Assessment of patent activity impact on the financial performance of oil and gas companies under import substitution conditions
https://doi.org/10.18184/2079-4665.2026.17.2.270-286
Abstract
Purpose: to assess the impact of patent activity on the financial performance (EBITDA and ROA) of oil and gas companies in the context of import substitution policy in the framework of the open innovation concept.
Methods: comparative, correlation and regression analysis with time lags of data from eight leading vertically integrated oil and gas companies – 4 Russian (PJSC Gazprom, Lukoil, Rosneft, Tatneft) and 4 international (BP, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell) for the period 2015– 2023. To assess the impact of import substitution on the operating profit of Russian companies, models with interaction variables were used.
Results: universal positive relationship between patent activity and subsequent growth in EBITDA and ROA (with a 3-year lag) was not identified. Significant differences in the effectiveness of innovation strategies between companies were revealed. The correlation turned out to be strongly positive for Tatneft and ExxonMobil, and negative for Lukoil and Gazprom. This reflects different approaches, from formal patenting and meeting institutional requirements to the targeted creation of commercialized technological assets. Regression analysis with the interaction variable revealed a tendency to weaken the positive impact of patents on operating profits of Russian companies compared with international ones in the context of import substitution policy.
Conclusions and Relevance: the import substitution policy stimulated the quantitative growth of patenting, but weakened its positive impact on the operational efficiency of Russian companies. This indicates a shift towards a more "closed" innovation model, where patent growth is often formal and does not provide the expected financial returns in the medium term. The study confirms that the quality of patents, the effectiveness of their commercialization, and the depth of integration into business processes are critical to financial results, rather than the volume of the patent portfolio.
About the Authors
D. I. Daudi
ITMO University
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Dauddin I. Daudi, Postgraduate student of the Faculty of Technological Management and Innovation
Researcher ID: AAV-6375-2021
Scopus ID: 57224734546
Saint Petersburg
Competing Interests:
The authors declare that there is no Conflict of Interest.
L. V. Silakova
ITMO University
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Liubov V. Silakova, Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Faculty of Technological Management and Innovation
Researcher ID: E-4800-2014
Scopus ID: 57221666368
Saint Petersburg
Competing Interests:
The authors declare that there is no Conflict of Interest.
References
1. Cooke Ph. Regionally asymmetric knowledge capabilities and open innovation: Exploring “Globalisation 2” – A new model of industry organization. Research Policy. 2005; 34(8):1128–1149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.12.005 (In Eng.)
2. Borodin A., Panaedova G., Ilyina I., Harputlu M., Kiseleva N. Overview of the Russian oil and petroleum products market in crisis conditions: Economic aspects, technology and problems. Energies. 2023; 16(4):1614. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16041614 (In Eng.)
3. Kryukov V., Tokarev A. Spatial trends of innovation in the Russian oil and gas sector: What does patent activity in Siberia and the Arctic reflect? Regional Science Policy and Practice. 2022; 14(1):127–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/rsp3.12445 (In Eng.)
4. Sergi B.S., Berezin A. Oil and gas industry’s technological and sustainable development: Where does Russia stand? In: Exploring the Future of Russia’s Economy and Markets: Towards sustainable economic development. Bingley: Emerald Publishing, 2019. P. 161–182. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/ehmgji. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78769-397-520181009 (In Eng.)
5. Cherif R., Hasanov F. The pitfalls of protectionism: Import substitution vs. export-oriented industrial policy. Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade. 2024; 24:14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10842-024-00414-9 (In Eng.)
6. Kuzyk M.G., Simachev Yu.V. Strategies of Russian companies to adapt to the 2022 sanctions. Journal of the New Economic Association. 2023; (3(60)):172–180. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/spdhbn. https://doi.org/10.31737/22212264_2023_3_172-180 (In Russ.)
7. Kalyuzhnova Y., Nygaard C. A., Omarov Y., Saparbayev A. Local content policies in resource-rich countries. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016. 235 p. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-44786-9 (In Eng.)
8. Holgersson M., Wallin M.W., Chesbrough H.W., Dahlander L. Closing open innovation. Strategic Management Review. Forthcoming. URL: https://www.strategicmanagementreview.net/assets/articles/Holgersson%20 et%20al.pdf (accessed: 09.01.2026) (In Eng.)
9. Cohen W.M., Levinthal D.A. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1990; 35(1):128–152. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393553 (In Eng.)
10. West J., Bogers M. Leveraging external sources of innovation: A review of research on open innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2014; 31(4):814–831. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12125 (In Eng.)
11. Zhang Y., Jia J., Wu Ch., Zhou W., Evangelinos K. An investigation of the impact of intellectual capital on entrepreneurial performance: A moderated mediation analysis on global firms. Journal of International Management. 2024; 30(5):101173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2024.101173 (In Eng.)
12. Khan R. What is an intellectual property strategy for oil and gas industry? Journal of the Licensing Executives Society. 2017; 52(1). URL: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2896210 (accessed: 09.01.2026) (In Eng.)
13. Alaberdin R.R., Shepelev R.E. Approaches to the intellectual property management and the patent strategy formation of oil and gas companies on the example of PJSC «Gazprom». Problems of Economics and Management of Oil and Gas Complex. 2022; (1(205)):60–65. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/camtiv. https://doi.org/10.33285/1999-6942-2022-1(205)-60-65 (In Russ.)
14. Brewer P.L. Oil and gas: Innovation, patents, and the future of an industry. In: SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition. Houston, USA, 2022. https://doi.org/10.2118/210282-MS (In Eng.)
15. Avilova V.V., Garafieva G.I. Management of intellectual capital of oil companies (on the example of OAO Tatneft). Bulletin of Kazan Technological University. 2011; (23):174–179. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/onahrn (In Russ.)
16. Deorsola A.B., Rodrigues A.D., Polato C.M.S., Dupim L.C. de O., Amorim R.M., Bencke S.G., Winter E. Patent documents as a technology mapping tool in the Brazilian energy sector focused on the oil, gas and coke industries. World Patent Information. 2012; 35(1):42–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2012.10.006 (In Eng.)
17. Raghupathi V., Raghupathi W. Innovation at country-level: Association between economic development and patents. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship. 2017; 6:4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-017-0065-0 (In Eng.)
18. Cavalheiro G.M.C., Joia L.A., Gonçalves A.C. Strategic patenting in the upstream oil and gas industry: Assessing the impact of the pre-salt discovery on patent applications in Brazil. World Patent Information. 2014; 39:58–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2014.04.003 (In Eng.)
19. Quintella C.M., Dino R., Musse A.P. CO2 enhanced oil recovery and geologic storage: an overview with technology assessment based on patents and articles. In: SPE International Conference on Health, Safety and Environment in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. 2010. https://doi.org/10.2118/126122-MS (In Eng.)
20. Volkov A.T., Shepelev R.E. Patent activity in the oil and gas complex. Vestnik universiteta. 2015; (9):11–17. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/xhnsbr (In Russ.)
21. Volkov A.T., Shepelev R.E. Ensuring the technological independence of oil and gas companies using patent analytics on the example of companies producing liquefied natural gas. Vestnik universiteta. 2023; (9):113–122. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/beikdw. https://doi.org/10.26425/1816-4277-2023-9-113-122 (In Russ.)
22. Atun R.A., Harvey I., Wild J. Innovation, patents and economic growth. International Journal of Innovation Management. 2007; 11(2):279–297. https://doi.org/10.1142/s1363919607001758 (In Eng.)
23. Cho K., Kim C., Shin J. Differential effects of intellectual property rights on innovation and economic performance: A cross-industry investigation. Science and Public Policy. 2015; 42(6):827–840. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scv009 (In Eng.)
24. Maresch D., Fink M., Harms R. When patents matter: The impact of competition and patent age on the performance contribution of intellectual property rights protection. Technovation. 2016; 57-58:14–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2015.11.009 (In Eng.)
25. Eckstein C. The measurement and recognition of intangible assets: then and now. Accounting Forum. 2004; 28(2):139–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2004.02.001 (In Eng.)
Review
For citations:
Daudi D.I., Silakova L.V. Assessment of patent activity impact on the financial performance of oil and gas companies under import substitution conditions. MIR (Modernization. Innovation. Research). 2026;17(2):270–286. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18184/2079-4665.2026.17.2.270-286
Views:
77
JATS XML
Email this article 