Author : dr. Jacekas Antulis, Associated Partner, Head of the Patent Division at METIDA

In this second part of the blog text on the subject “Patenting Culture of Twenty Years in Europe” we will try to compare Lithuania, Scandinavian countries and Germany.

In the first part of the blog: (https://metidalawfirm.wordpress.com/2016/07/14/20-ties-metu-patentavimo-kultura-europoje-baltijos-saliu-analize-i-dalis/) analysing the patenting culture of the Baltic States, we applied a theoretical model which allowed comparing the patenting intensity in each country in relative units by applying a rationing procedure in a sufficiently objective manner. Thus, we have analysed and compared the characteristics of patenting in the Baltic States in detail.

In this blog text, we will try to review and compare Lithuania and other European countries. First of all, we will review the trends in patenting prevailing in Germany, since it is assumed that this country has developed a high level of patenting culture. In pursuance of evaluation of the patenting situation in a more objective manner, we will first look at the changes in the population of Germany during the last 10 years (Table 1):

Table 1. Population in Germany during the period from 2006 to 2015

As far as we can see, the population in Germany has not significantly changed over the last ten years: on the one hand, a slight decrease in the population has naturally occurred (like in the majority of the European countries); on the other hand, a major immigration to Germany has occurred which has partially compensated for this “loss”.

The patenting intensity in Lithuania and Germany is described below, expressed in relative units on the basis of the model introduced in the previous blog text and the respective estimations (the number of inventions per million people is calculated, taking into account the number of patent applications and population) (Table 2):

Table 2. Patenting intensity in Lithuania and Germany

Table 2 suggests that the patenting intensity in Germany is particularly high and Germany is ahead of Lithuania by as much as tens of times. As the difference is so great, in order to assess the patenting situation in an unbiased manner, an additional rationing procedure should be applied: the value of the patenting intensity of Germany should be divided from the value of patenting intensity of Lithuania (Table 3):

Table 3. Patenting intensity in Germany in respect to Lithuania

Table 3 shows how many times the patenting intensity of Germany is higher than the patenting intensity of Lithuania. It may be assumed that the patenting intensity of Lithuania is rather low as compared with Germany; nevertheless, the comparison of years 2012–2014 suggests that the difference has gradually decreased.

 Now let us turn to the patenting situation in Scandinavian countries (Sweden, Finland and Norway).

Table 4. Patenting intensity in Lithuania, Sweden, Finland and Norway

The second rationing stage (including Germany) has shown the following results:

Table 5. Patenting intensity in Germany, Sweden, Finland and Norway in respect to Lithuania

Table 5 suggests that the patenting intensity in Lithuania is rather low as compared with Germany or Scandinavian countries. It may be noted that in Germany, the national patenting culture is rather stable and has remained the same as 20 years ago. However, the analysis of the Scandinavian countries has disclosed that currently they are going through a difficult period, since the number of national applications in the countries has significantly decreased, and in the recent 20 years, the number of national applications has dropped by as much as 2.55 times in Sweden, 1.88 times in Finland and by 1.42 times in Norway (in respect to Lithuania). Certainly, some positive trends have already been noticed in the Scandinavian countries: the analysis of population has shown that in the recent ten years, the population has consistently increased in all the Scandinavian countries: from 9.05 million to 9.75 million in Sweden, from 5.27 million to 5.49 million in Finland, from 4.64 million to 5.17 million in Norway. We can also see that earlier, Norway would be significantly behind Sweden and Finland according to its patenting intensity, but in recent years the situation has substantially changed: in practice, the patenting intensity of all three Scandinavian countries has become the same, but Sweden has dropped from the first position to the last position, losing its leading position to Finland, and Norway has moved to a higher position.

The analysis carried out suggests that the Baltic States should follow the example of Germany and our neighbours in Scandinavia. Thus, we should make significant progress and take serious actions in order to strengthen the protection of our unique products in Europe and the rest of the world.

In other blog texts on the subject “Patenting Culture of Twenty Years in Europe”, we will examine the patenting situation of the Baltic region in respect to Europe and the Asian countries in detail.