Scientific publications play a crucial role in industrial innovation, but not all companies have equal access to this knowledge. A recent study, published in the journal Scientometrics, examined nearly 500,000 patents filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to analyze this flow of knowledge.
Patents, which grant exclusive rights to an invention in exchange for its public description, can cite scientific works. The researchers focused on references introduced by inventors themselves within the text, considered more representative of the knowledge mobilized.
The study concentrated on open access to scientific publications, which allows articles to be consulted without a subscription. Although non-open access articles remain the majority in patent references, a comparative analysis by discipline reveals a significant overrepresentation of open access publications.
Once disciplinary differences are accounted for, open access publications are, on average, 38% more present in patent references than their frequency in scientific literature would suggest. This indicates that inventors proportionally cite more freely accessible works.
Including platforms like Sci-Hub increases the proportion of scientific articles accessible without payment in patents to 85%. However, the study distinguishes between authorized open access and pirate access, highlighting that accessibility facilitates knowledge mobilization for companies.
Fields such as biology, chemistry, and medicine, particularly biotechnology and pharmaceuticals, show a strong reliance on scientific publications in their patents. Conversely, sectors related to tooling and equipment less frequently cite scientific publications, favoring gradual improvement and technical know-how.
To foster knowledge circulation, the study recommends aligning scientific publication policies with innovation policies. This includes strengthening open access to publicly funded research, supporting dissemination infrastructures, and funding joint projects between companies and researchers, such as Cifre agreements in France or Knowledge Transfer Partnerships in the UK.
Finally, the issue of sharing innovation benefits is raised. Avenues such as profit or equity sharing in innovative companies, or reinvestment of patent revenues by public research institutions, are discussed to ensure the collective benefits from inventions derived from public research.
