1 Errata
The corrections to the original paper are detailed as follows:
1.1 Inclusion of the baseline date
On section 3, first paragraph, the sentence “The extraction was done on November 20, 2019.” was added. This informs the baseline date for the data collection, allowing the experiment to be reproduced by choosing the appropriate data from PATSTAT. In the previous version of the paper, some of the data was taken from a different date, as the study was refined over a few months, causing the final results to be difficult to reproduce precisely. For this reason, we fixed this date and ran all the calculations on this baseline. This caused small changes in the tables (1, 2, and 3) and in Figure 3 , which are detailed in the next points.
1.2 Changes to Table 1
In Table 1 , the number of inventors and respective “Avg. women p/ patent” and “Avg. women invt. ratio” changed for the following countries:
• Belize: 25 to 26, unchanged, unchanged
• Cuba: 1547 to 1556, 0.664 to 0.672 , 0.437 to 0.440
• Dominican Republic: 145 to 148, unchanged, 0.255 to 0.250
• Portugal: 9086 to 9129, 0.460 to 0.465, 0.265 to 0.267
• Latin America: 60012 to 60016, unchanged, 0.228 to 0.227
• Iberian Countries: 104088 to 104131, 0.443 to 0.446, 0.274 to 0.275
• Ibero-America: 164100 to 164156, 0.657 to 0.658, 0.231 to 0.232
Also in Table 1 , the “percent” column in table 1 was mistakenly calculated using the entire set (150,863 patents) instead of the filtered set (103,914). We fixed that so the percent values now match correctly the patent numbers in the “# of patents” column.
The updated table is as follows:
Table 1 Female involvement in patent applications with priority years (2007-2016) for which the applicant was resident in an iberoamerican1 country. |
| Country | #of patents | percent | #of inventors | Avg. women p/ patent2 | Avg. women invt. ratio3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Argentina (LA) | 2,019 | 1.9429 | 4,741 | 0.486 | 0.207 |
| Bolivia (LA) | 16 | 0.0153 | 73 | 0.500 | 0.109 |
| Brazil (LA) | 18,632 | 17.9302 | 28,099 | 0.352 | 0.233 |
| Belize (LA) | 145 | 0.1395 | 26 | 0.062 | 0.360 |
| Chile (LA) | 3,521 | 3.3883 | 5,180 | 0.348 | 0.237 |
| Colombia (LA) | 1,547 | 1.4887 | 2,847 | 0.451 | 0.245 |
| Costa Rica (LA) | 173 | 0.1664 | 689 | 0.358 | 0.090 |
| Cuba (LA) | 1,018 | 0.9796 | 1,556 | 0.672 | 0.440 |
| Dominican Republic (LA) | 76 | 0.0731 | 148 | 0.487 | 0.250 |
| Ecuador (LA) | 365 | 0.3512 | 481 | 0.266 | 0.201 |
| Spain (IB) | 63,128 | 60.7502 | 95,002 | 0.426 | 0.283 |
| French Guyana (LA) | 1 | 0.0009 | 12 | 5.000 | 0.417 |
| Guatemala (LA) | 18 | 0.0173 | 91 | 0.500 | 0.099 |
| Honduras (LA) | 7 | 0.0067 | 35 | 1.571 | 0.314 |
| Mexico (LA) | 6,569 | 6.3215 | 13,731 | 0.428 | 0.204 |
| Nicaragua (LA) | 7 | 0.0067 | 36 | 0.143 | 0.028 |
| Panama (LA) | 613 | 0.5899 | 302 | 0.132 | 0.268 |
| Peru (LA) | 211 | 0.2030 | 484 | 0.588 | 0.256 |
| Portugal (IB) | 5,242 | 5.0445 | 9,129 | 0.465 | 0.267 |
| Paraguay (LA) | 23 | 0.0221 | 44 | 0.174 | 0.091 |
| Suriname (LA) | 5 | 0.0048 | 10 | 0.600 | 0.300 |
| Uruguay (LA) | 324 | 0.3117 | 649 | 0.346 | 0.172 |
| Venezuela (LA) | 254 | 0.2444 | 791 | 0.779 | 0.250 |
| Latin America (LA) | 35,544 | 34.2000 | 60,016 | 0.678 | 0.227 |
| Iberian countries (LA) | 68,370 | 65.8000 | 104,131 | 0.446 | 0.275 |
| Ibero-America (LA) | 103,914 | 100.0 | 164,156 | 0.658 | 0.232 |
1Latin american countries are indicated with (LA) next to their names, and Iberian countries with (IB). 2The Avg. women per patent shows the average number of women listed as inventors in each application. 3The Avg. women inventor ratio shows the mean ratio of women=men inventors for the appications analyzed. |
1.3 Changes to Table 2
In Table 2 , the numbers were truncated to the 3rd decimal place, and the number of inventors and respective “Avg. women p/ patent” and “Avg. women invt. ratio” were changed as follows:
• COMPANY: 150,796 to 150,866, unchanged, unchanged
• GOVERNMENT: 21,094 to 21,126, unchanged, unchanged
• INDIVIDUAL: 6,412 to 6,421, 0.190 to 0.194, 0.192 to 0.193
• UNIVERSITY: 27,990 to 28,006, 0.641 to 0.635, 0.405 to 0.404
The updated table is as follows:
Table 2 Female involvement by institutional sector in patent applications with priority years (2007-2016) for which the applicant was resident in an iberoamerican country. |
| Avg. women invt. ratio | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sector | #of patents | percent | #of inventors | Avg. women p/ patent | Avg. women invt. ratio |
| COMPANY | 119,364 | 0.730 | 150,866 | 0.347 | 0.274 |
| GOVERNMENT | 12,991 | 0.079 | 21,126 | 0.679 | 0.418 |
| INDIVIDUAL | 6,453 | 0.039 | 6,421 | 0.194 | 0.193 |
| UNIVERSITY | 17,712 | 0.108 | 28,006 | 0.635 | 0.404 |
Note. The institutional sectors indicate the institutional origin or affiliation of the inventors. Only the applications pertaining to one of the four sectors: Company, Government, Individual, University, are listed in this table. Thus the total number of patents is different from |
1.4 Changes in Table 3
In Table 3 one row was changed as follows:
• Portugal: 0.226 to 0.228, 0.301 to 0.302, 0.076 to 0.074
The updated table is as follows:
Table 3 Ranking of Ibero American countries in female participation growth on patenting (2007-2016). |
| Rank | Country | Avg. women invt. ratio | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 2016 | growth | ||
| 1 | Chile | 0.199 | 0.308 | 0.108 |
| 2 | Ecuador | 0.062 | 0.154 | 0.091 |
| 3 | Colombia | 0.170 | 0.259 | 0.088 |
| 4 | Portugal | 0.228 | 0.302 | 0.074 |
| 5 | Dominican Republic | 0.437 | 0.500 | 0.062 |
| 6 | Costa Rica | 0.071 | 0.131 | 0.060 |
| 7 | Mexico | 0.165 | 0.206 | 0.040 |
| 8 | Brazil | 0.223 | 0.257 | 0.033 |
| 9 | Spain | 0.273 | 0.275 | 0.001 |
1.5 Changes in Figure 3
Figures 1 and 2 were not changed due to truncation of small numbers.
The updated Figure 3 is as follows:
Figure 3. Average women inventor ratio (women=men) over time, per region in patent applications with priority years (2007-2016) for which the applicant was resident in an iberoamerican country. |
Additional information
The online version of the original article can be found at https://content.sciendo.com/view/journals/jdis/ahead-of-print/article-10.2478-jdis-2020-0025/article-10.2478-jdis-2020-0025.xml