[目的/意义] 发明专利申请公开后，实质审查决定作出前，一直处于悬而未决的法律状态，此阶段对发明专利授权前景的评估，在理论和实践中都很有意义。[方法/过程] 以1985-2014年国内申请人在生物技术领域向国家知识产权局（CNIPA）申请的88 304件发明专利为对象，构建基于专利文献的指标，通过Logistic回归模型，探讨影响专利授权的因素，通过分组回归和系数差异检验，分析不同类型创新主体专利授权影响因素的差异。[结果/结论] Logistic回归结果表明，在生物技术领域，权利要求数、发明人数、是否提前公开、首项权利要求字数和专利文献页数等指标都与专利申请授权概率存在正相关关系；企业专利授权率低于大学和科研机构专利，但高于个人专利。分组回归系数差异检验结果表明，各变量对专利授权的影响在不同类型创新主体间存在显著差异。因此，专利授权分析中，对不同创新主体予以分类考虑很有必要。
[Purpose/significance] After the invention patent has been applied for and published, it has been in a pending legal status until the substantive examination decision is made. At this stage, the assessment of the prospects of patent grant is meaningful in theory and practice. [Method/process] Taking the 88304 invention patents applied by Chinese applicants in the field of biotechnology in the National Intellectual Property Office (CNIPA) from 1985 to 2014 as the study object, constructing indicators based on patent documents, the factors which impacted patent grant are studied through Logistic regression. This paper compared and analyzed the differences in the factors affecting the patent grant of different types of innovation entities through group regression and comparison of coefficients. [Result/conclusion] Logistic regression results show that the number of claims, the number of inventors, whether the applications are disclosed in advance, the number of words in the first claim, and the number of patent document pages are all positively related to the probability of patent grant in the field of biotechnology. The patent grant rate of enterprises is lower than that of universities and scientific research institutions, but higher than that of individual patents. The results of group regression coefficient difference test show that the influence of variables on patent grant is significantly different among different types of innovation entities. Therefore, in the analysis of patent grant in the field of biotechnology, it is necessary to classify and consider different innovation subject.
[1] 张亚峰,刘海波,陈光华,等.专利是一个好的创新测量指标吗?[J].外国经济与管理,2018,40(6):3-16.
[2] 文家春,卢炳克.专利实质审查周期的影响因素[J].中国科技论坛,2016,(12):90-97.
[3] GUELLEC D, DE LA POTTERIE B P. Applications, grants and the value of patent[J].Economics letters, 2000, 69(1):109-114.
[4] 冯仁涛.基于专利文献的专利维持时间影响因素分析[J].情报杂志,2020,39(7):202-207.
[5] 宋爽.中国专利维持时间影响因素研究——基于专利质量的考量[J].图书情报工作,2013,57(7):96-100,105.
[6] GRIMALDI M, CRICELLI L. Indexes of patent value:a systematic literature review and classification[J]. Knowledge management research & practice, 2020, 18(2):214-233.
[7] SCHUSTER W M, DAVIS R E,SCHLEY K, et al. An empirical study of patent grant rates as a function of race and gender[J].American business law journal, 2020, 57(2):281-319.
[8] 乔永忠.不同类型创新主体发明专利维持信息实证研究[J].科学学研究, 2011, 29(3):442-447.
[9] SAPSALIS E, DE LA POTTERIE B P, NAVON R. Academic versus industry patenting:an in-depth analysis of what determines patent value[J].Research policy, 2006, 35(10):1631-1645.
[10] MOWERY D C, ZIEDONIS A A. Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayh-Dole act in the United States[J].Research policy, 2002, 31(3):399-418.
[11] OECD. OECD patent databases, identifying technology areas for patents.[EB/OL].[2020-07-17]. https://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/40807441.pdf.
[12] 吴红,付秀颖,董坤.专利维持时间影响因素实证分析——以燃料电池专利文献为例[J].图书情报工作, 2013, 57(24):112-116,100.
[13] LERNER J. The importance of patent scope:an empirical analysis[J].The RAND journal of economics, 1994, 25(2):319-333.
[14] 刘雪凤,高兴.中国风能技术发明专利维持时间影响因素研究[J].科研管理, 2015, 36(10):139-145.
[15] 叶静怡,李晨乐,雷震, 等.专利申请提前公开制度, 专利质量与技术知识传播[J].世界经济, 2012(8):115-133.
[16] 蔡中华,侯翱宇,马欢.专利维持时间影响因素的实证研究[J].科技管理研究, 2015, 35(21):160-163.
[17] 刘云,王小黎, 闫哲.专利质量测度及区域比较研究——以我国石墨烯产业为例[J].科学学与科学技术管理, 2019, 40(9):18-34.
[18] 刘丽军,宋敏.中国农业专利的质量:基于不同申请时期, 申请主体和技术领域的比较[J].中国农业科学, 2012, 45(17):3617-3623.
[19] 张杰.中国专利增长之"谜"——来自地方政府政策激励视角的微观经验证据[J].武汉大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2019,72(1):85-103.
[20] 马茹,罗晖,王宏伟,等.中国区域经济高质量发展评价指标体系及测度研究[J].中国软科学, 2019(7):60-67.
[21] FISCHER T, LEIDINGER J. Testing patent value indicators on directly observed patent value-an empirical analysis of Ocean Tomo patent auctions[J].Research policy, 2014, 43(3):519-529.
