在知識經濟及全球化的驅動下，研發創新已成為各國產生知識財，強化競爭力的重要主張，隨著全球經濟活動不斷拓展與深化，所帶來研發、生產與消費地理位置的快速轉變，引發各國對於區域發展的高度關注；而區域創新及創新氛圍裡所強調的成員互動及創新網絡，常因此形成正式或非正式的合作關係。近年來許多研究指出，公私部門尋求合作來進行創新活動的比例提升，欲藉此來連結彼此的創新研發能量。

由於專利是表現知識具體化的成果，自從專利資訊數位化後，學者即開始以專利數作為創新產出面的重要代理變數，並將其創新產出的意涵引入地區之中。但過往研究多停留在以量化之方式，以專利數或引證數衡量在特定空間尺度下，組織或地區的創新合作績效及知識外溢效果，但相關研究對於「創新合作」現象的了解，仍是有所缺乏。

在上述的研究缺口下，本研究選擇新竹科學園區作為觀察分析的對象，利用專利資料上所提供的共同申請人地址，將竹科的合作夥伴轉為空間型態的描述，藉此了解創新合作現象的在空間特性上的表徵，並了解不同創新系統成員所扮演的角色及定位，此有助於測試既有理論及過往研究的解釋，並推動空間與創新相關領域研究的發展。

就竹科個案而言，本研究結果顯示，利用專利資料將竹科的合作現象轉為空間型態的描述，能了解竹科作為一個高科技產業群聚，廠商與其合作夥伴的實際合作互動及空間表徵，而其在時間歷程及空間特性的表現上，與過去文獻所論述的結果能相互對應，並以區域內合作及跨國合作現象最為顯著；另一方面，清大、交大與竹科的地理鄰近性，並沒有促成更多的專利共有關係，但近年伴隨廠商全球化布局，則有建立跨國產學合作連結之趨勢；而組織鄰近性效果所促成的廠商間專利合作關係在本研究中亦有所表現。

Driving by knowledge-based economy and globalization, R&D and innovation has become the important elements to enhance the ability of competence of countries. With the economic activities flourishing, which deeply arouse the concerned of regional development. And the regional innovation and innovative milieu theories which emphasize the interactions between members and innovative network are easier to form the formal and informal collaborations. Many studies indicate that the ratio of public and private sectors seeking to engage in cooperative innovations is increasing in recent years.

Patent is one of the types of innovation output. Since patent data is digitalization, researchers begin to use number of patent as a proxy of innovation outputs and put it in regional scales to measure the innovative ability of a specific region. However, most of researches stayed in quantitative method to measure the performance of organizations or knowledge spillover effect.

Due to the research gap mentioned above, this study chooses Hsinchu Science Park as the research subject and uses patent data which disclosure the applicant (or so-called assignee) address to do the spatial analysis and description of the relationships between firms in Hsinchu Science Park and their partners. This research helps us to test the past theories and explanations, what’s more, driving the development in related fields.

As Hsinchu Science Park as concerned, the result shows that using patent data to draw the cooperative innovations phenomenon is identical with the past researches, no matter on time or spatial features. The regional and international collaboration are significant through the patent statistics. On one hand, the geographical proximity doesn’t make more collaboration with Tsing-Hua and Chiao-Tung universities, however, with the globalization allocation, there’s an increasing trend to collaborate with overseas universities. And the organizational proximity effect does show the collaborative output on patent data.

王明妤（2012）。基於專利資料檢視我國國家創新系統的成果。科技管理學刊，17，49-78。
何秀青（2012）。產業區域發展與產學網絡型態關係之分析－以台灣專利分析為例。行政院國家科學委員會商管產學橋接研究中心，13，144-151。
周志龍（1998）。後工業臺北多核心的空間結構化及其治理政治學。地理學報，34，1-18。
林亞偉（2007年11月5日）。關鍵一擊，超越對手20年。商業周刊，1041。
林計妙（2006）。以技術創新擴散觀點探討產業空間分佈現象─以台灣IC產業為例。國立成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文。
林唯杰（2007）。台灣地區創新效率評估。國立成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文。
吳思華（2009）。台灣地區第二次產業創新活動調查研究。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫報告（報告編號：NSC 96–3013–P–004‐003‐MY2）。
侯慶辰（2009）。論企業共同開發完成後之專利權共有。政大智慧財產評論，7，23-41。
徐進鈺（1998）。邁向一個學習性的區域?台北一新竹高科技走廊的廠商聚集與技術學習。師大地理研究報告，29，143-159。
徐進鈺（2005）。跨界研發與區域創新體系：資訊業台商在美國矽谷與中國上海、北京研發活動的比較。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（報告編號：NSC93-2415-H-002-001）。
耿筠，張彥輝，陳達仁，林佩芬（2010）。大學研發成果關聯性研究及台美狀況比較。商管科技季刊，11，1-20。
張素莉，胡太山，林建元（2004）。高科技産業與生産者服務業互動關係之探討: 以新竹科學園區及周邊地區爲例。科技管理學刊，9，33-61。
張詩林（2012）。以專利共有探討區域之創新合作。國立成功大學都市計劃研究所碩士論文。
陳東升（1997）。高科技產業組織間關係的權力分析: 以臺灣積體電路產業的設計公司為例。臺大社會學刊，25，47-104。
楊文全（2011）。開放城市：開放原始碼年代的創新城市孕育－Linux-based EeePC的臺北。國立台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所博士論文。
楊志海（2002）。科學園區廠商的專利決定因素－一般化分析法。行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告（報告編號：NSC91-2415-H-032-013）。
楊奕泠（2005）。創新環境、網絡與創新成效之研究。國立政治大學地政研究所碩士論文。
經濟部（2007）。掌握產業群聚思維，提升產業發展新價值。經濟部技術處產業技術白皮書。
經濟部（2008）。經濟部技術處產業技術白皮書。
經濟部（2011）。我國產業科技創新競爭力與開放式創新政策研究計畫（後續擴充第2年）。100年度計劃執行報告（報告編號：100-EC-17-B-03-07-0942）。
經濟部工業局（民100）。臺灣地區 ICT 產業與創新績效。工業區開發管理100年度年報。
葉佳琪，林天柱，孔憲法（2011）。從成功大學產學合作企業之區域分佈情形探討合作特性與創新，建築與規劃學報，12，27-48。
廖淑容，周志龍（2000）。全球化與台灣地方再發展的競爭策。都市與計劃，27，191-209。
閻永琪，孔憲法（2010）。南部科學園區創新平台形成之政策網絡分析。2010年第二屆發展研究年會。台北市：國立成功大學都市計劃學系。
簡博秀（2004）。Desakota 與中國新的都市區域的發展。建築與城鄉研究學報，12，45-68。
魏依玲，吳彥寬（2008）。開放式創新下研究機構角色之轉變，產業與管理論壇，10，8-30。
龔欣平（2007）。地方創新環境與創新成效之研究。國立政治大學地政研究所碩士論文。
Acs, Z. J., Anselin, L., & Varga, A. （2002）. Patents and innovation counts as measures of regional production of new knowledge. Research policy, 31（7）, 1069-1085.
Amin, A. and Thrift, N. （1992）. Neo-Marshallian nodes in global networks. International Journal of Urban and RegionaL Research, 16, 571-587.
Anderson, M. （1995）. The role of collaborative integration in industrial organization: observations from the Canadian aerospace industry. Economic Geography, 55-78.
Asheim, B. T. （1999）. Interactive learning and localised knowledge in globalising learning economies. GeoJournal, 49（4）, 345-352.
Asheim, B. T., & Isaksen, A. （2002）. Regional innovation systems: the integration of local ‘sticky’and global ‘ubiquitous’ knowledge. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 27（1）, 77-86.
Audretsch, D. B., & Feldman, M. P. （1996）. R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. The American Economic Review, 86（3）, 630-640.
Aydalot, P., & Keeble, D. （1988）. High technology industry and innovative environments: the European experience: Psychology Press.
Bacchiocchi, E., & Montobbio, F. （2009）. Knowledge diffusion from university and public research. A comparison between US, Japan and Europe using patent citations. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 34（2）, 169-181.
Beckett-Camarata, E. J., Camarata, M. R., & Barker, R. T. （1998）. Integrating internal and external customer relationships through relationship management: A strategic response to a changing global environment. Journal of Business Research, 41（1）, 71-81.
Boschma, R. （2005）. Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Regional studies, 39（1）, 61-74.
Bouty, I. （2000）. Interpersonal and interaction influences on informal resource exchanges between R&D researchers across organizational boundaries. Academy of management journal, 43（1）, 50-65.
Broekel, T., & Binder, M. （2007）. The regional dimension of knowledge transfers—a behavioral approach. Industry and Innovation, 14（2）, 151-175.
Camagni, R. （1995）. Global network and local milieu: towards a theory of economic space. The industrial enterprise and its environment: Spatial perspectives, 195-214.
Carayannis, E. G., Assimakopoulos, D. G., & Kondō, M. （2008）. Innovation networks and knowledge clusters: findings and insights from the US, EU and Japan: Palgrave Macmillan.
Castells, M., & Hall, P. （1994）. Technopols of the World. P. Hall, Newyork.
Castells, M.（2000）。網絡社會之崛起。（夏鑄九、王志弘等校譯）。台北：唐山。
Chesbrough, H. W. （2003）. Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology: Harvard Business Press.
Chesbrough, H. W. （2006）. Open business models: How to thrive in the new innovation landscape: Harvard Business Press.
Cooke, P. （1996）. Regional innovation systems: an evolutionary approach: London: London University Press.
Cooke, P., & Morgan, K. （1998）. The associational economy: firms, regions, and innovation: Oxford University Press Oxford.
Drucker, P. F. （1993）. The concept of the corporation: Transaction Publishers.
Duysters, G., & Hagedoorn, J. （1995）. Strategic Groups and Inter‐Firm Networks In International High‐Tech Industries. Journal of Management Studies, 32（3）, 359-381.
Feldman, M. P., & Florida, R. （1994）. The geographic sources of innovation: technological infrastructure and product innovation in the United States. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 84（2）, 210-229.
Fritsch, M., & Franke, G. （2004）. Innovation, regional knowledge spillovers and R&D cooperation. Research policy, 33（2）, 245-255.
Giuri, P., Mariani, M., Brusoni, S., Crespi, G., Francoz, D., Gambardella, A., . . . Harhoff, D. （2006）. Everything you always wanted to know about inventors （but never asked）: Evidence from the PatVal-EU survey: Centre for Economic Policy Research.
Gourevitch, P., Bohn, R., & McKendrick, D. （2000）. Globalization of production: insights from the hard disk drive industry. World Development, 28（2）, 301-317.
Griliches, Z. （1998）. R&D and Productivity: The Economic Evidence: Chicago （IL）: University of Chicago Press.
Hagedoorn, J. （1993）. Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: Nterorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences. Strategic management journal, 14（5）, 371-385.
Hagedoorn, J. （2003）. Sharing intellectual property rights—an exploratory study of joint patenting amongst companies. Industrial and corporate change, 12（5）, 1035-1050.
Hagedoorn, J., & Narula, R. （1996）. Choosing organizational modes of strategic technology partnering: international and sectoral differences. Journal of international business studies, 265-284.
Hall, B. H., Jaffe, A., & Trajtenberg, M. （2006）. Market Value and Patent Citations'. International library of critical writings in economics, 197（2）, 233.
Harhoff, D., Narin, F., Scherer, F. M., & Vopel, K. （1999）. Citation frequency and the value of patented inventions. Review of Economics and statistics, 81（3）, 511-515.
Henderson, V. （1995）. Innovation and agglomeration: two parables suggested by city-size distributions: comment. Japan and the world Economy, 7（4）, 391-393.
Hicks, D., & Narin, F. （2001）. Strategic research alliances and 360 degree bibliometric indicators. Paper presented at the Janowski, JE, AN Link & NS Vonortas （2001）（Eds.）, Strategic Research Partnerships–Proceedings from a National Science Foundation Workshop, National Science Foundation, Washington, DC.
Howells, J. R. L. （2002）. Tacit knowledge, innovation and economic geography. Urban Studies, 39（5-6）, 871-884.
Jaffe, A. B. （1989）. Real effects of academic research. The American Economic Review, 957-970.
Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg, M., & Romer, P. M. （2002）. Patents, citations, and innovations: A window on the knowledge economy: MIT press.
Knox, P. & Agnew, J. (1994). The Geography of the World Economy, London: Edward Amold.
Krugman, P. R. （1991）. Geography and trade: the MIT Press.
Lin, T. C., Kung, S. F., ＆Wang, H. C. （2012, May）. Effects of firm size and geographical proximity towards different models of interaction between university and firm－A case study. Paper presented in International Conference in Management Sciences and Decision Making, Taipei, Taiwan.
Ma, Z., & Lee, Y. （2008）. Patent application and technological collaboration in inventive activities: 1980–2005. Technovation, 28（6）, 379-390.
Marshall, A. （1890）. Principles of Economics.
McQueen, D. H. （2005）. Growth of software related patents in different countries. Technovation, 25（6）, 657-671.
Mogee, M. E., & Kolar, R. G. （1994）. International patent analysis as a tool for corporate technology analysis and planning: Practitioners forum. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 6（4）, 485-504.
Morgan, K. （1997）. The learning region: institutions, innovation and regional renewal. Regional studies, 31（5）, 491-503.
Mowery, D. C., Oxley, J. E., & Silverman, B. S. （1996）. Strategic alliances and interfirm knowledge transfer. Strategic management journal, 17, 77-91.
Mowery, D. C., & Ziedonis, A. A. （2002）. Academic patent quality and quantity before and after the Bayhā€“Dole act in the United States. Research policy, 31（3）, 399-418.
Mytelka, L. K. （1991）. Strategic partnerships and the world economy. London: Pinter.
OECD （1996）. The Knowledge-Based Economy. Paris: OECD
OECD （1997）. Cities and regions in the new learning economy. Paris: OECD.
Osborn, R. N., & Baughn, C. C. （1990）. Forms of interorganizational governance for multinational alliances. Academy of management journal, 33（3）, 503-519.
Parkhe, A. （1993）. Strategic alliance structuring: A game theoretic and transaction cost examination of interfirm cooperation. Academy of management journal, 36（4）, 794-829.
Pavitt, K. （1982）. R&D, patenting and innovative activities: a statistical exploration. Research policy, 11（1）, 33-51.
Petruzzelli, A. M. （2011）. The impact of technological relatedness, prior ties, and geographical distance on university–industry collaborations: A joint-patent analysis. Technovation, 31（7）, 309-319.
Sassen, S. （1991）. The Global City: New York. London, Tokyo, 41.
Scott, A. （1996）. Regional motors of the global economy. Future, 28（5）, 391-411.
Shachar,A. & Felsenstein, D. （1992）. Urban Economic Development and High Technology
Industry, Urban Studies, 29（6）, 839-855.
Sivadas, E., & Dwyer, F. R. （2000）. An examination of organizational factors influencing new product success in internal and alliance-based processes. The Journal of Marketing, 31-49.
Smith, N. （2012）. The new urban frontier: Gentrification and the revanchist city: Routledge.
Sternberg, R. （1996）. Regional growth theories and high‐tech regions. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 20（3）, 518-538.
Stewart, D. W.（2000）。次級資料研究法。（董旭英、黃儀娟譯）。台北：弘智。
Torre, A., & Gilly, J. P. （2000）. On the analytical dimension of proximity dynamics. Regional studies, 34（2）, 169-180.
Torre, A., & Rallet, A. （2005）. Proximity and localization. Regional studies, 39（1）, 47-59.
Trajtenberg, M. （1990）. A penny for your quotes: patent citations and the value of innovations. The Rand Journal of Economics, 172-187.
Wood, A. （1993）. Organizing for local economic development: local economic development
networks and prospecting for industry. Environment and Planning, 25, 1649-1661.
WIPO（2011）. World Intellectual Property Report－The Changing Face of Innovation.

網頁資料
中華民國經濟部智慧財產局，http://www.tipo.gov.tw/en/index.aspx
世界智慧財產權組織，http://www.wipo.int/classifications/ipc/en/
全國法規資料庫，http://law.moj.gov.tw/index.aspx
美國專利商標局（USPTO），http://www.uspto.gov/
新竹科學工業園區，http://www.sipa.gov.tw/
經濟部商業司，http://gcis.nat.gov.tw/service_q.jsp