IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ecinnt/v16y2007i3p227-236.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patents, imitation and welfare

Author

Listed:
  • Arijit Mukherjee
  • Achintya Ray

Abstract

We consider the effects of product and process patents on profits and welfare. In a duopoly model, we show that if the cost of imitation is not very large, prisoner's dilemma occurs under process patent, thus creating lower profit of each firm under process patent than under product patent. Welfare is higher under process (product) patent for very small (not very small) cost of imitation. Although the possibility of cross-licensing never makes lower welfare under process patent for all costs of imitation, welfare is never lower under product patent under infinitely repeated game.

Suggested Citation

  • Arijit Mukherjee & Achintya Ray, 2007. "Patents, imitation and welfare," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 227-236.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:ecinnt:v:16:y:2007:i:3:p:227-236
    DOI: 10.1080/10438590600661855
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10438590600661855
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10438590600661855?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. Zeng, Jinli, 2001. "Innovative vs. imitative R&D and economic growth," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 499-528, April.
    2. Nancy T. Gallini, 1992. "Patent Policy and Costly Imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(1), pages 52-63, Spring.
    3. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1991. "Endogenous Product Cycles," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(408), pages 1214-1229, September.
    4. Arijit Mukherjee & Enrico Pennings, 2004. "Imitation, patent protection, and welfare," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 56(4), pages 715-733, October.
    5. Helpman, Elhanan, 1993. "Innovation, Imitation, and Intellectual Property Rights," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(6), pages 1247-1280, November.
    6. Lai, Edwin L. -C., 1998. "International intellectual property rights protection and the rate of product innovation," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 133-153, February.
    7. Bernhofen, Daniel M. & Bernhofen, Laura T., 1999. "On the likelihood of a prisoners' dilemma in a differentiated duopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 291-294, September.
    8. Diwan, Ishac & Rodrik, Dani, 1991. "Patents, appropriate technology, and North-South trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1-2), pages 27-47, February.
    9. Deardorff, Alan V, 1992. "Welfare Effects of Global Patent Protection," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 59(233), pages 35-51, February.
    10. Kotaro Suzumura & Kazuharu Kiyono, 1987. "Entry Barriers and Economic Welfare," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 54(1), pages 157-167.
    11. Marjit, Sugata & Beladi, Hamid, 1998. "Product Versus Process Patents: A Theoretical Approach," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 193-199, April.
    12. Okuno-Fujiwara, Masahiro & Suzumura, Kotaro, 1993. "Symmetric Cournot Oligopoly and Economic Welfare: A Synthesis," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 3(1), pages 43-59, January.
    13. Lambertini, Luca & Rossini, Gianpaolo, 1998. "Product homogeneity as a prisoner's dilemma in a duopoly with R&D," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 297-301, March.
    14. N. Gregory Mankiw & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Free Entry and Social Inefficiency," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 48-58, Spring.
    15. Glass, Amy Jocelyn & Saggi, Kamal, 2002. "Intellectual property rights and foreign direct investment," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 387-410, March.
    16. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1991. "Endogenous Product Cycles," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(408), pages 1214-1229, September.
    17. Mukesh Eswaran, 1994. "Cross-Licensing of Competing Patents as a Facilitating Device," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 27(3), pages 689-708, August.
    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. Eberhard Feess & Michael Hoeck & Oliver Lorz, 2009. "International Technology Transfers and Competition," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(5), pages 1038-1052, November.
    2. Pasquale L. Scandizzo & Marco Ventura, 2016. "Innovation and imitation as an interactive process," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(8), pages 821-851, November.
    3. Bhan, Aditya & Kabiraj, Tarun, 2014. "Incentives for product and process innovations: a case for the drug industry," MPRA Paper 61030, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Kabiraj, Tarun & Chattopadhyay, Srobonti, 2014. "Cooperative vs. non-cooperative R&D incentives under incomplete information," MPRA Paper 59259, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Leonard F.S. Wang & Arijit Mukherjee, 2014. "Patent Protection, Innovation and Technology Licensing," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3-4), pages 245-254, December.
    2. Arijit Mukherjee, 2017. "Patent Protection and R&D with Endogenous Market Structure," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(1), pages 220-234, March.
    3. Arijit Mukherjee, 2014. "Patent protection under endogenous product differentiation," Asia-Pacific Journal of Accounting & Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 78-93, March.
    4. Arijit Mukherjee & Uday Bhanu Sinha, 2013. "Patent Protection, Southern Innovation and Welfare in a North–South Trade Model," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 80(318), pages 248-273, April.
    5. Arghya Ghosh & Jota Ishikawa, 2018. "Trade liberalization, absorptive capacity and the protection of intellectual property rights," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 997-1020, November.
    6. Hong Hwang & Jollene Z. Wu & Eden S. H. Yu, 2016. "Innovation, Imitation and Intellectual Property Rights in Developing Countries," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 138-151, February.
    7. Yang, Xuebing, 2013. "Horizontal inventive step and international protection of intellectual property," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 338-355.
    8. 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.
    9. Elif Bascavusoglu & Maria Pluvia Zuniga, 2005. "The effects of intellectual property protection on international knowledge contracting," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques bla05009, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    10. Chen, Hung-Ju, 2018. "Innovation And Imitation: Effects Of Intellectual Property Rights In A Product-Cycle Model Of Skills Accumulation," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(6), pages 1475-1509, September.
    11. Lin, Hwan C., 2010. "Technology diffusion and global welfare effects: Imitative R&D vs. South-bound FDI," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 231-247, November.
    12. Gancia, Gino & Zilibotti, Fabrizio, 2005. "Horizontal Innovation in the Theory of Growth and Development," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 3, pages 111-170, Elsevier.
    13. Anja, Breitwieser & Neil, Foster, 2012. "Intellectual property rights, innovation and technology transfer: a survey," MPRA Paper 36094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Lorenczik, Christian & Newiak, Monique, 2012. "Imitation and innovation driven development under imperfect intellectual property rights," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(7), pages 1361-1375.
    15. Glass, Amy Jocelyn & Wu, Xiaodong, 2007. "Intellectual property rights and quality improvement," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 393-415, March.
    16. Stadler, Manfred, 2015. "Innovation, industrial dynamics and economic growth," University of Tübingen Working Papers in Business and Economics 84, University of Tuebingen, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, School of Business and Economics.
    17. Michael A. Klein, 2015. "Foreign Direct Investment and Intellectual Property Protection in Developing Countries," CAEPR Working Papers 2015-018, Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research, Department of Economics, Indiana University Bloomington.
    18. Arijit Mukherjee & Chiranjib Neogi, 2009. "Vertical technology transfer and the implications of patent protection," Discussion Papers 09/05, University of Nottingham, School of Economics.
    19. Juan Carlos Escanciano, 2015. "Uniformly Consistent Estimation of Linear Regression Models with Strictly Exogenous Instruments," CAEPR Working Papers 2015-023, Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research, Department of Economics, Indiana University Bloomington.
    20. Cristóbal Campoamor, Adolfo, 2021. "North-South trade liberalization and factor reallocations between manufacturing and R&D," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 277-294.

    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:16:y:2007:i:3:p:227-236. 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.