IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v106y2016i1p99-135.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Market Impacts of Pharmaceutical Product Patents in Developing Countries: Evidence from India

Author

Listed:
  • Mark Duggan
  • Craig Garthwaite
  • Aparajita Goyal

Abstract

In 2005, as the result of a World Trade Organization mandate, India implemented a patent reform for pharmaceuticals that was intended to comply with the 1995 Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Exploiting variation in the timing of patent decisions, we estimate that a molecule receiving a patent experienced an average price increase of just 3-6 percent, with larger increases for more recently developed molecules and for those produced by just one firm when the patent system began. Our results also show little impact on quantities sold or on the number of pharmaceutical firms operating in the market. (JEL K33, L11, L13, L65, O14, O34, O38)

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Duggan & Craig Garthwaite & Aparajita Goyal, 2016. "The Market Impacts of Pharmaceutical Product Patents in Developing Countries: Evidence from India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(1), pages 99-135, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:106:y:2016:i:1:p:99-135
    Note: DOI: 10.1257/aer.20141301
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/aer.20141301
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/aer/data/10601/20141301_data.zip
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/aer/ds/10601/20141301_ds.zip
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/aer/app/10601/20141301_app.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Petra Moser, 2005. "How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth-Century World's Fairs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1214-1236, September.
    2. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1982. "Limit Pricing and Entry under Incomplete Information: An Equilibrium Analysis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 443-459, March.
    3. Sara Fisher Ellison & Catherine Wolfram, 2006. "Coordinating on Lower Prices: Pharmaceutical Pricing under Political Pressure," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(2), pages 324-340, Summer.
    4. Margaret Kyle & Qian Yi, 2014. "Intellectual property rights and access to innovation: evidence from TRIPS," Working Papers hal-01952690, HAL.
    5. Daron Acemoglu & Joshua Linn, 2004. "Market Size in Innovation: Theory and Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(3), pages 1049-1090.
    6. Panle Jia & Pinelopi K. Goldberg & Shubham Chaudhuri, 2006. "Estimating the Effects of Global Patent Protection in Pharmaceuticals: A Case Study of Quinolones in India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1477-1514, December.
    7. Austan Goolsbee & Chad Syverson, 2008. "How Do Incumbents Respond to the Threat of Entry? Evidence from the Major Airlines," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(4), pages 1611-1633.
    8. Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg, 2010. "Alfred Marshall Lecture Intellectual Property Rights Protection in Developing Countries: The Case of Pharmaceuticals," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 8(2-3), pages 326-353, 04-05.
    9. Sara Fisher Ellison & Catherine Wolfram, 2006. "Coordinating on lower prices: pharmaceutical pricing under political pressure," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(2), pages 324-340, June.
    10. Raymond Fisman & Shang-Jin Wei, 2004. "Tax Rates and Tax Evasion: Evidence from "Missing Imports" in China," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(2), pages 471-500, April.
    11. Amy Finkelstein, 2004. "Static and Dynamic Effects of Health Policy: Evidence from the Vaccine Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(2), pages 527-564.
    12. Margaret K. Kyle & Anita M. McGahan, 2012. "Investments in Pharmaceuticals Before and After TRIPS," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(4), pages 1157-1172, November.
    13. Margaret Kyle & Yi Qian, 2014. "Intellectual Property Rights and Access to Innovation: Evidence from TRIPS," NBER Working Papers 20799, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Michael Kremer & Heidi Williams, 2010. "Incentivizing Innovation: Adding to the Tool Kit," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 10, pages 1-17, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Stephen Erfle & Henry McMillan, 1990. "Media, Political Pressure, and the Firm: The Case of Petroleum Pricing in the Late 1970s," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 105(1), pages 115-134.
    16. Joan-Ramon Borrell, 2005. "Patents and the faster introduction of new drugs in developing countries," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(6), pages 379-382.
    17. Nancy T. Gallini, 2002. "The Economics of Patents: Lessons from Recent U.S. Patent Reform," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 131-154, Spring.
    18. Amihai Glazer & Henry McMillan, 1992. "Pricing by the Firm Under Regulatory Threat," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(3), pages 1089-1099.
    19. David Dranove & Craig Garthwaite & Manuel Hermosilla, 2014. "Pharmaceutical Profits and the Social Value of Innovation," NBER Working Papers 20212, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chatterjee, Chirantan & Kubo, Kensuke & Pingali, Viswanath, 2015. "The consumer welfare implications of governmental policies and firm strategy in markets for medicines," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 255-273.
    2. Margaret K. Kyle, 2019. "The Alignment of Innovation Policy and Social Welfare: Evidence from Pharmaceuticals," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 20, pages 95-123, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Heidi L. Williams, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from Health Care Markets," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 53-87.
    4. Nancy Gallini, 2017. "Do patents work? Thickets, trolls and antibiotic resistance," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(4), pages 893-926, November.
    5. Agarwal, Ruchir & Gaule, Patrick, 2022. "What drives innovation? Lessons from COVID-19 R&D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    6. Kamal Saggi, 2016. "Trade, Intellectual Property Rights, and the World Trade Organization," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 16-00014, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    7. Iain M. Cockburn & Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2016. "Patents and the Global Diffusion of New Drugs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(1), pages 136-164, January.
    8. Michele Boldrin & David K. Levine, 2013. "The Case against Patents," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 3-22, Winter.
    9. Magnus Söderberg & Makoto Tanaka, 2012. "Spatial price homogeneity as a mechanism to reduce the threat of regulatory intervention in locally monopolistic sectors," Working Papers hal-00659458, HAL.
    10. Bonev, Petyo & Glachant, Matthieu & Söderberg, Magnus, 2020. "Testing the regulatory threat hypothesis: Evidence from Sweden," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    11. Bonev, Petyo & Glachant, Matthieu & Söderberg, Magnus, 2018. "A Mechanism for Institutionalised Threat of Regulation: Evidence from the Swedish District Heating Market," Economics Working Paper Series 1805, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    12. Rabbani, Maysam, 2023. "Mergers with future rivals can boost prices, bar entry, and intensify market concentration," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    13. Ismail Saglam, 2023. "Incentives of a monopolist for innovation under regulatory threat," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 41-66, March.
    14. David Besanko & David Dranove & Craig Garthwaite, 2016. "Insurance and the High Prices of Pharmaceuticals," NBER Working Papers 22353, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Pierre Dubois & Olivier de Mouzon & Fiona Scott-Morton & Paul Seabright, 2015. "Market size and pharmaceutical innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 46(4), pages 844-871, October.
    16. Makoto Tanaka, 2011. "The Effects of Uncertain Divestiture as Regulatory Threat," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 385-397, December.
    17. Glenn Ellison & Sara Fisher Ellison, 2011. "Strategic Entry Deterrence and the Behavior of Pharmaceutical Incumbents Prior to Patent Expiration," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 1-36, February.
    18. David Dranove & Craig Garthwaite & Manuel I. Hermosilla, 2020. "Expected Profits and The Scientific Novelty of Innovation," NBER Working Papers 27093, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Lamberova, Natalia, 2021. "The puzzling politics of R&D: Signaling competence through risky projects," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 801-818.
    20. Eric Budish & Benjamin Roin & Heidi Williams, 2013. "Do fixed patent terms distort innovation? Evidence from cancer clinical trials," Discussion Papers 13-001, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K33 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - International Law
    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L65 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Manufacturing - - - Chemicals; Rubber; Drugs; Biotechnology; Plastics
    • O14 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Industrialization; Manufacturing and Service Industries; Choice of Technology
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:106:y:2016:i:1:p:99-135. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.