“Assessing the Foreign Control of Production of Technology:
The Case of a Small Open Economy”
Cincera M., B. van Pottelsberge, R. Veugelers (2005)
The case of Dupont
Busana Pierre
Trekels Bruno
R&D in Multinationals
M.Cincera
1
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
3
SECTION 1: SUMMARY OF THE STUDIED ARTICLE
4
INTRODUCTION
INWARD R&D-FDI: FOREIGN OWNERSHIP OF PATENTS INVENTED IN BELGIUM
OUTWARDS R&D-FDI: BELGIAN OWNERSHIP OF PATENTS INVENTED ABROAD
CONCLUSION AND MAIN FINDINGS
CRITICS
4
5
5
7
8
SECTION 2: DUPONT’S PROFILE
9
INTRODUCTION
HISTORY
STRUCTURE
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AT DUPONT
FACTS & FIGURES
R&D STRATEGY
9
9
10
11
11
12
SECTION 3: THE DUPONT’S CONTROL OF PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGY IN
BELGIUM
14
INTRODUCTION
PATENT STRATEGY OF DUPONT
DUPONT’S PRESENCE IN BELGIUM
DUPONT’S OWNERSHIP OF PATENTS INVENTED IN BELGIUM
GENERAL FOREIGN OWNERSHIP OF PATENTS INVENTED IN BELGIUM
DUPONT’S OWNERSHIP OF BELGIAN INVENTIONS
CONCLUSION
14
14
16
16
17
17
21
SECTION 4: DEEPER ANALYSIS AND LINK WITH OTHER ARTICLES
22
1ST ARTICLE: NEW CONCEPTS AND TRENDS IN INTERNATIONAL R&D ORGANIZATION
22
ND
2 ARTICLE: DECENTRALISED R&D AND STRATEGIC COMPETITIVENESS: GLOBALISED APPROACHES
TO GENERATION AND USE OF TECHNOLOGY IN MNE’S.
23
SECTION 5: GENERAL CONCLUSION
24
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
25
APPENDIX
27
APPENDIX1: PATENT SCORECARD™
APPENDIX 2: PATENTING BY GEOGRAPHIC REGION (STATE AND COUNTRY), BREAKOUT BY
ORGANIZATION
27
27
2
General Introduction
The purpose of this report is to analyse the titled article, “Assessing the Foreign
Control of Production of Technology: The Case of a Small Open Economy” written in 2005
by M. Cincera, B. van Pottelsberghe and R. Veugelers, in order to apply its developed
concepts to the multinational, technology intensive corporation: DuPont.
MNE’s1 like DuPont play an ineluctable role in the actual trend of R&D
internationalisation because of their intensive R&D strategies and the impact on host
countries research capabilities through their location decisions. Knowing the importance of
R&D performed by MNE’s, our paper aims to quantify the impact of DuPont on R&D
internationalisation in the Belgian context with a similar approach of the one used in the
studied article.
The paper is structured as follows:
 Section 1 presents a summary of the studied article in order to understand the
key concepts used to assess R&D internationalisation;
 Section 2 introduce DuPont, a multinational technology-intensive corporation
which has subsidiaries in Belgium, to understand the profile of a key player in
the R&D internationalisation process;
 Section 3 analyses the application of the studied article’s ideas to DuPont in
order to assess the impact of this company on Belgian R&D spillovers;
 Section 4 presents an deeper analysis of R&D at DuPont in the light of two
other given articles;
 Section 5 presents our concluding remarks.
1
MNE = Multi National Enterprise
3
Section 1: Summary of the studied
article
Introduction
International R&D activities, following the internationalisation of production, have
grown significantly over the past 15 years and this article aims to measure this trend for the
case of Belgium. For that, the authors analyse two main dimensions of internationalisation
with two improved indicators based on EPO (European Patent Data) and USPTO (US Patent
and Trademark Office) patent data between 1978 and 2001. The first dimension (reflected by
the SHIA2) represents the extent to which patents invented in Belgium are assigned to firms
based abroad (inward R&D-FDI). The second one (measured by SHAI 3) is the extent to which
domestic firms control foreign inventions (outward R&D-FDI).
The approach of the authors allows an improvement of existing indicators of
internationalisation:
The existing literature typically uses information included in patent data, regarding
only the country of residence of the applicant (or assignee) and of the inventor. This method
provides an incomplete insight into the ownership of patent invention because there is no
information about the ownership structure of the Belgian assignees. Thus previous indicators
consider as “Belgian” the assignees which are based in Belgium BUT the country of residence
of a firm is not automatically related to the nationality of the firm.
For instance if a company, controlled by foreign multinationals (MNE’s), apply itself for a
patent, it will be considered by current literature as a “local” assignee, whereas it should be
considered as foreign controlled.
This article provide thus a more relevant approach by the identification of Belgian applicants
which are affiliates of foreign firms located in Belgium (for inward R&D-FDI) or the Belgian
based firms with affiliate abroad (for outward R&D-FDI).
The results suggest that taking into account the nationality of ownership of the firm changes
substantially the measured degree of internationalisation.
2
SHIA is the share of patents invented by the residents of a given country and controlled by foreign researchers
in the country’s total domestic invention
3
SHAI represents the number of patents invented by foreign researchers and controlled by residents of country
with regards to the number of patents controlled by resident
4
Inward R&D-FDI: Foreign ownership of patents invented in Belgium
Number of patent data applied
or invented in Belgium
With identification of nationality of
ownership of patented invention
EPO
USPTO
EPO
USPTO
Belgian inventor
12,301
7,871
Belgian inventor
12,301
7,871
Belgian inventor and
foreign assignee
5,300
3,671
Foreign ownership
(direct and indirect[1])
8,616
5,186
% of foreign ownership
43%
47%
% of foreign ownership
70%
77,1%
With the method based on information in patent data, there are about 40% of patent
applications invented in Belgium which are applied for a foreign firm outside Belgium. This
level of internationalisation is quiet high (one of the highest for the OECD member countries).
However if the patents applied for by Belgian subsidiaries of MNE’s are added to those that
are directly controlled by foreign firms, the picture is even more striking : the ratio of
domestic patented inventions made by foreign firms reaches a share of 70%.
This share of patents invented in Belgium and owned by foreign companies has increased
over the past 20 years.
The extent of cross-border ownership varies across broad technological areas4 : the
highest levels of foreign ownership are in the fields of Electrical Engineering, Instruments and
Chemicals and Pharmaceutics. In each of these fields, almost 80% of all patents with Belgian
inventor are owned, directly or indirectly, by foreign assignees.
The geographical origin of assignees that applied for patents in Belgium is principally the US
(50%) in all technological areas, except “Electrical engineering” which is more controlled by
firms based in France.
Outwards R&D-FDI: Belgian ownership of patents invented abroad
As shown in the following table, a share of 26% of patents applied for by Belgian
applicants is at least partially5 invented abroad. This share is significant but less pervasive
4
Electrical Engineering; Instruments; Chemicals and Pharmaceutics; Process Engineering and Mechanical
Engineering
5
Partially means that patents are at least one foreign inventor
5
than the share of patents invented in Belgium and applied by foreign applicants (see below).
This level shows an increase over the past 20 years.
Number of patent data applied or
invented in Belgium
Belgian assignee
Belgian assignee and
foreign inventor
Measuring the Belgian ownership
of patents invented abroad
EPO
USPTO
8,954
2,364
4,623
788
EPO
USPTO
Belgian assignee and
foreign inventor
2,364
788
Belgian local assignee
Belgian MNE assignee
Belgian subsidiary of
foreign MNE as assignee
others6
780
323
1,192
88
105
485
62
32
The group of Belgian assignees applying for a patent is a heterogeneous group of firm
in term of ownership and can be split in three main subgroups: the local Belgian firms,
Belgian multinational companies and Belgian subsidiaries of foreign multinationals. About
the half of EPO patents invented abroad and with Belgian assignee is controlled by the
subgroup of Belgian subsidiaries of foreign multinationals following by the Belgian local
firms with a share of about 30% and the Belgian MNE’s with subsidiaries abroad. With
USPTO patent data, local firms have a smaller share than Belgian MNE’s: that means that
local innovative firms find more easily their way to file a patent application at the EPO than at
the USPTO.
The analyse of variation across the technological areas for SHAI shows a reverse
picture in comparison with this of SHIA indicator: for instance, Belgian patent applications in
the field of mechanical engineering (about 35%), chemicals and pharmaceuticals (30%) and
process engineering (25%) tend to have at least one foreign inventor whereas mechanical
engineering and process engineering have a lower SHIA indicator  that reflect that Belgium
has a stronger advantage in these fields than in the others.
6
That represents Belgian uni/res as assignee and Belgian state institution as assignee
6
SHIA indicator
Chemics and
pharmaceuticals
Instruments
Electrical
engineering
Process
engineering
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Mechanical
engineering
Chemics and
pharmaceuticals
Instruments
Electrical
engineering
Process
engineering
%
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Mechanical
engineering
%
SHAI indicator
The major origin of the foreign inventions controlled by firms based in Belgium is Germany
and it is followed by the US, France and Great Britain.
Conclusion and main findings
The approach of the authors allows an improvement of existing indicators of R&D
internationalisation. Indeed, taking into account the nationality of ownership of the firm
provides a more relevant approach than the typical literature to analyse the R&D
internationalisation process.
All these results are in accordance with those of a small open economy: indeed,
relatively more knowledge generated by Belgian inventor’s flows out of Belgium towards
foreign ownership of this technology, than knowledge generated by foreign inventors is
owned by Belgian assignees. In other words, SHIA (indicator that reflects the extent to which
foreign firms control domestic inventions or inward R&D-FDI) is higher than SHAI (which
reflects the extent to which domestic control foreign invention or outward R&D-FDI).
SHIA > SHAI
However the analyse shows that the share of patents invented abroad and with Belgian
applicants has grown over the past 20 years, especially for the subgroup of Belgian MNE with
subsidiaries abroad.
7
Critics
According to us, the first weakness of this article is the author’s choice of the time period
used to measure the R&D internationalisation process. Indeed, this article was written in 2005
but used patent data for the time period from 1978 to 2001. This article doesn’t provide
information for the period between 2001 and 2005  with the rapid growth of the R&D
international activities; the situation could have changed significantly from the studied
interval.
The second element we noticed is that the authors based their studies only on patent data. As
the authors said, there are some limits associated with the use of patent data7. We think that it
should be relevant to confirm their results with other indicators used to compute the R&D
internationalisation: for example the R&D expenditures across countries or patent citation
data.
7
Weakness of patent data according to the authors of the studied article:
 Not all innovative activity is captured (not all inventions are patented or patentable, not all patents lead
to innovations and not all inventions are based on patented inventions.
 Patented inventions differ greatly in quality, in the magnitude of inventive output associated with them
(Griliches, 1990; Lanjouw and Schankerman, 1999).
8
Section 2: DuPont’s profile
Introduction
DuPont is a science-based products and services company. Founded in 1802, DuPont
puts science to work by creating sustainable solutions essential to a better, safer, healthier life
for people everywhere. Operating in more than 70 countries, DuPont offers a wide range of
innovative products and services for markets including agriculture and food; building and
construction; communications; and transportation.
DuPont is a key player in the R&D internationalisation process. Indeed, the R&D
performed by large technology intensive international firms is pivotal in discussing about the
R&D internationalisation because:
 They are, on average, significantly more R&D intensive than local firms;
 They account for close to half of global R&D expenditure 8;
 They have the potential to have major impact on host countries research capabilities
through their location decisions.
It is thus interesting to focus on the profile of DuPont. For that, we will firstly present briefly
its history and its structure and secondly its R&D strategy.
History
Founded in 1802 by Eleuthère Irénée du Pont, the original E.I. du Pont de Nemours
and Company met a rapid growth. At this time, America needed quality black powder and E.I.
du Pont organized an efficient means to supply that need. By 1815 DuPont's facilities grew
steadily and its share value had almost quintupled.
DuPont's strategy of expansion during the 19th century
was primarily one of horizontal integration that is the company
expanded production of gunpowder by building or acquiring new
plants.
DuPont also diversified, creating along with competitor
Laflin & Rand, the Repauno Chemical Company, a dynamite
subsidiary. Like many 19th century businesses, DuPont had
8
UNCTAD 2005
9
grown beyond the capacity of any single entrepreneur or family to manage properly. The three
du Pont cousins who inherited the company launched it into a new era of professional
management.
In July 1902, they established two laboratories, the Eastern Lab and the Experimental
Station, reflecting an increasing commitment to research. The Eastern Laboratory was the first
industrial chemical research lab established in the United States. The opening of the
Experimental Station helped define the company's dual approach to research: applied research
aimed directly at new or improved products, such as Eastern conducted, and the Experimental
Station's basic or fundamental research aimed at new knowledge.
DuPont's product lines were diversified beyond explosives into the broader field of
chemistry through several acquisitions. It was just after World War I that DuPont
management made one of its most fateful strategic decisions, investing the immense amount
of capital made in the explosives market to shift the company almost entirely into emerging
consumer and high technology markets including plastics, dyes, paints and artificial fabrics.
In 1921, to ensure that DuPont's newly diversified operations remained profitable, the
management undertook a fundamental restructuring of DuPont's organization. It dismantled
the system of centralized decision-making at the top of the management pyramid. Instead,
DuPont was organized as a line-and-staff system with 10 industrial departments under the
direct control of their own general managers, each with their own sales, research and support
functions.
This management structure served DuPont well through decades of crisis and
opportunity including the Great Depression, the Second World War, and the prosperous
1950s. Effective allocation of resources was a continuous challenge, especially since the
phenomenal success of nylon ensured that much of DuPont's available capital would flow into
basic research and development.
Structure
In its current structure, DuPont has seven segments. Five of these segments constitute
the company’s growth platforms: Agriculture & Nutrition, Coatings & Color Technologies,
Electronic & Communication Technologies, Performance Materials, and Safety & Protection.
The two other segments are The Pharmaceuticals segment and Textiles & Interiors. Each of
these segments is divided in specific businesses as shown in the organigram bellow.
10
DuPont
DuPont
Electronic &
Communication
Technologies
DuPont
Displays
DuPont
Electronic
Technologies
DuPont
Performance
Materials
DuPont Coating
& Color
Technologies
DuPont Safety
and Protection
DuPont
Agriculture &
Nutrition
DuPont
Engineering
Polymers
DuPont
Performance
Coatins
DuPont
Advanced Fiber
Pioneer Hi-Bred
International
DuPont
Chemical
DuPont Crop
Protection
DuPont
Nonwovens
DuPont
Nutrition &
Health
DuPont
Packaging and
Industrial
Polymers
DuPont
Fluoroproducts
DuPont Teijin
Films
DuPont
Imaging
Technologies
DuPont
Performance
DuPont
Titanium
Technologies
DuPont
Personnal
DuPont
Qualicon
DuPont Safety
Resources
DuPont Surfaces
Organigram of the five growth platforms
Research and Development at DuPont
Facts & Figures
Globally, DuPont has more than 75 R&D facilities with over 40 in the United States
and more than 35 in 11 other nations. The highest concentration of U.S Research Centers is in
the Wilmington, Delaware area where we can find several large research centers. Among
these, the Experimental Station laboratories engage in investigative and applied research, the
Chestnut Run laboratories focus on applications research, and the Stine-Haskell Research
Center conducts agricultural product research and toxicological research to ensure the safe
manufacture, handling and use of products.
Other major research locations in the United States include Marschall Lab in
Pennsylvania and Troy Lab in Michigan, both dedicated to coatings research; Pioneer
research facilities in Iowa; The Solae Company facilities in Missouri; polymer research
facilities in Virginia; and electronic technology research facilities in Research Triangle Park
in North Carolina.
11
Dupont, in line with the company’s global interests, runs a number of additional
research and development facilities outside the United States in countries such as Belgium,
Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, Spain, and
Switzerland. Consistent with plans announced in late 2003, the company has built a new
development facility in China in 2006 dedicated to high-tech and research organizations and
expects to complete the Dupont Knowledge Center in India until 2008.
DuPont invests an average of $1.3 billion annually on global research and
development in a diverse range of technologies for many markets including agriculture,
automotive, construction, electronics, chemicals and industrial materials. Today, DuPont has
more than 5000 scientists and engineers around the world.
In the past three years, DuPont launched more than 3,000 new products or new
product variations. New products impact significantly DuPont’s revenues. Products launched
in the past five years accounted for 36% of total revenues in 2007, up from 24% in 2001.
Total sales from new products introduced in the past five years doubled to more than $10
billion compared with 2003.9
R&D Strategy
The company’s philosophy is based on three main ideas:
9
-
Putting Science to Work: Science capabilities are the competitive advantage of all the
company’s business. The company is not focused on a single blockbuster innovation,
but seeks growth by generating dozens of new products each year. Market driven
innovation, which relies on the needs of the customer and market opportunities, has
been the main strategy of the company’s research efforts.
-
Going Where the Growth Is: DuPont is looking for significant growth opportunities
by increasing its presence in emerging markets and extending its presence into new
applications, products, brands and market position.
-
Power of One DuPont: DuPont’s strategy is to increase productivity, capabilities and
customers, with a single entity focus in order to create wider opportunities for the
numerous business units across the entire company.
Uma Chowdhry, DuPont’s chief science and technology officer, Chemical & Engineering News, 02/2008
12
The objectives of the company’s R&D programs are to create new technologies, processes
and business opportunities in relevant fields, as well as to improve existing products and
processes. Each segment of the company funds R&D activities that support its business
missions.
The corporate research laboratories are responsible for conducting research programs aligned
with corporate strategy as provided by the growth platforms. All R&D activities are
administered by senior R&D management to guarantee consistency with the business and
corporate strategy.
13
Section 3: the DuPont’s control of
production technology in Belgium
Introduction
The goal of this part of our report is to highlight the key ideas of the studied article and
to apply them to DuPont in order to assess its impact on R&D internationalisation for the case
of Belgium. For that, we will firstly introduce the DuPont’s patent strategy in order to have a
clear vision of the drivers of its patent data (used in the studied article to quantify R&D
internationalisation). Secondly, we will focus on the Belgian DuPont’s subsidiaries and their
activities in Belgium. Finally we will try to quantify the impact of DuPont R&D in the trend
of R&D internationalisation for the case of Belgium.
Patent strategy of DuPont
Patent data are used in the studied article to quantify R&D internationalisation and we
will use the same method to assess the impact of DuPont on the R&D internationalisation for
the case of Belgium. It is thus interesting to focus our attention on the patent strategy of
DuPont in order to have a clear vision on the drivers of DuPont’s patent data.
“Science is at core of DuPont. The best way we can protect our science is trough a strong
intellectual property strategy”
-Uma Chowdhry10DuPont believes that its patents provide it with an important competitive advantage.
The company owns many patents, which expire from time to time, covering many products,
processes and product uses. These patents protect many aspects of the company’s significant
research programs and the goods and services it sells.
The actual protection afforded by these patents varies across countries and depends upon the
scope of the coverage of each individual patent as well as the availability of legal remedies in
each country.
In 2007, the patents filings of DuPont increased by 7% in comparison with the figures
of 2006 and the number of patent granted by USPTO11 increase by 17%. The total of
DuPont’s patents granted in 2007 was 597 patents (the highest number for a company since
1992).
10
11
DuPont Senior Vice President and Chief Science & Technology Officer
Majority of DuPont’s patents is granted by USPTO
14
In March 2008 DuPont has achieved top rankings in
science and patent strength according to several surveys
published by The Patent Board™12 and Nature Biotechnology13.
DuPont was honoured for its efforts in both Chemistry and
Biotechnology. The Patent Board™, the leading independent
provider of best practices research for patent analysis and
intellectual property investment across 17 global industries, has
nominated DuPont as the No. 1 in the chemical industry for the
past quarter14(see figure on the right). Moreover, the scientific
journal Nature Biotechnology named DuPont as the organization
with the most U.S. biotechnology patents issued in its annual
listing.
Patent Scorecard ranks corporation
in Chemical industry
Rank
Company
1
DuPont
2
3M Co
3
Rohm and Haas Co
4
BASF Group
5
Mitsubishi Chemical Holdings
Compiled with data through 1/1/2008
These recognitions demonstrate that strategy of DuPont based on strong intellectual
property is well performing: DuPont is leading the chemical industry in creating new
science and protecting it in a way that ensures company brings value to its customers.
The integrated approach of DuPont to science and technology is fruitful.
As confirmed by Chowdhry15 “We are at a unique moment in history where huge
business opportunities are inherent in global trends related to population growth; increasing
living standards that demand solutions for more and better food; renewable materials; safety
and security; energy efficiency and alternative energy; and connectivity. Our strong R&D
pipeline is fully aligned to capitalize on these opportunities. Also, our integrated approach to
developing market-driven solutions using biology, chemistry, and materials science will
continue to deliver sustainable growth.”
12
The Patent Board™ produces a Patent Scorecard™ that ranks companies on patent quality, technological
strength and breadth of impact. It tracks the U.S. patent portfolios of more than 2500 of the world’s top
technology firms. For further explanation see Annexe 1.
13
Nature Biotechnology publishes an annual data page with analysis of the biotechnology patent landscape. The
December 2007 edition includes the journal’s patent analysis for 2006, which recognizes DuPont and its Pioneer
Hi-Bred business with having 161 U.S. biotechnology patents issued, placing DuPont first among organizations
such as the University of California, Genentech and the U.S. government
14
For the 13 weeks quarter ending the first January
15
DuPont Senior Vice President and Chief Science & Technology Officer
15
DuPont’s presence in Belgium
In accordance with its strategy focused on science and intellectual property, the Belgian
DuPont’s subsidiaries serve as a bridge from pure science to the application of science
specific to a customer or market need. DuPont had subsidiaries in Belgium since 1958.
DuPont Mechelen heads a network of satellite Belgian technologies centers:




DuPont Performance Coatings (Malines) which is the biggest car repair enamels
producer in the world. Being the world leader in the field of color research,
development and introduction of new technologies, it provides car repair products
characterized by color accuracy, high repair quality, business efficiency and
profitability.
DuPont Fluoroproducts (Malines) products different amorphous fluoropolymers
such as Teflon ®16, Rynite ®, Crastin ®, Zytel ® in Hytrel ®.
DuPont Vespel ® (Malines), offers advanced resolutions for various industries such
as car and semiconductors industry.
DuPont Powder Coating (Heusden-Zolder) has five divisions within the business,
Automotive, Vehicle Refinish, Industrial, Powder, Ink Jet - Speciality Coatings.
DuPont’s subsidiaries are specialised in R&D, processing and testing. DuPont has no
single motive for locating R&D in Belgium since both product adaptation and learning from
Belgian markets keep pace with access to skilled researchers. With these subsidiaries DuPont
has a channel for accessing Belgian technology spillovers.
Dupont’s ownership of patents invented in Belgium
The goal of this section is to quantify the impact of DuPont R&D in the trend of R&D
internationalisation for the case of Belgium. For that we will use USPTO17 patent data from
2002 to 2006 and indicators developed by M. Cincera, B. van Pottelsberghe and R.
Veugelers18in their article. As explain in the studied article, the improved indicators will
consider patents applied by Belgian DuPont subsidiaries as foreign controlled. Indeed while
the existing literature considers as “Belgian” the assignees which are based in Belgium (for
example the Belgian DuPont’s subsidiaries will be considered as a local assignee), the
approach of the authors takes into account the ownership structure of the Belgian assignee.
16
Industrial products made with Teflon® fluoropolymer resins have exceptional resistance to high temperatures,
chemical reaction, corrosion, and stress-cracking.
17
Reminder: the majority of DuPont’s patents is granted by USPTO
18
the authors of the studied article
16
First of all, we will analyse the general foreign ownership of patents invented in
Belgium from 2002 to 2006 to have a more recent picture of inward R&D-FDI. After that we
will focus our attention on Dupont’s ownership.
General foreign ownership of patents invented in Belgium
Our empirical analysis will be performed for the utility patents19 originated in Belgium
and granted by USPTO during the time period extending from January 1 to December 31 of
each year. The measure of the extent to which inventions with one or more Belgian inventor
are controlled by foreign researchers (inward R&D-FDI) is given in the following table. It
reveals the contributions of foreign firms to Belgian patent activities20.
Belgian inventor
Belgian inventor and foreign assignee (directly
and indirectly controlled)
USPTO 2002-2006
3100
1905
61,45%
Sources: USPTO Database: Patenting By Geographic Region (State and Country), Breakout by Organization
This table shows that 1905 out of 3100 USPTO patents with at least one Belgian
inventor, granted between 2002 and 2006, are directly and indirectly (through a Belgian
subsidiary of a foreign multinational company) controlled by foreign assignee. In comparison
with the article, the share of patents invented in Belgium and owned (directly and indirectly)
by foreign companies decrease by about 20%. Indeed, this share has decreased from about
77% for the time period analysed by the authors (between 1978 and 1999) to 61,45% for the
period between 2002 and 2006. However the international ownership of Belgian inventions
stays at a very high level.
DuPont’s ownership of Belgian inventions
We aim to quantify the impact of its international R&D activities for the case of
Belgium. For that, we analyse the number of patents granted by USPTO to DuPont in
Belgium and their evolution between 2002 and 2006.
As explain in the previous sections, DuPont’s global strategy is focused on intellectual
properties: its patents represent a competitive advantage. Hence, DuPont applies for a great
number of patents each year. For instance, USPTO granted 597 patents for DuPont in 2007.
19
20
utility patents (i.e., patents for inventions)
For details of the calculation: see annexe 2
17
The number of patents which at least one Belgian inventor and owned by DuPont is given in
the following table.
Total number of DuPont's patents granted by
USPTO
DuPont’s originated from USA
DuPont’s patents originated from all other
countries
DuPont’s patents originated from Belgium
2002
312
2003
340
2004
330
2005
251
2006 Total
371 1595
260
269
277
221
328
1355
52
71
53
30
43
240
0
6
1
1
1
9
Sources: USPTO data base: Patenting By
Geographic Region (Belgium), Breakout
by Organization
The geographic pattern turns out to be relatively stable over time: the most of
DuPont’s patents are originated from the US. Indeed, about 85% of the patents granted by
USPTO emerge from the US. These results are in accordance with the fact that there is the
highest concentration of the DuPont’s R&D centers in the US.
For the period between 2002 and 2006, DuPont is granted by USPTO for 9 patents
originated from Belgium. That means that Dupont owns these nine patents (with at least one
Belgian inventor) through its Belgian subsidiaries. With the approach of the studied article,
these patents should be considered as foreign controlled for the Belgian point of view due to
the nationality of company. This share is very low in comparison with the total number of
DuPont’s patent, but we don’t have to forget that DuPont is a MNE’s which operate in more
than 70 countries and its presence in Belgium is limited. However, in 2003, DuPont’s patent
originated from Belgium reach a peak of 6 patents: that represents about 10% of its patents
from all other countries than the US.
DuPont has thus an impact on the degree of internationalisation of R&D in Belgium.
Indeed, with its ownership of patent with at least one Belgian inventor, DuPont increase the
SHIA indicator (indicator that reflects the extent to which foreign firms control domestic
inventions or inward R&D-FDI)
We will now compare this impact with the impact of other multinational companies.
The following table presents the list of the 20 organizations (national and international
corporations, universities, government agencies, businesses, and other organizations) that
receive the most utility patents with at least one Belgian inventor during time period
extending from 2002 to 2006.
18
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 total
1 AGFA-GEVAERT N.V.
77
60
61
40
58
296
2 VZW)
23
44
29
25
27
148
3 ALCATEL
17
19
33
36
34
139
4 ~Individually Owned Patent
36
26
25
20
26
133
5 PROCTER + GAMBLE COMPANY
29
25
31
20
16
121
6 COLGATE-PALMOLIVE COMPANY
41
30
7
5
3
86
7 JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICA N.V.
23
21
11
11
14
80
8 SOLVAY (SOCIETE ANONYME)
19
14
18
13
14
78
13
12
16
15
16
72
4
12
11
11
20
58
13
13
5
10
8
49
12 BIOLOGICALS (S.A.)
6
10
17
6
9
48
13 N. V. INNOGENETICS S.A.
7
16
8
6
7
44
21
14
1
3
0
39
14
10
5
3
7
39
9
3
5
9
10
36
17 N. V. MICHEL VAN DE WIELE
10
2
7
4
12
35
18 U.C.B. SOCIETE ANONYME
14
4
7
4
4
33
19 CNH AMERICA LLC
0
0
2
16
12
30
20 ROBERT BOSCH GMBH
2
7
11
4
2
26
0
6
1
1
1
9
INTERUNIVERSITAIR MICROELEKTRONICA CENTRUM (IMEC
EXXONMOBIL CHEMICAL
9 PATENTS INC.
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS
10 ELECTRONICS N.V.
GOODYEAR TIRE + RUBBER
11 COMPANY
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM
14 FINA RESEARCH S.A.
LUDWIG INSTITUTE FOR CANCER
15 RESEARCH
16 N.V. BEKAERT S.A.
E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
51 COMPANY
Sources: USPTO data bases: Patenting by
Geographic Region (Belgium), Breakout
by Organization
19
As we can see, DuPont stands at the 51 position with 9 patent granted by USPTO in
Belgium. If we compare with other organisations the impact of DuPont on internationalisation
of Belgian R&D is very moderate (but significant). Indeed, several organizations receive
more than 10 times the number of DuPont’s patents; they have thus a greater impact on
Belgian R&D.
It is interesting to trace the nationality of these organizations. If we take into account
the nationality for this sample of organizations (see the following table), we can show that
Belgian organizations own the bulk of patents with at least one Belgian inventor granted by
the USPTO between 2002 and 2006. The table also shows that the US is the largest foreign
owner of patents invented in Belgium and that Belgium main neighbours have a significant
importance. We can explain this trend by the geographical distance and the sharing of
common language21.
Nationality of the 20 bigest producers of patents in Belgium
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Belgium
France
USA
Netherlands
Germany
Sources: USPTO data bases: Patenting by
Geographic Region (Belgium), Breakout
by Organization
Remark: If we take into consideration only organizations that receive 5 or more utility patents
during the time period from 2002 to 2006, we keep 98 different organizations that represent
about 77%22 of all patents granted by USPTO with inventors based in Belgium. These figures
reflect a relatively high concentration of innovations, as limited amount of organizations
represent the majority of patents granted by USPTO. That reflects that Belgian innovation
21
For more information, see Guellec, D. and B. van Pottelsberghe (2001), “The internationalization of
technology analysed with patent data”, Research Policy, vol. 30, n°8
22
source: USPTO data base
20
system is dominated by large firms perform for the most of R&D and apply for a majority of
patents.
Conclusion
Our results suggest that DuPont, as a science-based products and services company, plays
an ineluctable role in the R&D internationalisation trend because of its intensive R&D
strategy and its impact on host countries research capabilities through its location decisions.
Indeed, with a total of 597 patents granted in 2007, DuPont achieves top rankings in science
and patent strength in both Chemistry and Biotechnological fields.
In Belgium DuPont has an impact on the degree of internationalisation of R&D. Indeed,
with its ownership of patents with at least one Belgian inventor, DuPont increases the SHIA
indicator23 for Belgium. In comparison with other organisations the impact of DuPont on
internationalisation of Belgian R&D is very moderate (but significant): several organizations
own 10 times more Belgian patents granted by USPTO (between 2002 and 2006) than DuPont
and have thus a greater impact on Belgian R&D.
The fact of taking into account the nationality of the 20 organisations which produce the most
of patents with at least one Belgian inventor shows that Belgian organizations own the bulk of
these patents and that the US is the largest foreign owner of them.
23
It reflects the extent to which foreign firms control (directly or indirectly) domestic inventions or inward
R&D-FDI
21
Section 4: Deeper analysis and link with
other articles
We found interesting to compare our case to other given articles which seemed to be relevant
with our analysis of DuPont. Internationalization of DuPont’s R&D is a key factor of its
success and the organization of this internationalization presents a lot of interesting aspects
that we can analysed through different perspectives. We have selected the following articles:
-
Gassman O., M. von Zedtwitz (1999), New Concepts and Trends in International
R&D Organization, Research Policy, 28(2-3), 31-50.
-
Pearce R. (1999), Decentralised R&D and Strategic Competitiveness: Globalised
Approaches to Generation and Use of Technology in Multinational Enterprises
(MNE’s), Research Policy, 28(2-3), 157-78.
1st article: New Concepts and Trends in International R&D Organization
The article notices the recent (80’s) phenomenon of R&D internationalization. Technologybased companies initiate this trend by outsourcing research centers abroad in order to benefit
from local spillovers.
Despite the fact that firms based in small countries tended to be more internationalized,
increased competition and attractiveness of emerging markets forced most R&D intensive
countries to look for a new global R&D strategy.
The study highlights five category of international R&D organization regarding to the
dispersion of R&D activities and the degree of cooperation between individual R&D units.
The case of DuPont fit precisely in one of the five typical forms of international R&D
organization, which is the integrated R&D network characterized by a structure of highly
dispersed R&D, several competence centers and an orientation of a synergic integration of
international R&D units.
DuPont’s R&D philosophy is fully oriented towards internationalization. Efforts are made to
bring its technology capabilities closer to marketplaces in order to meet the needs of
customers and to better access the commercialization process. DuPont operates in an
22
environment of increasing technological strength and must be present everywhere relevant
knowledge can be gained through the implementation of multiples large specialized research
facilities abroad.
2nd article: Decentralised R&D and Strategic Competitiveness: Globalised
approaches to Generation and Use of Technology in MNE’s.
The paper stressed the fact that the decentralization of R&D facilities answers most of
the time to medium and long term strategic orientations of MNE’s.
The function of decentralized R&D centers has fundamentally evolved is the past
decades. Initially they were assuming only a role of implementer of the home technology and
products. Nowadays the R&D facilities as used as value creator for the whole company and
create new products and technologies directly adapted to new markets.
DuPont R&D organization is going beyond this centrifugal view by building a
knowledge network trough its numerous R&D facilities around the world. The most recent
DuPont’s R&D large investments were dedicated to complete new research facilities in the
most promising emerging markets: China and India. Firstly Dupont gains an access to new
markets (Going Where the Growth is) but secondly, through transfer of knowledge DuPont
will benefits from the technological progress made in foreign environments. Today, DuPont
is clearly focusing on synergies among its different departments and locations, combining its
strengths in chemistry and materials science and emerging technologies such as
nanotechnology and biotechnology.
23
Section 5: General Conclusion
The ultimate objective of this paper was to apply the main concepts of an R&D
specialised article24 to a multinational, technology intensive corporation in order to
understand the impact of MNE’s on R&D internationalisation process. More precisely we
analysed the impact of DuPont on R&D internationalisation for the case of Belgium, using
patent data (USPTO patent data from 2002 to 2006) and taking into account the nationality of
the ownership of the firm (cfr article’s improved indicators). Our results suggest that DuPont,
as a science-based products and services company, plays an ineluctable role in the R&D
internationalisation trend because of its intensive R&D strategy and its impact on host
countries research capabilities through its location decisions. Indeed, with a total of 597
patents granted in 2007, DuPont achieves top rankings in science and patent strength in both
Chemistry and Biotechnological fields.
If we consider the Belgian subsidiaries of foreign MNE’s as “foreign control” over the
USPTO patents invented in Belgium, the ratio of domestic patented inventions controlled by
foreign firms reaches a level of 61% for the time period between 2002 and 2006. This total
level of foreign ownership (direct or indirect) of patented invention made in Belgium has
decreased by about 20% over the past 10 years.
In Belgium DuPont has an impact on the degree of internationalisation of R&D.
Indeed, with its ownership of patent with at least one Belgian inventor, DuPont increase the
SHIA indicator25 for Belgium. In comparison with other organisations the impact of DuPont
on internationalisation of Belgian R&D is very moderate (but still significant): several
organizations own 10 times more Belgian patents granted by USPTO (between 2002 and
2006) than DuPont and have thus a greater impact on Belgian R&D. The fact of taking into
account the nationality of the 20 organisations which produce the most of patents with at least
one Belgian inventor shows that Belgian organizations own the bulk of these patents and that
the US is the largest foreign owner of them.
We completed our analysis by confronting DuPont’s R&D organization with findings
from other articles. We conclude that DuPont’s policy about R&D fully integrates the
increasing trends of R&D internationalization process. Indeed, DuPont’s research facilities
are largely decentralized in order to maximize the benefits of foreign spillovers in terms of
knowledge and access to new markets.
24
“Assessing the Foreign Control of Production of Technology: The Case of a Small Open Economy” written by
M. Cincera, B. van Pottelsberghe and R. Veugelers
25
It reflects the extent to which foreign firms control (directly or indirectly) domestic inventions or inward
R&D-FDI
24
Bibliography:
Papers















Arora, Ashish Ralph Landau and Nathan Rosenberg, (eds). (2000). “Chemicals and
Long-Term Economic Growth: Insights from the Chemical Industry”.
Arthur D. Little and R. Vleugelers (November 2005) “Internationalisation of R&D in
the UK: a review of the evidence”
Chandler, Alfred D. (1971). Pierre S.” Du Pont and the making of the modern
corporation. “
Chandler, Alfred D. (1969).” Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the
American Industrial Enterprise.”
Cincera M., Van Pottelsberghe and R.Veugelers (2005), “Assessing the foreign
control of production of technology: the case of a small open economy”, Discussion
Paper Series
Cukier Kenneth: The Economist "Intellectual property is the next asset class.
Companies are creating a market says Eric Gillespie.”
du Pont, B.G. (1920). E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company: A History 1802-1902.
Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin Company. - (Kessinger Publishing Rare
Reprint. ISBN 1-4179-1685-0).
DuPont E.I.de Nemours and co (March 02, 2005) “Annual report which provides a
comprehensive overview of the company for the past year”
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner University/research institution,
Government, Business
Gassman O., M. von Zedtwitz (1999), New Concepts and Trends in International
R&D Organization, Research Policy, 28(2-3), 31-50.
Guellec, D. and B. van Pottelsberghe (2001), “The internationalization of technology
analysed with patent data”, Research Policy, vol. 30, n°8
Haynes, Williams (1983). American chemical industry.
Hounshell, David A. and Smith, John Kenly, JR (1988). Science and Corporate
Strategy: Du Pont R and D, 1902-1980. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
University Press. ISBN 0-521-32767-9.
Kinnane, Adrian (2002). DuPont: From the Banks of the Brandywine to Miracles of
Science. Willimington: E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company. ISBN 0-8018-7059-3.
Ndiaye, Pap A. (trans. 2007). Nylon and Bombs: DuPont and the March of Modern
America
25



Oldach Scott and Nick Stabinsky of Patent Board™ (May 01, 2008) “Why Use Patent
Analytics?”
Pearce R. (1999), Decentralised R&D and Strategic Competitiveness: Globalised
Approaches to Generation and Use of Technology in Multinational Enterprises
(MNEs), Research Policy, 28(2-3), 157-78.
Wilmington, Del, USA, 12 March 2008 :”The Patent Board(TM) and Nature
Biotechnology Rank DuPont No. 1 Innovator in Chemical Industry and No. 1 in
Biotech Patents”
Web
http://www.uspto.gov/
http://v3.espacenet.com/eclasearch?AB=belgium
http://www2.dupont.com
http://www.chemindustry.com/category/88.html
http://www.dupontpowder.be/fr/index_fr.html
http://www.euroscreen.com
http://heritage.dupont.com
http://www.wikipedia.com
http://www.rdmag.com
26
Appendix
Appendix1: Patent Scorecard™
The Patent Board’s metrics reflect varying aspects of innovation, speed, strength and
relevancy.
The Patent Scorecard is published each month and the indicators are calculated based on a
rolling 12-month calendar.
Patent Portfolio Indicators
Quality
Quantity
Science
Speed
Technology Strength™: ranking
measure to indicate an overall
strength of the company’s patent
portfolio holdings with a combined
measure of quality and quantity.
Patents Granted: a count of
patents granted during the period
under analysis.
Science Strength™: ranking
measure to indicate how much a
company uses science in building
its patent portfolio with a
combined measure of science and
quantity.
Innovation Cycle Time™:
indicates whether a patent or patent
portfolio is building off newer or
older inventions (art).
Industry Impact™: indicates the
extent to which others are building
upon a portfolio of issued US
utility patents as compared to a
total set of patents.
Research Intensity™: tracks a
indicates the extent to which a
portfolio includes patents with
above average Science Linkage.
DuPont scored high points on Technology Strength(TM), Science Strength(TM) and Patent
Count(TM), according to the Patent Board(TM). Technology Strength(TM) is a measure of
the overall strength of the company’s patent portfolio holdings based on a combined
indication of quality and quantity. Science Strength(TM) indicates how much a company
uses science in building its patent portfolio based on a combined measure of science and
quantity. DuPont leads the competition by over 800 percent in Science Strength(TM) at
8,894.3 points, with BASF Group in second place with 1,062.3 points and 3M Co. in third
with 909 points.
Appendix 2: Patenting By Geographic Region (State and Country),
Breakout by Organization
The identification of Belgian subsidiaries of foreign MNE’s represents a contribution to the
existing literature measuring inward R&D-FDI through patent information  so we analyse
27
the nationality of companies that apply for patents in Belgium. The foreign companies are
coloured in orange.
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 total
AGFA-GEVAERT N.V.
77
60
61
40
58
296
(IMEC VZW)
23
44
29
25
27
148
ALCATEL
17
19
33
36
34
139
~Individually Owned Patent
36
26
25
20
26
133
29
25
31
20
16
121
41
30
7
5
3
86
N.V.
23
21
11
11
14
80
SOLVAY (SOCIETE ANONYME)
19
14
18
13
14
78
13
12
16
15
16
72
4
12
11
11
20
58
13
13
5
10
8
49
BIOLOGICALS (S.A.)
6
10
17
6
9
48
N. V. INNOGENETICS S.A.
7
16
8
6
7
44
21
14
1
3
0
39
14
10
5
3
7
39
9
3
5
9
10
36
N. V. MICHEL VAN DE WIELE
10
2
7
4
12
35
U.C.B. SOCIETE ANONYME
14
4
7
4
4
33
CNH AMERICA LLC
0
0
2
16
12
30
ROBERT BOSCH GMBH
2
7
11
4
2
26
BARCO N.V.
5
1
4
4
11
25
GLAVERBEL
4
3
2
8
7
24
PICANOL N.V.
4
3
3
7
6
23
INTERUNIVERSITAIR MICROELEKTRONICA CENTRUM
PROCTER + GAMBLE
COMPANY
COLGATE-PALMOLIVE
COMPANY
JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICA
EXXONMOBIL CHEMICAL
PATENTS INC.
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS
ELECTRONICS N.V.
GOODYEAR TIRE + RUBBER
COMPANY
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM
FINA RESEARCH S.A.
LUDWIG INSTITUTE FOR
CANCER RESEARCH
N.V. BEKAERT S.A.
28
TYCO ELECTRONICS
RAYCHEM N.V.
4
3
4
6
5
22
ATOFINA RESEARCH, S.A.
0
3
9
8
1
21
2
7
8
2
2
21
9
5
1
3
2
20
4
5
5
1
4
19
OPERATING COMPANY INC.
1
0
2
9
7
19
BAXTER INTERNATIONAL INC.
3
4
0
2
9
18
2
5
6
5
0
18
INDUSTRIES PLC
8
4
3
3
0
18
THIN FILM ELECTRONICS ASA
3
4
7
4
0
18
AMERICA, INC.
8
6
1
0
1
16
BAYER BIOSCIENCE N.V.
1
1
4
4
5
15
2
2
3
5
3
15
COMPANY
7
1
0
2
4
14
AKZO NOBEL NV
4
4
4
1
1
14
5
1
3
1
3
13
BIOTECHNOLOGIE (VIB) VZW
1
0
6
2
4
13
COCA-COLA COMPANY
5
3
1
1
2
12
MILLIKEN & COMPANY
5
4
0
0
3
12
COMPOSITES SPRL
2
2
1
2
4
11
SONY EUROPA B.V.
3
0
5
3
0
11
UNIVERSITE DE LIEGE
3
3
2
2
1
11
SIEMENS
AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT
SOLVAY POLYOLEFINS
EUROPE -- BELGIUM (SOCIETE
ANONYME
NATIONAL SEMICONDUCTOR
CORPORATION
TENNECO AUTOMOTIVE
HUNTSMAN INTERNATIONAL
LLC
IMPERIAL CHEMICAL
NEW HOLLAND NORTH
UNIVERSITE CATHOLIQUE DE
LOUVAIN
3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES
ATLAS COPCO AIRPOWER,
NAAMLOZE VENNOOTSCHAP
VLAAMS INTERUNIVERSITAIR
INSTITUUT VOOR
OWENS CORNING
29
BASF AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT
1
1
2
2
4
10
CERESTAR HOLDING BV
5
0
1
1
3
10
CF TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
1
3
4
2
0
10
FINA TECHNOLOGY, INC.
0
2
3
1
4
10
1
2
3
2
2
10
0
6
1
1
1
9
NAAMLOZE VENNOOTSCHAP
4
0
3
2
0
9
MEDTRONIC INC.
1
1
1
2
4
9
MELEXIS N.V.
3
1
2
2
1
9
UNIVERSITEIT GENT
1
1
1
3
3
9
XEIKON INTERNATIONAL N.V.
0
5
0
3
1
9
BROADCOM CORPORATION
2
1
1
1
3
8
DOW CORNING S.A.
2
4
1
1
0
8
EUROSCREEN S.A.
0
0
2
3
3
8
DEVELOPMENT
1
2
1
2
2
8
KRATON POLYMERS US LLC
3
1
1
1
2
8
TECHSPACE AERO S.A.
0
4
1
0
3
8
1
0
2
3
2
8
INC.
1
0
2
3
1
7
AVENTIS CROPSCIENCE N.V.
6
1
0
0
0
7
FLOORING INDUSTRIES, LTD.
0
0
1
3
3
7
0
2
2
0
3
7
SOCIETE ANONYME
1
0
3
2
1
7
MANIA BARCO N.V.
6
1
0
0
0
7
TIBOTEC BVBA
0
1
1
3
2
7
1
2
1
3
0
7
3
2
2
0
0
7
HERAEUS ELECTRO-NITE
INTERNATIONAL N.V.
E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS
AND COMPANY
FIRMA G.B. BOUCHERIE,
K.U. LEUVEN RESEARCH &
UNILIN BEHEER BV,
BESLOTEN VENNOOTSCHAP
AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES,
GENERAL ELECTRIC
COMPANY
ION BEAM APPLICATIONS
TYCO ELECTRONICS
LOGISTICS AG
VLAAMS INTERUNIVERSITAIR
INSTITUUT VOOR
30
BIOTECHNOLOGIE
WARNER-LAMBERT COMPANY
0
1
1
1
4
7
XEIKON NV
4
3
0
0
0
7
ASML NETHERLANDS B.V.
0
0
1
1
4
6
DSM N.V.
3
3
0
0
0
6
INTERNATIONAL S.A.
3
3
0
0
0
6
NEXANS
1
2
2
0
1
6
VENNOOTSHCAP
2
2
2
0
0
6
TOYOTA JIDOSHA K.K.
2
1
1
1
1
6
2
1
1
0
1
5
1
1
3
0
0
5
CO., OHG
1
1
1
1
1
5
DELPHI TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
2
0
1
0
2
5
EMC CORPORATION
0
0
1
3
1
5
FCI
0
1
1
1
2
5
E.V.
2
0
1
1
1
5
Kemin Pharma Europe B.V.B.A.
0
0
0
0
5
5
1
3
0
0
1
5
GROUPE COCKERILL SAMBRE
3
1
0
1
0
5
ROSE RESEARCH, L.L.C.
5
0
0
0
0
5
FRAMATOME CONNECTORS
PURATOS NAAMLOZE
ADVANCED ELASTOMER
SYSTEMS, L.P.
BAYER
AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT
CONTINENTAL TEVES AG &
FRAUNHOFERGESELLSCHAFT ZUR
FOERDERUNG DER
ANGEWANDTEN FORSCHUNG
L'AIR LIQUIDE, SOCIETE
ANONYME A DIRECTOIRE ET
CONSEIL DE SURVEILLANCE
POUR L'ETUDE ET
L'EXPLOITATION DES
PROCEDES GEORGES
CLAUDE
RECHERCHE ET
DEVELOPPEMENT DU
31
SIDMAR N.V.
3
2
0
0
0
5
SURFACE SPECIALTIES, S.A.
0
0
0
1
4
5
TEXACO INC.
3
0
2
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
5
5
0
2
1
0
2
5
1
2
2
0
0
5
2
3
0
0
0
5
number of patent by Organisation
558
491
457
403
467 2376
total number of patent
722
622
612
519
625 3100
TOTAL PETROCHEMICALS
RESEARCH FELUY
UNIVERSITE LIBRE DE
BRUXELLES
VESUVIUS CRUCIBLE
COMPANY
VLAAMSE INSTELLING VOOR
TECHNOLOGISCH
ONDERZOEK (VITO)
32