Innovative Labor and Intellectual Property Market in the Semiconductor Industry

  • Rajà Attia
  • Isabelle Davy
  • Roland Rizoulières
Part of the Economics of Science, Technology and Innovation book series (ESTI, volume 22)


Anyone wishing to outline the strategic characteristics of the semiconductor industry must look for the common point between those industries which currently lead worldwide growth. In fact, semiconductors act as intermediary products in a growing number of applications (automotive, telecommunications, computers, consumer electronics) which represent a significant part of the global worldwide exchanges,as shown in table 1.


Intellectual Property Technological Knowledge Semiconductor Industry California Management Review Technological Convergence 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Antonelli, Cristiano, The Microdynamics of Technological Change. London and New York: Routledge, 1999.Google Scholar
  2. Arora A., Fosfuri A., Gambardella A. Markets for Technology (Why do we see them, why don’t we see more off them, and why we should care). Working Paper N¡ã99–17, Université Carlos III de Madrid. 1999.Google Scholar
  3. Arora A., Gambardella A. The changing technology of technological change: general and abstract knowledge and the division of innovative labour. Research Policy 1994; 23:523–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arora A. Gambardella A. Rullani E. Division of Labour and the Locus of Inventive Activity. Journal of Management and Governance 1997; 1:123–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arundel A., Kabla I. What percentage of innovations are patented ? Empirical estimates for European firms. Research Policy 1998; 27:127–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Athreye S. M. On Markets in Knowledge. Working Paper N¡ã 83, ESRC. March 1998.Google Scholar
  7. Bresnahan T., Malerba F. The Computer Industry. CCC Matrix project. Cape Cod (MA). 1996.Google Scholar
  8. Brunsvold B.G., Burgujian R.V., Pratt W.H. Protecting intellectual property: copyrights. Silicon Strategies 1998; June.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen W.M., Klepper S. Firm size and the nature of innovation within industries: the case of process and product R&D. Review of Economics and Statistics 1996; 78:232–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cusumano, Michael A. Japan’s Software Factories. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  11. Dauvin, Jean-Philippe, Les semi-conducteurs. Paris: Cyclope Economica, 1990.Google Scholar
  12. De Bandt J., Ravix J.L., Romani P.M. Allyn Young: une approche de la dynamique industrielle. Revue Française d’Economie 1990; 5:85–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dosi G. Sources, procedures and microeconomic effects of innovation. Journal of Economic Litterature 1988; 26:1120–71.Google Scholar
  14. Duysters, Gert, The dynamics of technical innovation - The evolution and development of information technology. Cheltenham: Elgar, 1996.Google Scholar
  15. Fernandez I. H., Fernandez D. S. Building a legally sound intellectual property portfolio. Silicon Strategies 1998; June.Google Scholar
  16. Flaherty M.T. Field research on the link between technological innovation and growth: evidence from the international semiconductor industry. American Economic Review, Papers & Proceedings 1984; 74:67–72.Google Scholar
  17. Foray D. Standardisation et concurrence: des relations ambivalentes. Revue d’Economie Industrielle 1993; 63:84–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gambardella A., Torrisi S. Does technological convergence imply convergence in markets ? Evidence from the electronics industry. Research Policy 1998; 27:445–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Geneau De Lamarlière, Isabelle. “Les déterminants des localisations dans l’industrie des semi-conducteurs.” In La dynamique spatiale de l’économie contemporaine, George B. Benko, ed. Paris: Editions de l’Espace Européen, 1990.Google Scholar
  20. Grandstrand O., Patel P., Pavitt K. Multi-technology Corporations: Why they have `distributed’ rather than `distinctive core’ competencies. California Management Review 1997; 39:8–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grindley P. C., Teece D. J. Managing Intellectual Capital: Licencing and Cross-Licencing in Semiconductors and Electronics. California Management Review 1997; 39:8–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gruber H. The yield factor and the learning curve in semiconductor production. Applied Economics 1994; 26:837–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hayek F.A. Economics and Knowledge, Presidential address delivered before the London Economic Club; November 10 1936, Reprinted from Economica IV 1937: 33–54.Google Scholar
  24. Hodor K. Adopting methods to protect intellectual property from pirates. Silicon Strategies 1998; February.Google Scholar
  25. Ikonicoff R. Nanotubes: vers l’ordinateur microscopique. Science & Vie 2000; 989:130–33.Google Scholar
  26. Integrated Circuit Engineering Corporation. Status 1995. Mid-Term Report. 1995.Google Scholar
  27. Langlois R.N. Capabilities and Vertical disintegration in process technology. Working Paper, University of Connecticut. January 1998.Google Scholar
  28. Langlois R., Robertson P. L. Innovation, Networks, and Vertical Integration. Research Policy 1995; 24:543–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Langlois, Richard N., Steinmueller William E. The Evolution of Competitive Advantage in the Worldwide Semiconductor Industry, 1947–1996. Report of the CCC Matrix Project, 3`d draft. Cape Cod: 1996.Google Scholar
  30. Levin R., Klevorick A., Nelson R., Winter S. Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brooking Papers on Economic Activity 1987; 3:783–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Loasby B. J. The organisation of capabilities. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 1998; 35: 139–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Loasby B. J. Transactions Costs and Capabilities. Proceedings of the XIe European Summer School on Industrial Dynamics; 1996 September 12–16; Cargese.Google Scholar
  33. Lundvall Bengt. A. “Innovation as an Interactive Process from User-Producer Interaction to the National System of Innovation.” In Technical Change and Theory, Giovanni Dosi, ed. London and New York: Pinter Publishers, 1988.Google Scholar
  34. Luther K., Graml B. Joining Hands in Memory Development. Siemens Review. R&D special 1996.Google Scholar
  35. Macher J. T., Mowery D. C., Hodges D. A. Reversal of Fortune ? The recovery of the U.S. semiconductor industry. California Management Review 1998; 41:107–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Malerba F., Nelson R., Orsenigo L., Winter S. ‘History-friendly’ models of industry evolution: the computer industry. Industrial and Corporate Change 1999; 8:1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Malerba F., Orsenigo L. Technological regimes and firm behaviour. Industrial and Corporate Change 1993; 2:45–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mansfield E. Patents and innovation: an empirical study. Management Science 1986; 32:173–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Martinotti P. Microelectronics Towards System On Chip. Silicon Strategies Conference; 1998 March 16–17; San Jose (US).Google Scholar
  40. McCall T. Gartnergroup’s Dataquest Says Worldwide Semiconductor Market Growth Grew nearly 18%. Press Release; 2000 January 6.Google Scholar
  41. Mc Leod J. A sea change hits the semiconductor industry. Silicon Strategies 1998; June.Google Scholar
  42. Moati P., Mouhoud E. M. Division cognitive du travail et dynamiques de la localisation industrielle dans l’espace mondial. Proceedings of the International Conference “La connaissance dans la dynamique des organisations productives”; 1995 September 14–15; Aix-en-Provence.Google Scholar
  43. Menger, Carl, Principles of Economics. New York: New York University Press, 1981 (Original in German 1871).Google Scholar
  44. Muller M. How to make Money in IP. Silicon Strategies 1999; May.Google Scholar
  45. O.C.D.E. La mesure des activités scientifiques et technologiques - Les données sur les brevets d’invention et leur utilisation comme indicateurs de la science et de la technologie - Manuel Brevets 1994. Working Paper GD(94) 114. Paris: OCDE 1994.Google Scholar
  46. Pavitt K. Technologies, products and organisations in the innovative firm: what Adam Smith tells us and Joseph Schumpeter doesn’t. Working Paper, SPRU. May 1998: 1–21.Google Scholar
  47. Penn M. Semiconductor Market - Trends & Analysis. Scottish SC Supplier Forum Annual General Meeting; 1999a June 17.Google Scholar
  48. Penn M. Semiconductors Market Drivers and profitability. SEMI Fab Management Forum; 1999b April 16; Dresden.Google Scholar
  49. Pichon A. Dossier spécial futur. Science & Vie Micro 1998; 166:58–123.Google Scholar
  50. Quéré, Michel, Ravix Jacques-Laurent. “Proximité et organisation territoriale de l’industrie.” In Approches multiformes de la proximité, Michel Bellet, Thierry Kirat, Christine Largeron, eds.: Hermès, 1998.Google Scholar
  51. Ravix, Jacques-Laurent, Production, Institutions et Organisation de l’Industrie, une contribution ¨¤ la méthode économique. Thèse d’Etat. Université de Nice-Sophia Antipolis, 1994.Google Scholar
  52. Richardson, George. B., Information and Investment, A Study in Working of Competitive Economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960.Google Scholar
  53. Streissler E. To what extent was the Austrian school marginalist? History of Political Economy 1972; 4:426–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Tassey G. Standardization in technology-based markets. Research Policy 2000; 29:587–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Tassey, Gregory, Technology Infrastructure and Competition Position. Northwell: Kluwer, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Teece D. J. Capturing Value From Knowledge Assets: The New Economy, Markets For Know-How, and Intangible Assets. California Management Review 1998; 40:55–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Von Hippel E. The Dominant Role of Users in the Scientific Instrument Innovation Process. Research Policy 1976; 5:212–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wieder A.W. Mapping the Future of Microelectronics. Siemens Review. R&D special 1996.Google Scholar
  59. Winter S.G. Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 1984; 5:287–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Wright, Richard.W., “The role of imitable vs inimitable competences in the evolution of the semiconductor industry.” In Dynamics of competence-based competition, Ron Sanchez, Aimé Heene, Howard Thomas, eds. Oxford, New York: Pergamon, 1996.Google Scholar
  61. Young A. A. Rendements croissants et progrès économique. Revue Française d’Economie 1990; 5:85–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rajà Attia
    • 1
  • Isabelle Davy
    • 1
  • Roland Rizoulières
    • 1
  1. 1.CEFI-CNRS, Aix-en-ProvenceUniversité de la MéditerranéeFrance

Personalised recommendations