参考文稿说明2018aom comment on patent premium in china response and action

1、Reviewer 1This review pertains to submis# 16374. The sed objective of the pr is to investigatewhether and when firms in emerging economies, specifically in China, can obtain patentpremium, which is defined as the incremental returns from firms patent in addition to the value of the unpatented invent

2、ion.The crux of this prshe argumentt firmst patenve some sed premiumt do not patent, even in emergingt they enjoy in terms of their output over firmseconomies like China.There are severaresolved ieshis argument and I thinkt my focushis reviewis to highlight these to the authors and hopet this is use

3、ful:(1) Why is productivity measurederms of an abstract metric like TFP. I did not understandexactly what it is and why ist a good way of capturing firm performance. Why not pick amore conventional metric like sales and revenue.would the premium not be adequaycaptured in suetrics? Why or why not?评审人

4、不了解 TFP 的概念和计算方法。会查一下SMJ 和 AMJ 里文章关于公司绩效的指标主要有哪些，然后选择最常用的再做一次结果。目前看来的数据Return on assets (ROA)是可以算的。ROA 应该是管理学杂志都接受的绩效指标，特别是 Chang and Shim, 2014, SMJ用的是 matching 的方法，绩效变量是 operating return on assets, 类似 ROA。本文最后可能会换成 ROA。(2) Thehypothesis is verynd to me, did nove mueaning. Since the wholedataset co

5、mprised of only Chifirms, why is it meaningful to say there will be patentingpremium in China (compared to which other country?)新的 H1 的推导会解决这个问题。(3) There is also is a selection ie here which troubles me. Firms in emerging economiest choose to patent clearly are selectinghigh-potential/high-growth/h

6、igh qualityo it. And hence these may be firmst are moreheplace. Is it not natural,t these firmswould haverformance advantage over other firmst do not patent. Relatedly, theremay be firms in industriest are more global (and hence faceernational preres topatent), it is not clear what covariates the au

7、thors picked to implement the nearest neighboralgorithmt they used, but I am concerned whether they are really comparing apples toapples or apples to oranges.评审人没有理解 matching 的方法。不用做实质性的修改。I wish the authors all the best as they work on taking this pr through the publishing pros.Reviewer 2nk you for

8、 allowing me to read this pA couple of questions and commentsr.t the authors might want to consider as follow.The author arguedt the “relationship” with variouors for enforcing patents couldmitigate the institutional void. To me, it seemst the relationship enabled enforcement israther “substitution”

9、 to the institution for patentsn complementary device. If so, why evenfirms try to file patents? Without patenting inventions, firms may be able to protect theirinvention through different channels (e.g., secrecy) if they could take advantage of“relationship” with other actors (e.g.ernmental authori

10、ty).hypothesis needs to be further refined.his sense, the rationale for新的一稿的理论部分会修改。Patenting is signal. The firmst may have some promising future business plan mightbe more likely to file patents, not for protection but signaling. Using the patent as a signal,firms may be able to get more investmen

11、t and attract more investors. If this is the case, theysis could suffer fromogeneity by “reverse causality.”评审人没有理解 matching 的方法。不用做实质性的修改。One page, the author cites an article to arguet foreign subsidiaries are less likely topete their domestic peers in develothe cooperative relationship with domes

12、ticsocio-political actors. This rationale has not been well clarified and elaborated. Authors maywant to spell out the logic behind this argument for more solid hypothesis construction.新的一稿的理论部分会修改。Chifirms used to joly operate with foreign firms. According to the authorsargument, such joventures sh

13、ould be able to enjoy the advantage of the relationship withdomestic sociopolitical players while enjoying benefits of foreign firms resource.I amwonder how authors dealt with the joventure case.会查一下 SMJ,AMJ，JIBS 的文章如果使用 liability of foreignness 的理论框架，是如何处理合资企业的。然后会参照这些文章的做法。Authors explainedt they

14、examined high-tech sectors in China for empiricalysis.How do you define the high-tech sectors? How did you identify the high-tech sectors firmsand relevant patents accordingly? It is needed to clarify the empirics further.P19. Where is Table A1?这两个问题在新的一稿都会得到解决。Footnote 2. It is not clear why the ex

15、cluof utility mis nesary and justifiable.Firms in China used to file utility mbecause of shorter delay to get protectionn thetypical patent does. Authors might need to include the UM oreast, spell out why theyr.excluded UM and how it does norm theof the p会坚持不包括 utility m，会修改脚注 2 的文字，进一步说明理由。For robu

16、stness check, the author might want to use “IPR index” as it is, not transformingo the dummy variables.使用指数分成高低两组是 matching 的一般方法，评审人没有完全理解，不用做实质性的改动。About empirics, Authors examined the patent premium from the year of patenting to 4years thereafter. However, this does not allow you to identify the

17、“patent premium” becauseduring the period observation, patenting firms may have very different events from “no- patenting” firms.做一个重要的调整，将 t 设置成企业获得第一个专利的年份。这样可以更加贴近理论部分的论述，因为所有的理论的论述都是说这个公司有了专利权之后，而不是只是申请。这样也不一定汇报到 t+4 年。上一版说汇报到 t+4 的原因是专利申请之后还有两年的时间来，因此汇报到 t+4。根据 Chang and Shim, 2014, SMJ，汇报到 t+3

18、 可能也可以了。Reviewer 3The goal of submis# 16374 is theive appraisal of firm performance witht is the value of patents as appropriationrespect to the so called patent premium,mechanism. Firm performance is given by total factor productivity (TFP) measured at thefirm level and the micro dataset comprises

19、the patent strategies of 33K Chihigh-techfirms observed from 1998 to 2007 (though the definition of the high-tech group ofindustries is not explicitly shown).There is a long literature background and several testable hypotheses are put forward.Moreover, the methodological approach ifficiently expand

20、ed: the measurement of TFP isarticulated through robust methods, while propensity score matching is used to create thecontrol group of firms. Nonetheless, this psections.r presents several drawbacksultiple1) The hypotheses development is quite confusing and not linear. Further, the approachfollowed

21、by the theoretical framework is highly speculative and the narrative includes repetitively jargon words. For instance the testable HP1 is pleonastic.新的一稿会做修改。2) The mof patent premium dcted in Figure 1 is not justified with regard to howtechnological collaboration enhanpatent premium.新的一稿会做修改。3) A m

22、ajor econometric problem concerns the assessment of the causality relation acrosspatent premium and firm performance. In particular, some variables used for thematching of the control sle are likely to affect not only patenting but also firmperformance (e.g. newprod ratio of new product output to to

23、tal output). Therefore,it cannot be rule out the alternative hypothesist the impact patenting on firmperformance is explained by innovation activity rather IP protection.4) The selection bias in sub 3) could be at the base of theing result on testable HP4t patenting redufirm performance in provinstr

24、ength.characterized by a high IP评审人没有完全理解加入 newprod 的意义。在新的一稿中做文字的修改。5)he light of sub 3) a structural mcould be estimated (Griliches, Hall, Pakes, 1991).还没能够Griliches, Zvi, Hall, Bronwyn H., & Pakes, Ariel. (1991). R&D, Patents, andMarket Value Revisited: Is There A Second (Technological Opportunity) Factor? Economicsof Innovation and New Technology, 1(3), 183-201。但是structural m应该不需要。6) Given the fast and accelerating patent activities by the Chifirms it