面對知識經濟的來臨，台韓兩國電子廠商為了增加自身的競爭能力，莫不增加對創新活動的投入，以獲取更高的市場經濟價值。而由相關資料可以發現，台韓兩國電子廠商對於創新活動的投入、研發與專利產出皆快速地逐年增長，可見其對技術創新的重視，故本研究將以研發費用、專利權以及專利引證數等指標，分別衡量台韓兩國廠商投入創新活動所增加的市場價值。
本研究以台韓兩國有公開交易之電子產業廠商為研究對象，採用自2000年1月1日至2008年12月31日為觀察期間。結合美國專利暨商標局(United States Patent and Trademark Office, USPTO)與Data Stream資料庫，再將所得資料，分為流量與存量變數，分別探討兩國創新活動對其公司價值的影響。
研究結果顯示，以流量變數衡量兩國廠商的市場價值，其解釋能力較存量變數為高，而南韓廠商在其規模越大時，其相對的市場價值也會越高，而台灣廠商並無這種明顯的區別，且由模型中指出，以高科技著稱的台韓兩國電子廠商，在投入創新活動後，的確會增加廠商自身的價值。

Facing the era of knowledge-based economy, Taiwan and South Korea electronics manufacturers all increase the investment in innovation activities, in order to obtain a higher market value and increase their competitive ability.
According to relevant researches, the electronic manufacturers in both Taiwan and South Korea are increasing their investment in innovation activities, R&D and patent output rapidly in recent years. This phenomenon shows the importance of technology innovation. In this study, we use the R&D expense, the number of patents and patent citations as innovation indicators. By using these indicators, we measure the market value that creates from the investment in innovation activities in Taiwan and Korean firms.
In this study, we select the electronic firms that offer publicly trading system in Taiwan and South Korea as research sample. And the observation period is from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2008. We combined the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the Data Stream database to obtain our raw data. Then we divided these data into flow and stock variables to compare the market value between Taiwan and South Korea.
The results show that the explanatory power of flow variables is higher than the stock variable when measuring the market value in Taiwan and South Korea. The empirical result also indicates that the bigger firms will have higher market value in South Korea; whereas, Taiwanese firms did not show this tendency. From the model, we find that the investment in innovation will certainly leads to higher market value in electronic firms in Taiwan and South Korea.

(1) Choung, J. Y. (1998) “ Patterns of innovation in Korea and Taiwan. ”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, VOL. 45, NO. 4.
(2) Cockburn, I. and Zvi G. (1988). “ Industry Effects and Appropriability Measures in the Stock Market''s Valuation of R&D and Patents, ”The American Economic Review, Vol. 78, No. 2.
(3) Gold, B. , (1977), Research, Technological Change and Economic Analysis, Lexington Books, Lexington, Mass.
(4) Goto, A. and K Motohashi, 2007. "Construction of a Japanese Patent Database and a first look at Japanese patenting activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1431-1442, November.
(5) Greenhalgh , C. and M. Rogers, (2006). “The value of innovation: The interaction of competition, R&D and IP.” Research Policy, 35, 562-580
(6) Griliches, Z. ,(1980), “Returns to Research and Development Expenditures in the Private Sector.”In Kendrick, J. W., and B. N. Vaccara (eds.), New Developments in ProductivityMeasurement and Analysis, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 419-454.
(7) Griliches, Z. ,(1981), "Market value, R&D, and patents", Economic Letters, Vol. 7 pp.183-7.
(8) Hall, B. H, G. Thoma. and S. Torrisi, (2006)” The market value of patents and R&D: Evidence from European firms”
(9) Hall, B. H. , (1993), “The Stock Market Valuation of R&D Investment during the 1980s. ”American Economic Review 83: 259-64.
(10) Hall, B. H. , (2000), “ Innovation and market value.” In R. Barrell, G. Mason and M.O’Mahoney (eds.), Productivity, Innovation, and Economic Performance.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 177-198.
(11) Hall, B. H. , “The Use and Value of IP Rights. ”,(2009)Prepared for the UK IP Ministerial Forum on the Economic Value of Intellectual Property,.
(12) Hall, B. H. and M. MacGarvie. , (2006). “The Private Value of Software Patents,” Cambridge,MA: NBER Working Paper No. 12195, revised 2008.
(13) Hall, B. H. and. R. Oriani (2006), “Does the market value R&D investment by European firms? Evidence from a panel of manufacturing firms in France, Germany.” International Journal of Industrial Organization 24: 971-993.
(14) Hall, B. H., A. B. Jaffe, and M. Trajtenberg (2000). "Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look," NBER Working Papers 7741.
(15) Hall, B. H., A. B. Jaffe, and M. Trajtenberg (2005), “Market Value and Patent Citations”.Rand Journal of Economics 36, 16-38.
(16) Hall, B. H., G. L. D. Thoma and S. Torrisi, (2007). “ The Market Value of Patents and R&D: Evidence from European Firms . ” Cambridge, MA: NBER Working Paper No.13428.
(17) Hall, B. H.,. A. B. Jaffe, and. M Trajtenberg , (2001), “The NBER Patent Citations Data File:Lessons, Insights, and Methodological Tools.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 8498 (October).
(18) Hirschey, M. (1982). “Intangible Capital Aspects of Advertising and R & D Expenditures. ” The Journal of Industrial Economics, 30(4), 375-390.
(19) Hu, A.G.Z. and A. B. Jaffe (2001) “Patent citations and international knowledge flow : the cases of Korea and Taiwan”. NBER Working Paper 8528.
(20) Jaffe, A. B. (1986). "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms'' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
(21) Janis, M. D. (2002) “Patent Abolitionism,” Berkeley Technology Law Journal 899.
(22) Lo, S. and D. Sutthiphisal (2009), “Does it Matter Who Has the Right to Patent: First-to-inventor First-to-file? Lessons From Canada. ” NBER Working Paper No. 14926.
(23) Mairesse, J. (1991), “R&D and productivity: a survey of econometric studies at the firm level.” STI Review (OECD) 8: 9-46.
(24) Nagaoka, S. (2006), “R&D and market value of Japanese firms in the 1990s” J. Japanese Int. Economies 20, P155–176.
(25) Salinger, M. A. (1984) “Tobin''s q, Unionization, and the Concentration Profits Relationship ,” The RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 159-170.
(26) Trajtenberg, M. (1990). "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," The RAND Journal of Economics ,vol. 21(1), pages 172-187.
(27) Wernerfelt, B. and C. A. Montgomery (1988) “Tobin''s q and the Importance of Focus in Firm Performance, ” The American Economic Review, Vol. 78, No. 1, pp. 246-250.
(28) Wildasin, DE. ,(1984), “The q Theory of Investment with Many Capital Goods. ”, The American Economic Review, Vol. 74, No. 1, pp. 203-210.
(29) Yang CH, JR Chen (2003) “Innovation and Market Value in Newly-Industrialized Countries: The Case of Taiwanese Electronics Firms”, Asian Economic Journal , Vol.17 No. 2, pp 205-220
(30) 謝中琮，2002年12月，「台灣、日本、南韓產業科技競爭力之比較探討」，行政院經濟建設委員會研究報告。
(31) 吳家興、李秋錦、陳之華、陳美菊、謝學如， 2004年，「亞洲金融風暴後台韓經濟表現之比較」， 經濟研究期刊第6期頁129-160。
(32) 鄭秀玲、張淑卿，2005年，「專利引證和國際知識外溢：以電子業爲例」，經濟論文叢刊33卷第1期。
(33) 洪志勳，「 美國專利法修法趨勢及現況」，科技法律透析，2007年4月，第14～19頁。