20 Recognition and Awards for Innovation
Downloaded by UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST on May 24, 2018 | https://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: August 8, 1980 | doi: 10.1021/bk-1980-0129.ch020
E. C. G A L L O W A Y Stauffer Chemical Company, Westport, C T 06880
Providing the best possible incentive and reward system for those involved in the innovation process is a matter of great importance both for our inventors and for our country. Evidence for the decline of innovation i n the United States has been documented in many excellent articles in the last few years(1,2,3,4,5). Invariably in discussing this decline, the loss of competitive position to other nations, based on patents issued, is cited: foreign inventors are obtaining a higher percentage of U.S. patents, up from 17% i n 1961 to 37% in 1976. Or, according to Figure 1, 20 years ago 6 patents went to U.S. inventors for every one to a foreign inventor, while today the ratio is less than two for one(6). A recent study by Stauffer Chemical shows a drop i n patent output of the chemical industry, consistent with this trend(7). Patent records were examined for the 12 largest U.S. chemical companies over the period 1967-76, and also for the 8 largest European chemical companies. From 1967 to 1976 patents granted to the U.S. companies dropped h0% while patents to the European companies went up 50% (Figure 2 ) . If we look at the 12 companies individually (Figure 3 ) , we see that the declining pattern holds for a l l except one company. Stauffer seems to be out of step, but the reason for this has not been determined. This decline in patent output for the U.S. companies i s not matched by a corresponding drop i n total R&D spending, which, i n fact has gone up slightly (Figure k). So, we have more evidence showing a decline in U.S. innovative capacity. Some of the possible reasons for this decline are l i s t e d below: • Greater emphasis on defensive R&D, to protect established positions. • More emphasis on short term, incremental improvements. • Less funding available for research of the type which can lead to inventions, due to regulatory demands (other countries have an advantage over the U.S. in the regulatory arena). 9
0-8412-0561-2/80/47-129-205$5.00/0 © 1980 American Chemical Society Smith and Larson; Innovation and U.S. Research ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1980.
INNOVATION AND U.S. RESEARCH: PROBLEMS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
206
(Thousands)
Downloaded by UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST on May 24, 2018 | https://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: August 8, 1980 | doi: 10.1021/bk-1980-0129.ch020
60r
nl
• '58
'60
• '64
'62
Figure 1.
'66
'68
70
72
• 74
76
U.S. patents history
3000
2400
U.S. Patents 1800 (3 Year Averages)
1200
600 '67 '68 '69 70 Figure 2.
71
72
73 74
75
U.S. patents—chemical industry
Smith and Larson; Innovation and U.S. Research ACS Symposium Series; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1980.
76
Downloaded by UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS AMHERST on May 24, 2018 | https://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: August 8, 1980 | doi: 10.1021/bk-1980-0129.ch020
GALLOWAY
Recognition and Awards
Dupont Dow Am. Cyanamid Monsanto Union Carbide Stauffer Allied Olin Celanese Ethyl Hercules Rohm & Haas
Total
1967
1970
1973
1976
664 488 243 467 375 65 189 106 71 72 95 60
604 421 239 398 232 80 171 89 100 86 86 44
608 426 237 327 234 124 188 107 112 106 104 64
484 324 215 235 227 131 146 100 74 73 61 70
2895
2548
2638
2140
*Patents issued to domestic subsidiaries are included. Source: IFI/Plenum Data Co.
Figure 3.
U.S. patents issued 1967-76 (3 year averages), including patents issued to domestic subsidiaries. From IFI/Plenum Data Company.
600-
- 2700
