IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/streco/v46y2018icp26-42.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does stronger intellectual property rights protection foster structural change? Effects of heterogeneity in innovations

Author

Listed:
  • Bondarev, Anton

Abstract

This paper studies the question how changes in intellectual property rights (IPR) regime affect relative innovation intensity for multinational large enterprises (MNEs) and local firms. The R&D process is doubly-differentiated, allowing both for variety-expanding and productivity-improving innovations. The IPR regime is abstracted as an effective duration of patent protection. From one side stronger IPR foster R&D activities of the MNE, which is in agreement with other findings. From the other side the local innovative activity is threatened by stronger protection. Depending on technical characteristics of the underlying R&D processes, the strengthening of the uniform one-size-fits-all IPR creates productivity bias or variety bias. Moreover, if technologies are heterogeneous, this bias varies over time implying the necessity of technology-specific heterogeneous IPR protection regimes to foster structural change and avoid technology lock-ins.

Suggested Citation

  • Bondarev, Anton, 2018. "Does stronger intellectual property rights protection foster structural change? Effects of heterogeneity in innovations," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 26-42.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:streco:v:46:y:2018:i:c:p:26-42
    DOI: 10.1016/j.strueco.2018.03.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0954349X16301527
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.strueco.2018.03.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bondarev, Anton, 2014. "Endogenous specialization of heterogeneous innovative activities of firms under the technological spillovers," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 235-249.
    2. Krugman, Paul, 1980. "Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 950-959, December.
    3. Acemoglu, Daron & Cao, Dan, 2015. "Innovation by entrants and incumbents," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 255-294.
    4. Grimaud, Andre & Rouge, Luc, 2005. "Polluting non-renewable resources, innovation and growth: welfare and environmental policy," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 109-129, June.
    5. Suzanne Scotchmer, 1996. "Protecting Early Innovators: Should Second-Generation Products Be Patentable?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(2), pages 322-331, Summer.
    6. Farrell, Joseph & Shapiro, Carl, 2004. "Intellectual Property, Competition, and Information Technology," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt3s03932b, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    7. Cimoli, Mario & Dosi, Giovanni & Maskus, Keith E. & Okediji, Ruth L. & Reichman, Jerome H. (ed.), 2014. "Intellectual Property Rights: Legal and Economic Challenges for Development," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199660766.
    8. Anton Bondarev, 2016. "Intensity of R&D competition and the generation of innovations in heterogeneous setting," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 621-653, July.
    9. Luca Lambertini & Andrea Mantovani, 2010. "Process and product innovation: A differential game approach to product life cycle," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 6(2), pages 227-252, June.
    10. Greiner, Alfred & Bondarev, Anton, 2017. "Optimal R&D investment with learning-by-doing: Multiple steady-states and thresholds," Working papers 2017/06, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    11. Bondarev, Anton & Greiner, Alfred, 2019. "Endogenous Growth And Structural Change Through Vertical And Horizontal Innovations," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 52-79, January.
    12. Lee Branstetter & Ray Fisman & C. Fritz Foley & Kamal Saggi, 2023. "Does intellectual property rights reform spur industrial development?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kamal Saggi (ed.), Technology Transfer, Foreign Direct Investment, and the Protection of Intellectual Property in the Global Economy, chapter 13, pages 307-316, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. William D. Nordhaus, 1967. "The Optimal Life of a Patent," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 241, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    14. Hu, Albert Guangzhou, 2004. "Multinational Corporations, Patenting, and Knowledge Flow: The Case of Singapore," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(4), pages 781-800, July.
    15. Carmen Matutes & Pierre Regibeau & Katharine Rockett, 1996. "Optimal Patent Design and the Diffusion of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(1), pages 60-83, Spring.
    16. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Furukawa, Yuichi & Liao, Chih-Hsing, 2017. "Inflation and economic growth in a Schumpeterian model with endogenous entry of heterogeneous firms," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 392-409.
    17. Judd, Kenneth L, 1985. "On the Performance of Patents," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(3), pages 567-585, May.
    18. Chu, Angus C., 2011. "The welfare cost of one-size-fits-all patent protection," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 876-890, June.
    19. Krysiak, Frank C., 2011. "Environmental regulation, technological diversity, and the dynamics of technological change," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 528-544, April.
    20. L. Kamran Bilir, 2014. "Patent Laws, Product Life-Cycle Lengths, and Multinational Activity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(7), pages 1979-2013, July.
    21. Hopenhayn, Hugo A & Mitchell, Matthew F, 2001. "Innovation Variety and Patent Breadth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 152-166, Spring.
    22. Anton Bondarev, 2012. "The long-run dynamics of product and process innovations for a multi-product monopolist," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(8), pages 775-799, November.
    23. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    24. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    25. Ted O'Donoghue & Suzanne Scotchmer & Jacques‐François Thisse, 1998. "Patent Breadth, Patent Life, and the Pace of Technological Progress," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(1), pages 1-32, March.
    26. Glass, Amy Jocelyn & Wu, Xiaodong, 2007. "Intellectual property rights and quality improvement," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 393-415, March.
    27. Dockner,Engelbert J. & Jorgensen,Steffen & Long,Ngo Van & Sorger,Gerhard, 2000. "Differential Games in Economics and Management Science," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521637329, January.
    28. Pietro Peretto & Michelle Connolly, 2007. "The Manhattan Metaphor," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 329-350, December.
    29. Mukesh Eswaran & Nancy Gallini, 1996. "Patent Policy and the Direction of Technological Change," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(4), pages 722-746, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Leandro M. Meller, 2022. "Patent Length and Breadth as Policy Instruments: A Systematic Review of Recent Contributions to the Theory of Optimal Patent Design," Working Papers 192, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    2. Xuemeng Guo & Ke Guo & Hanzhong Zheng, 2023. "Industrial Agglomeration and Enterprise Innovation Sustainability: Empirical Evidence from the Chinese A-Share Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-26, July.
    3. Gao, Xing & Meng, Jing & Ling, Yantao & Liao, Maolin & Cao, Mengqiu, 2022. "Localisation economies, intellectual property rights protection and entrepreneurship in China: A Bayesian analysis of multi-level spatial correlation," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 156-165.
    4. Gao, Xing & Meng, Jing & Ling, Yantao & Liao, Maolin & Cao, Mengqiu, 2022. "Localisation economies, intellectual property rights protection and entrepreneurship in China: a Bayesian analysis of multi-level spatial correlation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114290, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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. Bondarev, Anton & Greiner, Alfred, 2018. "Catching-up and falling behind: Effects of learning in an R&D differential game with spillovers," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 134-156.
    2. Anton Bondarev, 2021. "Games Without Winners: Catching-up with Asymmetric Spillovers," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 670-703, December.
    3. Bondarev, Anton & Greiner, Alfred, 2019. "Endogenous Growth And Structural Change Through Vertical And Horizontal Innovations," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 52-79, January.
    4. Bondarev, Anton, 2018. "Heterogeneous R&D spillovers and sustainable growth: Limits to efficient regulation," Working papers 2018/04, Faculty of Business and Economics - University of Basel.
    5. Anton Bondarev, 2016. "Intensity of R&D competition and the generation of innovations in heterogeneous setting," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 621-653, July.
    6. Bondarev, Anton A., 2012. "Optimal control over a continuous range of homogeneous and heterogeneous innovations with finite life-cycles," MPRA Paper 40068, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Nancy Gallini & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2002. "Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2, pages 51-78, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Grönqvist, Charlotta, 2009. "Empirical studies on the private value of Finnish patents," Scientific Monographs, Bank of Finland, number 2009_041.
    9. Bondarev, Anton, 2014. "Endogenous specialization of heterogeneous innovative activities of firms under the technological spillovers," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 235-249.
    10. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 315-380, Elsevier.
    11. Encaoua, David & Guellec, Dominique & Martinez, Catalina, 2006. "Patent systems for encouraging innovation: Lessons from economic analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1423-1440, November.
    12. repec:zbw:bofism:2009_041 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Mohamed MABROUKI, 2018. "What Kind Of Intellectual Propfrty Regime Is More Favorable To Innovation: With Or Without A Patent?," Journal of Smart Economic Growth, , vol. 3(1), pages 77-95, Juin.
    14. Anton Bondarev & Alfred Greiner, 2022. "How ongoing structural change creates a double dividend: outdating of technologies and green growth," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 21(2), pages 125-160, May.
    15. Bondarev, Anton & Krysiak, Frank C., 2021. "Economic development and the structure of cross-technology interactions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    16. Grönqvist, Charlotta, 2009. "Empirical studies on the private value of Finnish patents," Bank of Finland Scientific Monographs, Bank of Finland, volume 0, number sm2009_041, July.
    17. Aoki, R. & Spiegel, Y., 1998. "Public Disclosure of Patent Applications, R&D, and Welfare," Papers 30-98, Tel Aviv.
    18. Ohki, Kazuyoshi, 2023. "Disruptive innovation by heterogeneous incumbents and economic growth: When do incumbents switch to new technology?," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    19. Anja, Breitwieser & Neil, Foster, 2012. "Intellectual property rights, innovation and technology transfer: a survey," MPRA Paper 36094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Mabrouki, Mohamed, 2018. "Le brevet : un instrument efficace pour promouvoir l’innovation au profit de la croissance ou un mal nécessaire ? [Patent: an effective instrument to promote innovation for the benefit of growth or," MPRA Paper 85752, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Jerbashian, Vahagn, 2021. "Intellectual Property And Product Market Competition Regulations In A Model With Two R&D Performing Sectors," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(1), pages 59-80, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Heterogeneous innovations; Intellectual property rights; Structral change; Double differentiation; Technology lock-in;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C02 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Mathematical Economics
    • L0 - Industrial Organization - - General
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    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:eee:streco:v:46:y:2018:i:c:p:26-42. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/525148 .

    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.