Patenting to Fight Pandemics: International Importance of Intellectual Propertyfor Pandemic Mitigation Technologies

From: Canadian Intellectual Property Office

International Importance of IP for Pandemic Mitigation Technologies

This section presents the innovation that has been carried out by institutions worldwide for pandemic mitigation technologies. Using patent activity as a proxy for measuring innovation, this section explores the patent landscape for this field between 1999 and 2018.

Global Trend for Patented Inventions

Figure 5 shows the global trend for patented inventions for pandemic mitigation technologies between application years 1999 and 2018. During these two decades, the average annual growth rate of patented inventions was 17%. At the turn of the century, there was a limited number of patented inventions in this field; however, a significant spike in patent activity is observed between 2002 and 2004 following the SARS outbreak. After 2004, the growth for patented inventions remained relatively stable until the onset of the MERS outbreak, after which an annual average growth of 13% is observed between 2012 and 2018.

Figure 5: Global growth of patented inventions for pandemic mitigation technologies between 1999 and 2018

Figure 5: Global growth of patented inventions for pandemic mitigation technologies between 1999 and 2018
Application Year	Patented Inventions	Annual Growth Rate
1999	45	-
2000	113	151.11%
2001	116	2.65%
2002	130	12.07%
2003	362	178.46%
2004	428	18.23%
2005	397	-7.24%
2006	398	0.25%
2007	372	-6.53%
2008	420	12.90%
2009	420	0.00%
2010	421	0.24%
2011	419	-0.48%
2012	422	0.72%
2013	498	18.01%
2014	499	0.20%
2015	641	28.46%
2016	748	16.69%
2017	729	-2.54%
2018	874	19.89%

Geographical Clusters of Patent Activity

The Figure 6 displays the patenting intensity of each country's institutions for pandemic mitigation technologies. The patented invention volume for each country has been normalized by the country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) value for 2018 to adjust for the size of the economy.^{Footnote iv}, ^{Endnote 7} After accounting for this, smaller economies like Liechtenstein, Namibia and Denmark emerge as leaders in this field. However, in terms of absolute fractional counts, institutions from the United States of America (USA) and China are clear leaders, since they were cumulatively responsible for more than 50% of the total patented inventions considered for this analysis. Canadian institutions hold the eighth largest patent portfolio in this field.

Figure 6: Global patent activity by institution's country of origin for pandemic mitigation technologies

Figure 6: Global patent activity by institution's country of origin for pandemic mitigation technologies
Country of origin	Patented Inventions per trillion GDP
Argentina	2.507352647
Australia	32.11852734
Austria	76.7987506
Belgium	7.522092361
Brazil	6.956983039
British Virgin Islands	3213.242454
Canada	63.06532406
Cayman Islands	583.4305718
Chile	14.08303642
China	132.4206268
Croatia	37.82542647
Cuba	50
Estonia	58.57468272
Liechtenstein	241.3515688
Namibia	213.4986226
New Caledonia	410.1416853
Singapore	82.3723229
South Korea	109.3267449
West Bank	109.469075
Denmark	153.3836386
Egypt	4.782868346
France	24.48213763
Finland	14.96563543
Germany	80.31506944
Greece	4.586485987
Iceland	65.68215865
India	33.74508924
Ireland	26.1446459
Israel	129.8383602
Italy	13.98330305
Japan	34.80244193
Kuwait	15.52818983
Luxembourg	115.1279201
Malaysia	28.50301948
Mexico	12.25681573
Netherlands	144.4741169
New Zealand	29.26473268
Norway	4.600335105
Poland	4.097081211
Portugal	8.824310321
Russia	5.429688126
South Africa	8.688847411
Spain	44.17366417
Sweden	90.73888419
Switzerland	150.2477732
Taiwan	23.75337213
Turkey	1.826462361
United Kingdom	54.50926192
United States	95.49089738

Figure 7 showcases the growth in patented inventions for select countries in this field. Chinese institutions have made considerable headway between 2009 and 2018 and have recorded an average annual growth rate of 26%, which is significantly higher than the 8% average annual growth rate observed by institutions worldwide during this same period.^{Footnote v} In line with the worldwide average annual growth rate, Canadian institutions also experienced an average annual growth rate of 8% over the second half of the 20-year timeframe and it is encouraging to see this growth being almost on par with institutions from leading economies like Germany and Japan.

Figure 7: Global patent filing trend for pandemic mitigation technologies by institution's country of origin between 1999 and 2018

Figure 7: Global patent filing trend for pandemic mitigation technologies by institution's country of origin between 1999 and 2018
Application Year	United States	China	Germany	Republic of Korea	Japan	United Kingdom	Canada	Australia
1999	7	5	20	-	3	-	1	-
2000	43	1	23	1	3	6	1	3
2001	64	5	13	-	7	2	4	-
2002	68	4	13	1	7	6	3	3
2003	83	178	14	6	20	6	7	4
2004	182	70	32	8	25	12	15	5
2005	165	61	25	14	30	22	10	3
2006	195	46	25	10	26	20	18	5
2007	163	36	34	12	17	23	22	5
2008	168	72	24	15	17	19	14	2
2009	179	60	30	11	25	22	7	7
2010	158	100	20	20	17	22	7	3
2011	160	113	17	13	20	17	6	8
2012	161	122	17	13	15	11	6	4
2013	160	152	25	26	22	20	16	8
2014	207	161	29	13	12	13	5	1
2015	228	257	23	25	19	11	7	3
2016	253	315	19	30	19	16	9	6
2017	218	289	30	56	16	16	9	1
2018	236	480	13	39	13	12	14	5

IP Concentration among Countries

In order to gauge the degree of concentration of patented inventions globally, CIPO has developed a metric called the Intellectual Property Concentration Index (IPCI). This index can be used to determine the competitiveness of an industry or technology field based on the distribution of patented inventions held by all the countries active in that industry or field (additional details in Annex C). Index values closer to 0 indicate a more competitive global environment with no single country dominating, whereas index values closer to 1 would indicate a more concentrated global environment with one country clearly dominating.

Figure 8 shows the change in IPCI value over time for pandemic mitigation technologies for all institutions worldwide. After observing a peak value of 0.32 in 2001, the IPCI gradually stabilizes to a value of around 0.2 between application years 2004 and 2013. After 2013, one can notice an upward trend in the IPCI value over time which eventually attains its peak value of 0.36 in 2018. This uptick in IPCI value indicates an increase in patent activity from institutions originating from a few select countries. Based on the trend observed in Figure 7, this uptick in IPCI value is a result of the surge in patented inventions by Chinese institutions. The remaining countries, including Canada, form a competitive fringe to this dominant position.

Figure 8: Intellectual Property Concentration Index for pandemic mitigation technologies between 1999 and 2018

Figure 8: Intellectual Property Concentration Index for pandemic mitigation technologies between 1999 and 2018
Application Year	IPCI
1999	0.265432
2000	0.194001
2001	0.321704
2002	0.291179
2003	0.275415
2004	0.215706
2005	0.200182
2006	0.246505
2007	0.204311
2008	0.194294
2009	0.206581
2010	0.195737
2011	0.20526
2012	0.217061
2013	0.192628
2014	0.262763
2015	0.274778
2016	0.279578
2017	0.245647
2018	0.363546

In contrast to presenting the aggregated shift in concentration of patented inventions across all countries as in Figure 8, the IPCI in Figure 9 captures the degree of competitiveness for institutions originating from each respective country for pandemic mitigation technologies. When a new technology typically emerges into the marketplace, there are relatively few institutions engaged in this new field. As a result, these institutions operate in a less competitive environment and their country's IPCI value is therefore expected to be high; that is, closer to 1. As this technology matures over time and becomes recognized globally, the market becomes a more competitive environment as new institutions enter, resulting in the IPCI declining over time. The trends observed in Figure 9 align with these expectations as the IPCI for all countries, including Canada, is observed to be below 0.1.

Figure 9: Intellectual Property Concentration Index for institutions from select countries for pandemic mitigation technologies between 1999 and 2018

Figure 9: Intellectual Property Concentration Index for institutions from select countries for pandemic mitigation technologies between 1999 and 2018
Application Year	Australia	Canada	China	Germany	Japan	Republic of Korea	United Kingdom	United States
1999	-	1.0000	0.2593	0.1200	0.3333	-	-	0.1429
2000	0.3333	0.5000	0.2066	0.0603	0.1667	1.0000	0.2800	0.0429
2001	0.3333	0.2222	0.1136	0.0577	0.1076	1.0000	0.3333	0.0263
2002	0.2222	0.1358	0.0782	0.0496	0.0725	0.5000	0.2066	0.0197
2003	0.1247	0.0703	0.0156	0.0449	0.0336	0.1250	0.2133	0.0145
2004	0.1097	0.0395	0.0118	0.0322	0.0240	0.0793	0.1176	0.0092
2005	0.0848	0.0411	0.0108	0.0365	0.0185	0.0889	0.0640	0.0080
2006	0.0680	0.0462	0.0101	0.0336	0.0186	0.0691	0.0523	0.0065
2007	0.0547	0.0607	0.0094	0.0336	0.0183	0.0553	0.0449	0.0061
2008	0.0548	0.0509	0.0087	0.0321	0.0162	0.0503	0.0427	0.0055
2009	0.0576	0.0486	0.0081	0.0427	0.0166	0.0454	0.0364	0.0051
2010	0.0569	0.0455	0.0073	0.0432	0.0163	0.0406	0.0340	0.0048
2011	0.0484	0.0437	0.0067	0.0432	0.0152	0.0384	0.0346	0.0046
2012	0.0463	0.0405	0.0061	0.0424	0.0144	0.0382	0.0322	0.0044
2013	0.0469	0.0357	0.0055	0.0454	0.0144	0.0346	0.0298	0.0043
2014	0.0455	0.0362	0.0052	0.0485	0.0138	0.0312	0.0267	0.0041
2015	0.0443	0.0337	0.0050	0.0472	0.0142	0.0281	0.0247	0.0041
2016	0.0453	0.0313	0.0045	0.0486	0.0138	0.0258	0.0223	0.0039
2017	0.0446	0.0300	0.0041	0.0474	0.0135	0.0216	0.0206	0.0038
2018	0.0427	0.0269	0.0038	0.0476	0.0135	0.0206	0.0196	0.0037

Global Patent Landscape

The patent landscape map presented in Figure 10 is helpful in identifying the key areas that experienced high patent activity for pandemic mitigation technologies. This map is generated using an algorithm that relies on word sequences from patent documentation to cluster patented inventions according to shared language. The patented inventions are organized based on common themes and grouped as "contours" on the map to identify areas of high and low patent activity. The white peaks represent the highest concentrations of patented inventions, and each peak is labelled with key terms that tie the common themes together. The contours are further highlighted to represent the research areas they fall under. The distance between word sequences helps to illustrate the relationship between peaks, where shorter distances indicate that the patented inventions they represent share more commonalities relative to those that are further apart. Word sequences located close together may be part of similar systems or technologies, whereas word sequences that are further apart are less likely to be related or share less in common.

Figure 10 highlights the overlap between pandemic mitigation technologies and other foundational technologies that were initiated between 1999 and 2018. Coronavirus induces many symptoms similar to that of other viral respiratory infections, such as influenza and many of the interventions were originally intended for other infections. This explains why inventions that relate to research on the pathophysiological mechanisms of influenza infections, and of other bacteria, are of great value as pandemic mitigation. Similarly, it is expected that gastrointestinal and pulmonary inflammatory conditions appear in Figure 10, as coronavirus is known to cause both respiratory and gastrointestinal symptoms.^{Endnote 8} Indeed, mechanisms of immune response to these conditions and to cancer are also implicated in the immune response to coronavirus, which explains the overlap with the patented inventions related to light chain of antibody immunoglobulins. Similarly, for the Rapid Detection and Diagnosis research area, the patented inventions related to primers, polymerase chain reactions and antibodies are valuable foundational technologies for the pandemic.

Figure 10: International patent landscape map for pandemic mitigation technologies

Footnotes

Footnote iv

A fractional counting approach was used to compute the patented invention counts for each country. This approach avoids double counting for patented inventions that involve multiple assignees from different countries. For example, in the case where an invention is patented by an American inventor and two Canadian inventors, Canada would be assigned two-thirds of the patented invention count and the U.S. would be assigned the remaining third.

Return to footnote iv referrer

Footnote v

China's representation in the global patent dataset is incomplete for the timeframe considered in this analysis. This is due to the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) not publishing the applicant information for patented inventions at their office. As a result, China will not be used to benchmark Canada's performance in this report. Inventions originating from Chinese applicants that are patented abroad are assumed to be accurately captured by the respective filing offices that administer the international filings. The following dashboard illustrates this fact:

https://public.tableau.com/profile/patstat.support#!/vizhome/CoverageofPATSTAT2019SpringEdition/CoveragePATSTATGlobal

Return to footnote v referrer

Language selection

WxT Search form