IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ecinnt/v10y2001i6p449-492.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Patents In Growth Models

Author

Listed:
  • Louise Keely

Abstract

This paper argues that macroeconomic models of endogenous growth driven by technological change could be much improved by drawing lessons from the microeconomic literature of intellectual property design. Growth models use overly simplistic and sometimes incorrect assumptions regarding the intellectual property regime. Microeconomic theory and empirical work are reviewed to demonstrate that determining optimal intellectual property design is complex and has important implications for firm behavior and performance. Considering the question of intellectual property design in a dynamic general equilibrium model should yield important insights about how intellectual property impacts growth and welfare.

Suggested Citation

  • Louise Keely, 2001. "Using Patents In Growth Models," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 449-492.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:ecinnt:v:10:y:2001:i:6:p:449-492
    DOI: 10.1080/10438590100000018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10438590100000018
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10438590100000018?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 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. Hopenhayn, H.A. & Mitchell, M.F., 1999. "Innovation Fertility and Patent Design," Papers 303, Minnesota - Center for Economic Research.
    2. DeBrock, Lawrence M, 1985. "Market Structure, Innovation, and Optimal Patent Life," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(1), pages 223-244, April.
    3. Zvi Griliches, 1989. "Patents: Recent Trends and Puzzles," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 20(1989 Micr), pages 291-330.
    4. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    5. Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi & Hausman, Jerry A, 1986. "Patents and R and D: Is There a Lag?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 27(2), pages 265-283, June.
    6. Hall, B.H., 1999. "Innovation and Market Value," Economics Papers 1999-w3, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    7. Johnson, William R, 1985. "The Economics of Copying," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(1), pages 158-174, February.
    8. Kaiser, Ulrich, 2000. "Research Cooperation and Research Expenditures with Endogenous Absorptive Capacity: Theory and Microeconometric Evidence for the German Service Sector," ZEW Discussion Papers 00-25, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Gittleman, Maury B & Wolff, Edward N, 1995. "R&D Activity and Cross-Country Growth Comparisons," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 189-207, February.
    10. Adam B. Jaffe & Josh Lerner, 1999. "Privatizing R&D: Patent Policy and the Commercialization of National Laboratory Technologies," NBER Working Papers 7064, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Mark Schankerman & Suzanne Scotchmer, 1999. "Damages and Injunctions in the Protection of Proprietary Research Tools," NBER Working Papers 7086, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Jaffee, Adam & Trajtenberg, Manuel, 2000. "Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1rh8k6z2, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    13. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Dasgupta, Partha & Stiglitz, Joseph, 1980. "Industrial Structure and the Nature of Innovative Activity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(358), pages 266-293, June.
    15. Nancy T. Gallini, 1992. "Patent Policy and Costly Imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(1), pages 52-63, Spring.
    16. Shavell, Steven & van Ypersele, Tanguy, 2001. "Rewards versus Intellectual Property Rights," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(2), pages 525-547, October.
    17. L. Wade, 1988. "Review," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 99-100, July.
    18. Grossman, Gene M & Shapiro, Carl, 1988. "Counterfeit-Product Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(1), pages 59-75, March.
    19. Brouwer, Erik & Kleinknecht, Alfred, 1999. "Innovative output, and a firm's propensity to patent.: An exploration of CIS micro data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 615-624, August.
    20. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Scotchmer, suzanne, 1998. "The Independent-Invention Defense in Intellectual Property," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt2s5174q8, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    22. Ricardo J. Caballero & Adam B. Jaffe, 1993. "How High Are the Giants' Shoulders: An Empirical Assessment of Knowledge Spillovers and Creative Destruction in a Model of Economic Growth," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1993, Volume 8, pages 15-86, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Richard Gilbert & Carl Shapiro, 1990. "Optimal Patent Length and Breadth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 106-112, Spring.
    24. Green, Jerry R & Stokey, Nancy L, 1983. "A Comparison of Tournaments and Contracts," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(3), pages 349-364, June.
    25. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    26. Jean O. Lanjouw & Josh Lerner, 1996. "Preliminary Injunctive Relief: Theory and Evidence from Patent Litigation," NBER Working Papers 5689, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    27. Jean Olson Lanjouw, 1993. "Patent Protection: Of What Value and for How Long?," NBER Working Papers 4475, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    28. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 1997. "Stylized Facts of Patent Litigation: Value, Scope and Ownership," NBER Working Papers 6297, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    29. Chaney, Paul K & Devinney, Timothy M & Winer, Russell S, 1991. "The Impact of New Product Introductions on the Market Value of Firms," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 64(4), pages 573-610, October.
    30. Keely, Louise & Quah, Danny, 1998. "Technology in Growth," CEPR Discussion Papers 1901, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    31. Hayashi, Fumio, 1982. "Tobin's Marginal q and Average q: A Neoclassical Interpretation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 213-224, January.
    32. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-938, July.
    33. Aoki, Reiko & Hu, Jin, 1999. "A Cooperative Game Approach to Patent Litigation, Settlement, and Allocation of Legal Costs," Working Papers 216, Department of Economics, The University of Auckland.
    34. Bloch, Francis & Markowitz, Paul, 1996. "Optimal disclosure delay in multistage R&D competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 159-179.
    35. Kaiser, Ulrich & Licht, Georg, 1998. "R&D cooperation and R&D intensity: theory and micro-econometric evidence for german manufacturing industries," ZEW Discussion Papers 98-32, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    36. Lazear, Edward P, 1997. "Incentives in Basic Research," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(1), pages 167-197, January.
    37. Bronwyn H. Hall & Zvi Griliches & Jerry A. Hausman, 1984. "Patents and R&D: Is There A Lag?," NBER Working Papers 1454, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    38. Inkmann, Joachim, 2000. "Horizontal and Vertical R&D Cooperation," CoFE Discussion Papers 00/02, University of Konstanz, Center of Finance and Econometrics (CoFE).
    39. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2001. "The Microeconomics of Technological Systems," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199245536.
    40. Jean Olson Lanjouw, 1994. "Economic Consequences of a Changing Litigation Environment: The Case of Patents," NBER Working Papers 4835, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    41. Sakakibara, Mariko & Branstetter, Lee, 2001. "Do Stronger Patents Induce More Innovation? Evidence from the 1988 Japanese Patent Law Reforms," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 77-100, Spring.
    42. Austin, David H, 1993. "An Event-Study Approach to Measuring Innovative Output: The Case of Biotechnology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 253-258, May.
    43. Evenson, Robert E, 1993. "Patents, R&D, and Invention Potential: International Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(2), pages 463-468, May.
    44. Grossman, Gene M & Shapiro, Carl, 1987. "Dynamic R&D Competition," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 97(386), pages 372-387, June.
    45. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
    46. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1990. "Risky R&D in Oligopolistic Product Markets," Discussion Papers 872, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    47. Aoki, R. & Spiegel, Y., 1998. "Public Disclosure of Patent Applications, R&D, and Welfare," Papers 30-98, Tel Aviv.
    48. Zvi Griliches & Ariel Pakes & Bronwyn H. Hall, 1986. "The Value of Patents as Indicators of Inventive Activity," NBER Working Papers 2083, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    49. Denicolo, Vincenzo, 1996. "Patent Races and Optimal Patent Breadth and Length," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 249-265, September.
    50. Claude Crampes & Corinne Langinier, 2002. "Litigation and Settlement in Patent Infringement Cases," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 258-274, Summer.
    51. Arundel, Anthony & Kabla, Isabelle, 1998. "What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 127-141, June.
    52. 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.
    53. Michael L. Katz & Janusz A. Ordover, 1990. "R&D Cooperation and Competition," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 21(1990 Micr), pages 137-203.
    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. repec:mul:je8794:doi:10.1429/27918:y:2008:i:2:p:235 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Alberto BUCCI, 2004. "Economic growth in an enlarged Europe: the human capital and R&D dimensions," Departmental Working Papers 2004-22, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    3. Stryszowski, P.K., 2006. "Intellectual Property Rights, Globalization and Growth," Other publications TiSEM 32aa98b3-1bd4-43d3-badb-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Alberto Bucci, 2005. "Product Market Competition, R&D Effort and Economic Growth," UNIMI - Research Papers in Economics, Business, and Statistics unimi-1011, Universitá degli Studi di Milano.
    5. Alberto Bucci, 2003. "R&D, Imperfect Competition and Growth with Human Capital Accumulation," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 50(4), pages 417-439, September.
    6. Stryszowski, P.K., 2006. "Intellectual Property Rights, Globalization and Growth," Discussion Paper 2006-76, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    7. Alberto Bucci, 2008. "Competition and R&D investment in human capital-driven growth," Politica economica, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 2, pages 235-265.
    8. Piotr Stryszowski, 2005. "Intellectual Property Rights and National R&D Subsidy Policies in a Two-Country Schumpeterian Framework," DEGIT Conference Papers c010_027, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    9. Sefa Awaworyi Churchill & Hoang M. Luong & Mehmet Ugur, 2022. "Does intellectual property protection deliver economic benefits? A multi‐outcome meta‐regression analysis of the evidence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 1477-1509, December.
    10. Alberto BUCCI, 2002. "Market Power, Human Capital and Growth," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2002012, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).

    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. Alexandre Almeida & Aurora A.C. Teixeira, 2007. "Does Patenting negatively impact on R&D investment?An international panel data assessment," FEP Working Papers 255, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    2. Nicolas van Zeebroeck & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "Filing strategies and patent value," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 539-561, February.
    3. Bronwyn Hall & Rosemaire Ham Ziedonis, 2000. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the US Semiconductor Industry, 1979-95," Economics Series Working Papers 2000-W16, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    4. Appio, Francesco Paolo & Baglieri, Daniela & Cesaroni, Fabrizio & Spicuzza, Lucia & Donato, Alessia, 2022. "Patent design strategies: Empirical evidence from European patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    5. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Ham Ziedonis, Rosemarie, 1999. "Patent Paradox Revisited: Determinants of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1980-94," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1rg1088v, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    6. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.
    7. Li, Xibao, 2012. "Behind the recent surge of Chinese patenting: An institutional view," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 236-249.
    8. Per Botolf Maurseth, 2005. "Lovely but dangerous: The impact of patent citations on patent renewal," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 351-374.
    9. Choi, Mincheol & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2021. "Technological diversification and R&D productivity: The moderating effects of knowledge spillovers and core-technology competence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    10. 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.
    11. Olson Lanjouw, Jean & Schankerman, Mark, 2002. "Research productivity and patent quality: measurement with multiple indicators," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3729, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Jaffe, Adam B., 2000. "The U.S. patent system in transition: policy innovation and the innovation process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 531-557, April.
    13. 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.
    14. Kaiser, Ulrich, 2002. "An empirical test of models explaining research expenditures and research cooperation: evidence for the German service sector," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 747-774, June.
    15. Kaiser, Ulrich, 2002. "Measuring knowledge spillovers in manufacturing and services: an empirical assessment of alternative approaches," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 125-144, January.
    16. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2011. "The puzzle of patent value indicators," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 33-62.
    17. Anna Laura Baraldi & Claudia Cantabene & Giulio Perani, 2014. "Reverse causality in the R&D-patents relationship: an interpretation of the innovation persistence," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 304-326, April.
    18. 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.
    19. Chih-Hai Yang & Chia-Hui Huang, 2013. "Is Taiwan's R&D productivity in decline? A microeconometric analysis," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 137-155, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Intellectual Property; Technological Change; Growth JEL Classification: 034; 040;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - General

    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:taf:ecinnt:v:10:y:2001:i:6:p:449-492. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/GEIN20 .

    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.