IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v45y2018i2p151-158..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Knowledge properties and economic policy: A new look

Author

Listed:
  • Cristiano Antonelli

Abstract

This article explores the full range of effects of knowledge properties and explains how knowledge properties such as transient appropriability, non-exhaustibility, and indivisibility do not only have negative effects, but also positive ones. Knowledge externalities help reduce the cost of knowledge and imitation externalities reduce the revenue and profitability of innovations. Their effects need to be considered jointly in a single analytical framework. An analysis of their combined effects questions the scope of application of the ‘Arrovian postulate’ according to which the limited appropriability of knowledge due to its uncontrolled dissemination reduces invention. This ignores spillovers of outside knowledge, which increases invention. These are the two opposing faces of the limited appropriability of knowledge. Policy implications suggest that along with public interventions designed to support the supply of knowledge and to compensate for missing incentives, much attention should be paid to all interventions that favour the dissemination of knowledge and the knowledge connectivity of the system.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristiano Antonelli, 2018. "Knowledge properties and economic policy: A new look," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(2), pages 151-158.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:45:y:2018:i:2:p:151-158.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scx070
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cristiano Antonelli, 2009. "The economics of innovation: from the classical legacies to the economics of complexity," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(7), pages 611-646.
    2. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    3. Antonelli, Cristiano & Krafft, Jackie & Quatraro, Francesco, 2010. "Recombinant knowledge and growth: The case of ICTs," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 50-69, March.
    4. Mansfield, Edwin, 1985. "How Rapidly Does New Industrial Technology Leak Out?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(2), pages 217-223, December.
    5. Bruno Crepon & Emmanuel Duguet & Jacques Mairesse, 1998. "Research, Innovation And Productivity: An Econometric Analysis At The Firm Level," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 115-158.
    6. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1994. "Evaluating technological information and utilizing it : Scientific knowledge, technological capability, and external linkages in biotechnology," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 91-114, June.
    8. Crepon, B. & Duguet, E. & Mairesse, J., 1998. "Research Investment, Innovation and Productivity: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level," Papiers d'Economie Mathématique et Applications 98.15, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    9. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    10. James D. Adams & J. Roger Clemmons, 2013. "How Rapidly Does Science Leak Out? A Study of the Diffusion of Fundamental Ideas," Journal of Human Capital, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(3), pages 191-229.
    11. Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), 2010. "Handbook of the Economics of Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    12. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2006. "In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R& D and External Knowledge Acquisition," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(1), pages 68-82, January.
    13. Arora, Ashish & Gambardella, Alfonso, 1990. "Complementarity and External Linkages: The Strategies of the Large Firms in Biotechnology," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 361-379, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. The free rider problem – and opportunity: you heard it first at Troppo
      by Nicholas Gruen in Club Troppo on 2017-04-09 15:32:59

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Cristiano Antonelli, 2019. "A reappraisal of the Arrovian postulate and the intellectual property regime: user-specific patents," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 377-388, June.

    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. Cristiano Antonelli & Alessandra Colombelli, 2017. "The locus of knowledge externalities and the cost of knowledge," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(8), pages 1151-1164, August.
    2. Antonelli, Cristiano & David, Paul, 2015. "The Generation of Knowledge as an Emergent System Property: An Introduction," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201540, University of Turin.
    3. Stephane Lhuillery & Julio Raffo & Intan Hamdan-Livramento, 2016. "Measuring creativity: Learning from innovation measurement," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 31, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    4. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2017. "Digital knowledge generation and the appropriability trade-off," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 991-1002.
    5. Antonelli Cristiano & Colombelli Alessandra, 2013. "Knowledge cumulability and complementarity in the knowledge generation function," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201305, University of Turin.
    6. Tavassoli, Sam & Karlsson, Charlie, 2021. "The role of location on complexity of firms’ innovation outcome," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    7. Schmiedeberg, Claudia, 2008. "Complementarities of innovation activities: An empirical analysis of the German manufacturing sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1492-1503, October.
    8. Cristiano Antonelli, 2011. "The Economic Complexity of Technological Change: Knowledge Interaction and Path Dependence," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Audretsch, David B. & Belitski, Maksim, 2020. "The role of R&D and knowledge spillovers in innovation and productivity," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    10. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," 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 129-213, Elsevier.
    11. Bettina Peters & Rebecca Riley & Iulia Siedschlag & Priit Vahter & John McQuinn, 2018. "Internationalisation, innovation and productivity in services: evidence from Germany, Ireland and the United Kingdom," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 154(3), pages 585-615, August.
    12. Baumann, Julian & Kritikos, Alexander S., 2016. "The link between R&D, innovation and productivity: Are micro firms different?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1263-1274.
    13. Doran, Justin, 2012. "Are different forms of innovation complements or substitutes?," MPRA Paper 44580, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Measuring the Returns to R&D," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1033-1082, Elsevier.
    15. David B. Audretsch & Alexander S. Kritikos & Alexander Schiersch, 2020. "Microfirms and innovation in the service sector," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 55(4), pages 997-1018, December.
    16. Audretsch, David & Hafenstein, Marian & Kritikos, Alexander S. & Schiersch, Alexander, 2018. "Firm Size and Innovation in the Service Sector," IZA Discussion Papers 12035, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Cristiano Antonelli & Federico Barbiellini Amidei, 2011. "The Dynamics of Knowledge Externalities," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13292.
    18. Grazia Cecere & Sascha Rexhäuser & Patrick Schulte, 2019. "From less promising to green? Technological opportunities and their role in (green) ICT innovation," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 45-63, January.
    19. Spyros Arvanitis & Florian Seliger & Martin Woerter, 2020. "Knowledge Spillovers, Competition and Innovation Success," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 82(5), pages 1017-1041, October.
    20. Fulvio Castellacci, 2011. "How does competition affect the relationship between innovation and productivity? Estimation of a CDM model for Norway," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 637-658, August.

    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:oup:scippl:v:45:y:2018:i:2:p:151-158.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.