World Patent Information xxx (xxxx) xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

World Patent Information

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/worpatin

Innovations in agri-food biotechnology: Megatrends in tropical

Mexican fruits
José Alberto Solis-Navarrete a, *, Saray Bucio-Mendoza b, Federico Stezano-Pérez c
a
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Centro de Investigaciones en Geografía Ambiental, Morelia, 58190, Mexico
b
Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo, Morelia, 58030, Mexico
c
Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Unidad Azacaptozalco, Ciudad de, 02128, Mexico

A R T I C L E I N F O

Keywords:
Patents
Agri-food policy
Mango
Coconut
Papaya
Technology surveillance

1. Introduction
Industrial policies for the rural and agri-food sectors can have a
decisive influence in promoting processes of structural change, under­
stood as processes of transition towards more technically and produc­
tively complex activities, thus when this type of policies are articulated
with those oriented to promote innovation it is possible to generate
products based on the intensive use of knowledge [1]. In this context,
from a value chain perspective, an effective development policy in rural
areas would favour higher integration and complementarity of activ­
ities, markets, and sectors to increase the added value of value chain
activities, rural employment, higher linkages with other sectors, and
fostering the development of learning and innovation processes [2].
The absence of industrial and innovation policies, as evidenced by
institutional weaknesses, the lack of incentives, and the poor linkage
between actors in an innovation system, as per [3–5], reflect lags in the
development (and their development policies) of regions in countries
such as Mexico, despite having a vital agri-food vocation [6]. In contrast,
in Europe, different policy frameworks have been motivated by a
mission-oriented approach to industrial and innovation policy in a
broader sense, i.e., a development policy to address sustainable devel­
opment objectives [7].
Within this framework, this paper diagnoses three agri-food value
chains in Mexico from a megatrends perspective in order of their prog­
ress in agri-food biotechnology and levels of production gaps. The levels
of progress in both dimensions of these value chains make up two critical
aspects that determine the dynamics of any value chain and allow us to
understand their needs for the articulation of the linkages, the incor­
poration of new actors, and the processes for improvement and scaling
up within the chain and with surrounding sectors. This diagnosis pro­
vides critical elements for the future design of possible strategies to
strengthen (and expand) the chain’s actors and move towards higher
techno-productive complexity activities [8].
Mexico is a world leader in the value of production of different goods
in the agri-food sector, highlighting the tropical products of the states of
Guerrero and Oaxaca. Both states are the country’s least competitive and
developed regions [9]. Guerrero is a leader in the value production of
foods such as coconut and mango, while Oaxaca produces papaya
[10.11].
The state of Guerrero contributes 80% of the more than 220,000
tonnes of coconut per year [11], which places Mexico as the
seventh-largest coconut producer in the world. However, there is a
considerable gap between this country and the leading producers, such
as Indonesia, the Philippines, India, and Brazil [12]). On the other hand,
Guerrero is also the entity with the highest volume of national mango
production, with 19.4% of the 1.8 million tonnes produced in Mexico
[10], placing the country in fifth place worldwide [13], whose export
value exceeds $460 million [10]. The state of Oaxaca contributes 31% of
the national production of papaya, representing around 250,000 tonnes
[11]; however, the national production of papaya makes Mexico the

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: jsolis@ciga.unam.mx (J.A. Solis-Navarrete), saray.bucio@umich.mx (S. Bucio-Mendoza), fstezano@gmail.com (F. Stezano-Pérez).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2023.102207
Received 18 October 2022; Received in revised form 23 March 2023; Accepted 19 June 2023
0172-2190/© 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Please cite this article as: José Alberto Solis-Navarrete et al., World Patent Information, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2023.102207
J.A. Solis-Navarrete et al.
third-largest producer and leading exporter worldwide [14].
The three products have a low technological content and little value
addition, as they are marketed fresh, with only packaging as an indus­
trial activity. This is a result of value chains without complexity and low
income at the sectoral level, requiring low-skilled and low-paid labour.
One of the direct consequences is a lower investment in research and
development (R&D) by the participating companies, leading to low
participation in projects from the National Council for Science and
Technology (CONACyT), the governing authority for science technology
and innovation policy in Mexico.
On the other hand, higher education institutions such as universities
and research centres are strategic actors in generating knowledge. They
have often been disconnected from the demands of the economic sectors,
as is the case with the agri-food sector. There is also a certain tendency
among public knowledge agents to carry out research with obsolete
technology, existing results, or limited potential for innovation due to a
lack of mechanisms for detecting the state of the art of what is already
protected and its valorisation in the market. In this logic, a large part of
the problem is that few institutions and fewer companies have mecha­
nisms for detecting existing technologies; this avoids unnecessary ex­
penses for carrying out R&D activities on already existing products and
processes with specific trends in the filing of related patents, under the
association between the scientific–technological (tech-push) and the
market demand (market-pull).
From a technological innovation approach, patents are the primary
indicator of the results of knowledge generated for innovation (output)
[15], consisting of exclusive rights to the owners of an invention for its
use, sale, or licensing for a period. They are regularly valid in Mexico
and worldwide for 20 years from when the application was filed and
must meet the requirements of novelty, industrial application, and in­
ventive step [16]. Patents can be owned by institutions such as univer­
sities and research centres, individuals, and companies; however, the
latter can take them to the market because they have commercial ob­
jectives, although universities are sources of patent generation. It is
essential to have an overview of the global state of the art and thus be
able to propose mechanisms for technology transfer.
From the megatrends analysis, the food sector will become one of the
most dynamic, with consumption patterns oriented towards efficiency
and easy-to-prepare food. Food products with higher technological
content incorporated and, therefore, higher expenditure for faster
preparation will also be one of the global trends [17], evident in the
COVID-19 pandemic. Megatrends are also about increasing efficiency
and supplying global food demand, highlighting the pivotal role of
biotechnology [18].
However, there are gaps in the existing scientific literature because
studies on megatrends and technological convergence are separated.
The relevance of our research in a scientific and practical context derives
from the patent analysis proposed for agri-food biotechnology,
contributing to addressing the research gaps to articulate the concepts of
technological convergence and megatrends in the identified categories,
which will also facilitate future research related to technology fore­
casting and the promotion of public policy that encourages technology
transfer, particularly from universities and research centres, to com­
panies that value these innovations in the market, facilitating a higher
economic and social contribution in the agri-food chains.
Given the above, this work will be articulated around a central
research question, the formulation of which is presented below. Based
on the analysis of the type of technological surveillance and the
distinctive characteristics of the predominant innovations in agri-food
biotechnology (i.e., coconut, mango, papaya) as reflected in their pat­
ents: in which technological-productive and market segments are the
main knowledge gaps between Mexico and the rest of the world? In
order to address this research question, the paper is structured around
two main objectives: (1) to identify the megatrends associated with in­
novations in agri-food biotechnology in coconut, mango, and papaya,
and (2) to correlate the technological gaps between Mexico and the rest
2
World Patent Information xxx (xxxx) xxx
of the world for these products of the agri-food sector.
2. Theoretical framework
Megatrends consist of the direction taken simultaneously by different
aspects of society, which can be economic, such as the presence of new
sectors and consumer preferences, as well as technological, such as the
result of new forms of production, with significant noticeable effects on
society for more than a decade [19]. Thus, in these periods, technologies
emerge that are consolidating and are capable of generating superior
products and services, as is the case of biotechnology, which consists of
the search for ways to manipulate and improve biological processes in
living organisms [20]. Biotechnology applications by sector are mainly
divided into the environmental [21], pharmaceutical [22], and
agri-food [23].
In the analysis of innovation, we can underline different social
megatrends [19] that can be linked to the following aspects: (a) new
demographic structures, with existing food technologies such as bioac­
tive agents, bacteria fermentation, fortification, and freeze-drying or
lyophilisation; (b) green consumption with products such as organic
fruit and vegetables, precision farming crops, microorganisms as sub­
stitutes for chemical insecticides, and soil bioremediation; c) products
and services such as semi-processed food companies, food sensors that
alert about the presence of pollutants and synthetic products, and
functional foods; d) customised, lifelong, and universal education; and
e) everyday virtuality, with business models and alternative channels to
trade products and biotechnology monitored in agricultural regions.
Our research is linked to other megatrend studies related to the
analysis of the following sectors.
● Information and communication technologies, particularly in the
evolution of mobile telephony [24] as well as digitalisation and its
contribution to sustainability [25].
● Tourism towards a focus on sustainability, economic growth and
social change [26].
● Chemicals where the transition to a renewable chemicals industry is
needed as much as the transition to renewable energy [27].
On the other hand, in the field of agriculture and the agri-food sector,
we can also find megatrend studies on public policy in agri-food value
chains [28]; the geographical analysis of megatrends as a forecast of the
future of agriculture in Europe [29]; as well as a forecast of agricultural
and food systems to 2050 where technology innovation is fundamental
in the evolution of the sector.
Our analysis is also linked to technological convergence, in which
R&D becomes a fundamental part of economic development towards
higher value and more complex sectors. This makes it possible to facil­
itate knowledge exchanges that favour innovation, hence the idea of
converging sectors such as biotechnology, nanotechnology, information
technologies (IoT, big data, and artificial intelligence), and cognitive
sciences [30].
The idea of technology convergence is associated with the acronym
NBIC (Nano-Bio-Info-Cogno) [31], with synergies and linkages between
different scientific fields and technological developments, resulting in
more complex dimensions [32] from an interdisciplinary perspective of
convergence to convergence in business and technology management.
The establishment of science, technology, and innovation agendas,
through the leadership of the National Science Foundation (NSF) and its
vision of convergence with significant social and economic contribu­
tions, has favoured the development of long-term R&D financing pro­
grammes [32] are directly linked to the analysis of megatrends through
the setting of public policy.
Thus, megatrends consider changes in innovation management to­
wards lean approaches and converging sectors and how innovation
processes are conducted, the emergence of new consumers with new
ways of exercising purchasing power and influence, and a greater focus
J.A. Solis-Navarrete et al. World Patent Information xxx (xxxx) xxx

on efficient use of natural resources. Megatrends allow for rethinking of Table 1

innovation management in a “reverse” way. Fast technological advances
allow companies to seek new ways of interacting with and under­
standing customers, especially in developing countries. Finally, mega­
trends also focus on new concepts of solutions and co-creation involving
customers and competitors and new ways of measuring innovation
management performance [33].
According to Ref. [34], innovation is present in megatrends such as
the acceleration of technological innovation, in which the following
stand out: (i) those related to food in the search for food sovereignty and
(ii) adding value to food through its applications and the development of
genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This point is central to growing
food scarcity, which forces us to seek and find new ways to reduce
resource use, improve efficiency, promote reuse, and explore substitute
material solutions.
Finally, megatrend analysis can be addressed through the perspec­
tive of competitive intelligence [35,36], whose approach links to the
project portfolio, which, according to Ref. [37], is divided into four
cycles: plan, document, improve, and verify. From this assumption,
technology surveillance [38] starts from planning for documentation by
having as a basis the state of the art or current technique through in­
tellectual property, namely patents or exclusivity rights for the use and
licensing of inventions with industrial application that start from in­
ventive activity.
On the other side, scientific articles are also a source of information
in the technology surveillance process. However, patents are validated
and proven mature technologies that trace technological routes of
competitive intelligence [39,40]; this is linked to technology fore­
casting, as it allows trend analysis under exploratory methods that
provide insight into the direction of technology through trend extrapo­
lation using time-series data to develop future projections [41].
3. Materials and methods
This research starts from a quantitative approach with both
descriptive and correlational scopes. We analyse patent trends through
technology surveillance as part of competitive intelligence to identify
the leading technologies [42,43]. This analysis is associated with co­
conut, mango, and papaya agri-food biotechnology through a semantic
analysis of technology intelligence by Ref. [44]: a) analyse the literature
on megatrends associated with agri-food biotechnology, b) identify the
deriving technologies and their significance through phrase extraction,
c) set up relations to target the keywords in the megatrends analysed
above; thus, we identify twelve categories: organic, bioremediation,
bioactive, fermentation, fortification, lyophilisation, bio-sensor, syn­
thetic, functional food, genetics, GMOs, and biotechnology [18,19].
Those classifications were identified with the categories in the In­
ternational Patent Classification (IPC) of the World Intellectual Property
Organisation [45] related to directly applicable technologies, as shown
in Table 1.
The patent search string is configured by the combinations of the
three products analysed with the twelve categories we have identified.
To do this, it is first necessary to identify the food products to be ana­
lysed. Secondly we conduct a semantic analysis of the literature on
megatrends using competitive intelligence [44]. Subsequently, the re­
sults were combined through particular searches between the IPCs
shown in Table for each agri-food product and each megatrend (cate­
gories). The next phase consisted of a search in Patentscope from
January to July 2019 with information updated to August 31, 2018,1
following the results obtained for coconut and mango by Ref. [46]. In a
second period, we extended the analysis to papaya. Moreover, in a new
IPCs related to the agri-food sector.
Section Subsection
A – Current necessities of life A01 Agriculture, forestry, hunting, fishing
A21 Oven cooking
A22 Meat and meat processing
A23 Oven cooking
A61 Veterinary sciences
B – Miscellaneous industrial B01 General physical or chemical processes or
techniques apparatus
B02 Grinding, powdering, and disintegration
B05 Spraying and atomisation in general
B07 Separation of solids
C – Chemistry C01 Inorganic chemistry
C05 Fertilisers
C07 Organic chemistry
C08 Organic macromolecular compounds
C11 Oils, fats, and others
C12 Biochemistry, beer, alcoholic beverages,
vinegar, and others
C13 Sugar industry
Source: Authors’ elaboration based on [45].
search period in Patentscope between September 2021 and March 2022,
we completed and extended the information from 2018 to 2020 to have
more robust results as part of the megatrends analysis (at least ten
years).
Both searches were carried out in the Patentscope patent database of
the WIPO, which has the most significant number of databases of the
different patent offices worldwide. The 12 categories identified with the
classification in Table 1 for coconut, mango, and papaya from 2009 to
2020 were related to the megatrends analysis. We built a database in
which we eliminated duplicated patents either by being in several cat­
egories or at least two IPCs with the same patent number.
The results of the technology surveillance are shown in two parts: (i)
the comparative analysis of agri-food biotechnology patents between
mango, coconut, and papaya in the last 10 years; (ii) the correlational
analysis between what was found for Mexico and the rest of the world
through ordinary least squares. For this part, we used Eviews 12 soft­
ware to address our second objective through time series in which we
analyse the registration of Mexican patents as a correlation of interna­
tional patents for the products through the following equations:
cmx = cit + u Eq. 1
mmx = mit + u Eq. 2
pmx = pit + u Eq. 3
The variables correspond to a) coconut patents in Mexico (cmx) and
coconut patents at the international level (cit); b) mango patents in
Mexico (mmx) and mango patents at the international level (mmi); and c)
papaya patents in Mexico (pmx) and papaya patents at the international
level (pit). Once the data for the last 10 years were obtained, we
excluded the results from Mexico for the global analysis to avoid
duplication of information and statistical errors, mainly due to multi­
collinearity. Subsequently, we applied a unit root test (Dickey–Fuller
test) requiring the first level of integration. The PROB value was less
than 0.05 (i.e., stationarity is ruled out at a 95% statistical confidence
level). The data are related to each other with one degree of difference to
be able to conduct non-spurious regressions. The relevance of our
method combines megatrend analysis, technology surveillance, and
time-series data, describing a past and future forecast analysis of agri-
food products and their relative importance of patentability between a
country and the rest of the world. In summary, the research process is
described in Fig. 1.

1
This generates a bias in the information for this year, as patent registrations
obtained between September and December were not yet available in the
databases.

3
J.A. Solis-Navarrete et al. World Patent Information xxx (xxxx) xxx

Fig. 1. Research process.

Source: Authors’ elaboration

4. Results
From 2009 to 2020, 2684 patents were registered worldwide for the
three fruits in the different categories analysed. The first category of
megatrends associated with agri-food biotechnology is that of organic
products and processes in the search for a healthier diet and which, as
can be seen in Fig. 2, show (i) a more significant development of tech­
nologies associated with coconut, for example, while for coconut more
than 50 patents were registered on average per year, for mango and
papaya there were 11 and 6, respectively (in addition to the fact that

Fig. 2. Patents related to organics.

Source: Authors’ elaboration with data from Patentscope [47].

4
J.A. Solis-Navarrete et al.
coconut has a lower standard deviation); and (ii) a critical contribution
from the United Kingdom and China for the former, while China is the
leading developer for the latter, mainly developing organic fertilisers
and applications to horticulture in the sector.
In this category, there are six mango patents for Mexico whose ap­
plicants are CONACYT centres such as the Centro de Investigación
Científica de Yucatán (CICY), the Centro de Investigación en Química
Aplicada (CIQA), and the state universities of Hidalgo and Guanajuato.
There are also four Mexican patents related to papaya, also registered by
CIQA and CICY, and natural person with business activity related to
developing of fungicides and pest control.
In the case of decontaminant technologies through biotechnology,
such as bioremediation, there are no patents worldwide derived from
coconut, mango, and papaya in the period analysed, only applications of
the first product to the non-food industrial sector.
Regarding food-related megatrends and technological convergence
in biotechnology, we highlight functional foods with approximately 150
patents for the period analysed, of which China, Korea, and Japan are
the countries leading such developments. Also, as shown in Fig. 3, most
of the patents are derived from coconut (94), followed by papaya (27)
and mango (22), mostly coming from similar IPCs identified, as well as
bioactive and fortification of food products, beverages, edible oils, and
fats. According to the trends identified, the technology forecast for
bioactive and fortification is growing, mainly as observed with papaya
from 2017 to 2020.
In the context of megatrends on the convergence of biotechnology,
there are 57 patents directly related to the development of bioactive
products and processes and fortification, mostly the same patents were
found for both categories (including fortified coconut and mango); 63%
are for coconut, 32% for mango, and only 5% (3 patents) for papaya
(Fig. 4). Most of the developments come from India, China, and the
Philippines, mainly from coconut. They consist of developing foods,
food products, and non-alcoholic beverages with bioactive principles
with higher technological content. In fortification, patents related to the
development of foods with a higher degree of technological content
were also found.
In developing fermentation-based products and processes, we found
Fig. 3. Patents in functional foods.
Source: Authors’ elaboration with data from Patentscope (WIPO [47],
5
World Patent Information xxx (xxxx) xxx
more than 800 patents, of which half are for coconut, 25% for mango,
and 25% for papaya. As seen in Fig. 5, in recent years, inventions have
doubled and tripled, mainly from China, with an essential contribution
from its universities and technology centres at the regional level linked
to the development of food, medical and dental preparations, as well as
wine and alcoholic beverages. In this manner, the technological fore­
sight associated with fermentation processes has been expanding the
dynamism of the megatrend in biotechnology in recent years.
As a result of the technology surveillance, the existence of few pat­
ents related to dehydration through lyophilisation is notable: 12 for
coconut and 7 for both mango and papaya, mainly in the development of
foodstuffs, as well as dairy products or milk substitutes, of which China
also has the largest share of patents obtained. This is not far from what
happens with synthetic developments in creating new purposes that do
not exist in nature, where 11 patents are associated with coconut, 15
with mango, and 24 with papaya. Remarkably, three-quarters of these
were obtained in the last four years and in IPCs such as organic chem­
istry, macromolecular compounds, and agro-industrial (non-food) de­
velopments such as medical, dental, and cosmetic applications and
therefore with little linkage to the megatrends and converging tech­
nologies we have identified. The UK and China stand out in this case,
and Mexico has four patents.
For the field of synthetic biology, closely related to genetics [48], 79
patents were identified (66% for coconut, 24% for mango, and 10% for
papaya). Of these, applicants from China hold the largest share of
granted rights, most notably for developments of microorganisms or
enzymes obtained from genetic engineering as well as applications for
plant propagation.
Also, although it is not agri-food, we highlight the development of
antiviral mosaic vaccines from papaya; both synthetics and genetics can
be seen in Fig. 6. Finally, associated with genetics, no GMOs patents
were identified for the three products analysed.
The development of converging technologies that combine biotech­
nology with information technologies for agri-food applications, such as
bio-sensors from nature and the aforementioned synthetic biology, can
have multiple applications, such as enzyme composition sampling, pest
detection, and the presence of pollutants [49]. It has generated high
J.A. Solis-Navarrete et al.
Fig. 4. Patents in bioactive and fortification.
Source: Authors’ elaboration with data from Patentscope [47].
Fig. 5. Patents in fermentation.
Source: Authors’ elaboration with data from Patentscope [47].
expectations in innovations related to the agri-food sector. However, in
the period analysed, for coconut, mango, and papaya, 15, 3, and 1
patents were obtained, respectively, registered in the IPC for machines
or devices to treat fruit crops, with China, India, and Mexico standing
out as applicants.
Finally, as part of this first analysis of megatrends through technol­
ogy surveillance, when considering the general category of biotech­
nology and excluding the rest of the categories analysed above, 366
patents were detected for coconut, 77 for mango, and 176 for papaya on
6
World Patent Information xxx (xxxx) xxx
agri-food biotechnology, of which more than 95% come from China,
with these results, it is expected that the technology forecast is
increasing, taking into consideration the Patentscope cut-off dates. As
seen in Fig. 7, most of the patents were obtained in the last five years,
mainly for food, plant novelties and processes, and biochemistry. They
were fewer than the patents obtained in non-agri-food industrial sectors,
such as medical, dental, and therapeutic applications; therefore, they are
not linked to converging technologies such as biotechnology, particu­
larly agri-food.
J.A. Solis-Navarrete et al.
Fig. 6. Patents on synthetic and genetic developments.
Source: Authors’ elaboration with data from Patentscope
Fig. 7. Patents in agri-food biotechnology (excluding the above categories).
Source: Authors’ elaboration with data from Patentscope [47].
When integrating the patents of the categories analysed in Table 2,
we identify a higher dynamic of inventiveness in agri-food biotech­
nology in coconut than in mango and papaya at the international level.
For each patent registered for mango or papaya, between three and four
are generated for coconut, most primarily associated with oils, organics,
and fermentation processes to obtain fertilisers.
In agro-industrial applications derived from coconut, companies
such as Procter & Gamble, Colgate Palmolive, Unilever, and Dupont
7
World Patent Information xxx (xxxx) xxx
stand out. In contrast, in the agri-food sector, patents from Chinese
companies predominate for mango and coconut, as in the case of China,
in addition to the participation of other Asian countries such as Japan,
India, South Korea, and the Philippines.
On the other hand, Mexico’s small contribution is notorious, espe­
cially in the case of coconut. Despite having the highest number of
patents of the three products analysed, it has the smallest share of the
total number of patents obtained (1.1%), in contrast to mango (3.4%)
J.A. Solis-Navarrete et al. World Patent Information xxx (xxxx) xxx

Table 2
Patents in agri-food biotechnology for coconut, mango, and papaya.
Year Coconut Mango Papaya

International Mexico International Mexico International Mexico

2009 24 1 1 0 9 1
2010 31 0 10 0 3 0
2011 52 3 6 2 9 0
2012 28 0 5 0 10 0
2013 31 1 6 3 21 3
2014 86 1 16 0 46 0
2015 83 0 19 0 22 2
2016 164 5 34 0 74 0
2017 232 3 42 1 105 1
2018 294 3 113 2 86 2
2019 234 0 54 4 96 1
2020 210 0 45 0 65 1

Source: Authors’ elaboration with data from Patentscope

and papaya (2.0%). In the case of coconut, patents come mainly from
foreign companies located in the country, individuals, and the National
Polytechnic Institute. For mango and papaya, patents were obtained
mainly through public research centres such as the CICY mentioned
above, CIQA, the Centre for Research and Advanced Studies (CINVES­
TAV), and two state universities. Finally, Mexico’s contribution for 2011
and 2013 in the category related to organics and synthetics stands out.
The total number of patents obtained during the period analysed un­
derstood as a megatrend in agri-food biotechnology for the three prod­
ucts, is shown below.
With the results in Table 2, we performed three regressions, one for
each product, as described in the materials and methods section. Each
regression was performed with a level of integration (Dickey–Fuller
test). They behave with statistical normality at any statistical confidence
level and do not present heteroscedasticity, as they have non-zero re­
siduals and a PROB value higher than 0.05 by White’s test. They also
show no autocorrelation at the 99% statistical confidence level. Using
the Breusch–Godffrey test, there is a seasonal pattern in two lags and a
PROB value of 0.0000, so we applied binaries and seasonal adjustment,
thereby eliminating multicollinearity.
For coconut, the equation is 0.7094cmx = 0.0057cit + u, with a
correlation coefficient r2 of 0.1145 or 11.45% and a PROB value of
0.2818. The independent variable (patents at the international level for
coconut) is not representative, so there is no relationship between in­
ventiveness in Mexico with that of the rest of the world regarding co­
conut agri-food biotechnology.
In mango, the equation is 0.5735mx = 0.0146it + u, with a correlation
coefficient r2 of 0.1080 or 10.80% and a PROB value of 0.2969. The
independent variable (patents at the international level for mango) is
neither representative. There is no relationship between Mexico and the
rest of the world in the case of mango.
Finally, for papaya, the equation is 0.7627mx = 0.0034it + u, which
has a correlation coefficient r2 of 0.0166 or 1.66% and a PROB value of
0.4506. Thus, international patents for papaya are not representative
either, and, like the two previous products, there is no relationship be­
tween Mexico and the rest of the world.
The three equations present similar constants and high PROB values.
Therefore, there is no associativity between agri-food biotechnology
patents generated in coconut, mango, and papaya between Mexico and
the rest of the world.
5. Conclusions
The agri-food biotechnology megatrends show a higher contribution
of coconut in the emergence of innovations, mainly in organics, syn­
thetics, and fermentation processes, with dynamics associated with R&D
led by Chinese companies. On the contrary, mango shows a lower
innovative dynamic in which organic, functional food, and synthetic
categories stand out, with a remarkable contribution from Mexico. The
case of papaya is notable in fermentation and genetics, with a dynamic
led by China and India, and especially the role of the CONACYT centres
(CICY and CIQA) in developing technologies in Mexico.
This scenario ratifies the considerable need for the knowledge-
generating sectors to intervene in the productive sector. This require­
ment confronts a decisive process in the dynamics of public actors
generating knowledge: they cannot directly commercialise their
advanced and protected technologies. This dilemma makes it necessary
to re-discuss strategies that make it possible to take advantage of the
knowledge and inventions generated by the scientific sector and favour
the link between academia and business. The above is necessary to in­
crease innovative capabilities and conduct R&D activities in collabora­
tion with the scientific sector.
Through the regressions, it was possible to address the second
objective. The correlational analysis shows that the dynamics of inno­
vation in agri-food biotechnology in the three products are not associ­
ated with international activity. With similar equations and coefficients
between coconut, mango, and papaya, we found notable gaps in tech­
nology development and protection between Mexico and the rest of the
world. The dynamics in Mexico are not correlated with the global dy­
namics of the innovative activities identified as part of the megatrends;
This can be derived from the fact that Mexico participated with a low
percentage of the total number of patents granted in the categories
analysed for these 12 years; in this sense, it does not assume an active
role in the global patenting dynamics and, therefore, if we consider
patents as an indicator of the results of the innovation process, inno­
vative activity in Mexico concerning tropical fruits coconut, mango, and
papaya has not been inserted at the pace of the megatrends.
Instruments such as classification systems and patent databases are
essential in the technology surveillance process as part of project man­
agement. However, it is necessary to enhance the analysis by consid­
ering the technical part; the validation, feasibility, and profitability in
the market; and the legal mechanisms involved in protecting technol­
ogy. The diagnosis and analysis of the predominant megatrends in these
three chains make it possible to identify the state of the art of the
technologies and their categories.
Our research contributes to the literature mentioned above, partic­
ularly in the analysis of megatrends in the agri-food sector, which is
under-researched, especially in the dynamics of coconut, mango and
papaya patents, both for Mexico and internationally in the last twelve
years. The contribution is also articulated with technology convergence,
highlighting twelve categories of analysis in agri-food biotechnology,
with linkages between different scientific fields and technological de­
velopments; this contributes to addressing research gaps linked to the
analysis of megatrends and technology convergence, particularly in in­
novations of the agri-food sector. Our study allows us not only to identify
a possible correlation between the patents analysed, but also to facilitate

8
J.A. Solis-Navarrete et al.
technology forecasting mechanisms on possible future performance
through technology surveillance as the proposed methodology, thereby
broadening the scope of megatrends.
This research provides managerial and policy implications by
providing relevant data that avoids duplicating companies’ efforts in
R&D activities related to protecting the technological patrimony of in­
novations in agri-food biotechnology in coconut, mango, and papaya.
These identified aspects constitute critical factors that imply restrictions
(or bottlenecks) to the dynamics and competitiveness of the chain in
terms of innovativeness and economic performance. However, based on
their identification, it is possible to design strategies for change based on
a better articulation of the different productive and commercial stages of
the entire chain, the strengthening of some activities and actors involved
(as well as the possible incorporation of new ones), and a progressive
process of scaling up towards activities with a more complex productive
and technological content.
It can also contribute to meetings establishing technology transfer
mechanisms for the academic and private sectors. This diagnosis also
points to critical elements based on documented information that in­
terests public policymakers. In particular, the factors highlighted in this
work are relevant elements to consider in the design of public policy
mechanisms oriented toward the generation of incentives for the
development of applications of technology processes in categories and
applications that are scarcely attended to but with a growing demand
worldwide.
Finally, the limitations of this study are associated with its timeframe
(12 years), sources of information (patents), tropical products (coconut,
mango, and papaya), and its territoriality by correlating international
dynamics with those of Mexico; likewise, it does not explore in detail the
performance of individual actors and their possible articulation through
technology transfer mechanisms that value their technological de­
velopments in the market. Thus, further research could be related to
evaluate and contrast the performance of megatrends at present and
conduct more in-depth research on the scope of each of the categories
analysed, the causality, and the effects of their innovative dynamics;
cross-check with additional sources of information such as scientific
articles as well as journalistic information to explore the scope of tech­
nological developments and new contributions to technology conver­
gence, and, to anticipate the future performance of the megatrends
identified in agri-food biotechnology through different technology
forecasting methods, both for Mexico and for other countries, and their
correlation with international dynamics.
Additional information
The authors of this article declare that they have no conflicts of in­
terest and have the necessary permissions to disseminate the research.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] E. Gifford, M. McKelvey, R. Saemundsson, The evolution of knowledge-intensive
innovation ecosystems: co-evolving entrepreneurial activity and innovation policy
in the West Swedish maritime system, Ind. Innovat. 28 (5) (2021) 651–676,
https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2020.1856047.
[2] R. Padilla, Política industrial rural y fortalecimiento de cadenas de valor, Libros de
la CEPAL 145, CEPAL, Santiago de Chile, 2017.
[3] B.A. Lundvall, National innovation systems – analytical concept and development
tool, Ind. Innovat. 14 (2007) 95–119.
[4] J. Niosi, Building National and Regional Innovation Systems, Institutions for
Economic Development, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2010, 2010.
[5] L. Klerkx, S. Begemann, Supporting food systems transformation: the what, why,
who, where and how of mission-oriented agricultural innovation systems, Agric.
Syst. 184 (2020), 102901, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102901.
9
World Patent Information xxx (xxxx) xxx
[6] J.A. Solis-Navarrete, S. Bucio-Mendoza, P. Mata-Vázquez, M.X. Astudillo-Miller,
Innovation policy in the agri-food sector: evidence from undeveloped Mexican
regions, Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management 12 (1) (2021)
149–168, https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-01-2020-0002.
[7] M. Mazzucato, R. Kattel, J. Ryan-Collins, Challenge-driven innovation policy:
towards a new policy toolkit, J. Ind. Compet. Trade 20 (2020) 421–437, https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10842-019-00329-w.
[8] R. Padilla, N. OddoneN, Manual para el fortalecimiento de cadenas de valor, FIDA,
Ciudad de México, 2016, 2016, https://repositorio.cepal.org/bitstream/handle/
11362/40662/1/S1601085_es.pdf.
[9] M.X. Astudillo-Miller, J.A. Solis-Navarrete, M. Silva-Borges, R.I. Maldonado-
Astudillo (Eds.), Cadenas agroalimentarias e innovación social: Perspectivas entre
la competitividad y la sostenibilidad, Universidad Autónoma de Guerrero/
Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, 2019.
[10] SAGARPA – Secretaría de Ganadería, Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación, Atlas
agroalimentario de México, Ciudad de México, 2018. https://nube.siap.gob.mx/g
obmx_publicaciones_siap/pag/2018/Atlas-Agroalimentario-2018.
[11] SIAP – Servicio de Información Agropecuaria y Pesquera, Anuario Estadístico de la
Producción Agrícola, Ciudad de México. http://infosiap.siap.gob.mx/aagrico
la_siap_gb/icultivo/index.jsp, 2020.
[12] L. Castro-Gil, J.A. Solis-Navarrete, P. Ortega-Gómez, M.X. Astudillo-Miller, Cadena
de valor de las empresas del sector cocotero en la Costa Grande de Guerrero,
México, Revista Facultad de Agronomía La Plata 119 (2) (2021) 1–9, https://doi.
org/10.24215/16699513e058.
[13] FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAOSTAT, 2017.
http://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QC/visualize.
[14] México Sagarpa, principal exportador de papaya en el mundo; crece producción
3.2 por ciento en 2020, Ciudad de México, 2021. https://www.gob.mx/agricultu
ra/prensa/mexico-principal-exportador-de-papaya-en-el-mundo-crece-produccion-
3-2-por-ciento-en-2020.
[15] WIPO – World Intellectual Property Organisation, Global Innovation Index, 2019.
https://www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4434.
[16] DOF – Diario Oficial de la Federación, Ley de Propiedad Industrial. Cámara de
Diputados del H. Congreso de la Unión, Ciudad de México, 2018.
[17] B. Froehlich, Investment Megatrends, John Wiley & Sons, 2016.
[18] S. Hajkowicz, H. Cook, A. Littleboy, Our Future World: Global Megatrends that Will
Change the Way We Live, CSIRO, 2012.
[19] GDRTM – Grupo de de Desarrollo Regional del Tecnológico de Monterrey, Las
megatendencias sociales y la identificación de oportunidades estratégicas de
negocios, Instituto Tecnológico de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey, Monterrey,
2009.
[20] S. Dessain, S. Fishman, Biotechnology and the future of pharma, in: S. Dessain
S. Fishman (Ed.), Preserving the Promise, Improving the Culture of Biotech
Investment, 2015, pp. 33–40, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-809216-
3.00005-1.
[21] J. Hans-Joachi, J. Winter (Eds.), Environmental Biotechnology, Concepts and
Applications, Wiley – VCH, 2005.
[22] G. Walsh, Pharmaceutical Biotechnology, Concepts and Applications, John Wiley &
Sons, Limerick, 2007.
[23] B. Lee, Fundamentals of Food Biotechnology, Wiley Blackwell, 2015.
[24] M. Pratt, O. Sarmiento, F. Montes, D. Ogilvie, B. Marcus, L. Perez, R. Brownson,
The implications of megatrends in information and communication technology and
transportation for changes in global physical activity, Lancet 380 (2012) 282–293,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60736-3.
[25] U. Lichtenthaler, Digitainability: the combined effects of the megatrends
digitalization and sustainability, Journal of Innovation Management 9 (2) (2021)
64–80.
[26] R. Buckley, U. Gretzel, D. Scott, D. Weaver, S. Becken, Tourism megatrends, Tour.
Recreat. Res. 40 (1) (2015) 59–70, https://doi.org/10.1080/
02508281.2015.1005942.
[27] M. Pagliaro, An industry in transition: the chemical industry and the megatrends
driving its forthcoming transformation, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 58 (33) (2019)
11154–11159.
[28] I. Ferreira, M. Kirova, F. Montanari, C. Montfort, J. Moroni, R. Neirynck, M. Pesce,
Megatrends in the Agri-Food Sector: Global Overview and Possible Policy Response
from an EU Perspective, EPRS: European Parliamentary Research Service, 2019.
Retrieved from, https://policycommons.net/artifacts/1337763/megatrends-in-th
e-agri-food-sector/1945743/. on 06 Feb 2023. CID: 20.500.12592/djz6wq.
[29] N. Debonne, M. Bürgi, V. Diogo, J. Helfenstein, F. Herzog, C. Levers, F. Mohr,
R. Swart, P. Verburg, The geography of megatrends affecting European agriculture,
2022, Global Environ. Change 75 (2022), 102551, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
gloenvcha.2022.102551.
[30] P. Eder, Book review: leadership 2030: the six megatrends you need to understand
to lead your company into the future, World Futures Rev. 6 (2014) 213–215.
[31] M.C. Roco, W.S. Bainbridge, Converging Technologies for Improving Human
Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and
Cognitive Science, NSF/DOC-Sponsored Report, 2003, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
anngen.2003.09.001.
[32] F. Stezano, Approaches in the Concept of Convergence. A Critical Review of the
Literature, The European Journal of Social Science Research, Innovation, 2021,
pp. 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1080/13511610.2021.1919506.
[33] J. Jones, J. Cope, A. Kintz, Peering into the Future of Innovation Management,
Research-Technology Management. July-August, 2016, pp. 49–59, https://doi.org/
10.1080/08956308.2016.1185344.
J.A. Solis-Navarrete et al. World Patent Information xxx (xxxx) xxx

[34] F. Retief, A. Bond, J. Pope, A. Morrison-Saunders, N. King, Global megatrends and empresas de biotecnología en México, Miguel Ángel Porrúa, 2021, pp. 118–134.
their implications for environmental assessment practice, Environ. Impact Assess. Ciudad de México.
Rev. 61 (2018) 52–60, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2016.07.002. [47] Patentscope Wipo. https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/search.jsf, 2021.
[35] R. Bose, Competitive intelligence process and tools for intelligence analysis, Ind. [48] M. Hlavova, Z. Turoczy, K. Bisova, Improving microalgae for biotechnology: from
Manag. Data Syst. 108 (4) (2008) 510–528, 10.1108/02635570810868362. genetics to synthetic biology, Biotechnol. Adv. 33 (2015) 1194–1203, https://doi.
[36] J. Prescott, The evolution of competitive intelligence, Int. Rev. Strat. Manag. 6 org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2015.01.009.
(1995) 71–90. [49] L. Castro-Ortiz, V. Luna, R. Villalobos, Estado del arte y perspectivas del uso de
[37] G. Aguilar, Gestión Estratégica de Proyectos de Innovación. Un enfoque Práctico, biosensores ambientales en México, Rev. Int. Contam. Ambient. 23 (2007) 35–45.
ADIAT, Ciudad de México, 2014.
[38] R. Martínez-Béjar, G. Brändle, Contemporary technology management practices for
1. José Alberto Solis-Navarrete: Economist, M.Sc., and PhD in Regional Development at
facilitating social regulation and surveillance, Technol. Soc. 54 (2018) 139–148.
Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo (UMSNH) with research experience in
[39] A. Morales, M. Amaro, F. Stezano, Tendencias tecnológicas en el sector
Ecole des Hautes Études Commerciales (HEC Montréal) and Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y
biotecnológico: análisis de patentes en México y Estados Unidos, Economia: teoría
Tecnología (CONACYT); from 2019 is Associate Researcher in Centro de Investigaciones
y práctica 51 (2019) 17–44, https://doi.org/10.24275/etypuam/ne/512019/
en Geografía Ambiental (CIGA) at Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM).
morales.
His papers have been published in Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Journal
[40] Y. Zhang, D.K.R. Robinson, A.L. Porter, D. Zhu, G. Zhang, J. Lu, Technology
of Science and Technology Policy Management, International Journal of Innovation and
roadmapping for competitive technical intelligence, Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Sustainable Development, and others. Research interests: Public Policy for Territorial
Change 110 (2016) 175–186, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.11.029.
Development, Social Innovation, Innovation Policy, and Innovation and Sustainability
[41] Y. Cho, T. Daim, Technology forecasting methods, in: T. Daim, T. Oliver, J. Kim
(Eds.), Research and Technology Management in the Electricity Industry. Green
Energy and Technology, Springer, London, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1- 2. Saray Bucio-Mendoza: Economist, M.Sc., and PhD in Regional Development at Uni­
4471-5097-8_4. versidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo (UMSNH) with research and post-doctoral
[42] H. Park, K. Kim, S. Choi, J. Yoon, A patent intelligence system for strategic experience in HEC Montréal and Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM),
technology planning, Expert Syst. Appl. 40 (7) (2013) 2373–2390, https://doi.org/ respectively. Currently is Chief of the Technical Department in General Secretary at
10.1016/j.eswa.2012.10.073. UMSNH. Research interests: Social innovation, Business Innovation, and Territorial
[43] J. Yoon, J. Kim, TrendPerceptor, A property-function based technology intelligence Development.
system for identifying technology trends from patents, Expert Syst. Appl. 39 (3)
(2012) 2927–2938, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.08.+154.
3. Federico Stezano-Pérez: Socioligst by Universidad de la República (Uruguay), M.Sc., and
[44] J. An, K. Kim, L. Mortara, S. Lee, Deriving technology intelligence from patents:
PhD in Social Sciences at Facultad Latinomaericana de Ciencias Sociales (FLACSO) in
preposition-based semantic analysis, Journal of Informetrics 12 (1) (2018)
México. He has been a researcher professor at Instituto Tecnológico de Estudios Superiores
217–236, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.01.001.
de Monterrey Campus Ciudad de México, Centro de Investigación e Innovación en Tec­
[45] WIPO, International Patents Classification, 2021. http://www.wipo.int/class
nología de la Información y Comunincación INFOTEC, Instituto Politécnico Nacional and
ifications/ipc/es/.
Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana (UAM) Unidad Cuajimalpa. Currently is professor at
[46] J.A. Solis-Navarrete, S. Bucio-Mendoza, Megatendencias en las innovaciones de la
UAM Azcapotzalco. Research interests: Innovation, Science and Techonolgy Policies,
biotecnología agroalimentaria del coco y mango, in: Actividades de innovación de
Knowledge Convergence.

10