Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Do Patents Matter for Commercialization?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Elizabeth Webster
  • Paul H. Jensen

Abstract

This paper estimates the effect of a patent grant on the likelihood that an invention will progress to different commercialization stages, using survey data on 3,162 inventions that were the subject of a patent application. We find that about 40 percent of all inventions advanced to the point of market launch and mass production. Although a patent grant had no effect on the decision to proceed with the commercialization process, being refused a patent reduced the probability of attempting market launch and mass production by about 13 percentage points. Over and above this, having protection from several other complementary patents increased the probability of commercialization by an additional 3–5 percentage points.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/10.1086/658487
Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

File URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/full/10.1086/658487
Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by University of Chicago Press in its journal The Journal of Law and Economics.

Volume (Year): 54 (2011)
Issue (Month): 2 ()
Pages: 431 - 453

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/658487

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLE/

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Bruno Van Pottelsberghe & Dominique Guellec, 2003. "The impact of public R&D expenditure on business R&D," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/6213, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  2. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2006. "Sequential Innovation, Patents, and Imitation," Economics Working Papers 0025, Institute for Advanced Study, School of Social Science.
  3. Sunil Kanwar & Robert Evenson, 2003. "Does intellectual property protection spur technological change?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 235-264, April.
  4. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67, pages 297.
  5. Joshua S. Gans & David H. Hsu & Scott Stern, 2002. "When Does Start-Up Innovation Spur the Gale of Creative Destruction?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(4), pages 571-586, Winter.
  6. Mazzoleni, Roberto & Nelson, Richard R., 1998. "The benefits and costs of strong patent protection: a contribution to the current debate," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 273-284, July.
  7. Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster, 2009. "Knowledge management: does capture impede creation?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(4), pages 701-727, August.
  8. Marcus Asplund & Rickard Sandin, 1999. "The Survival of New Products," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 219-237, November.
  9. 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.
  10. Mansfield, Edwin & Schwartz, Mark & Wagner, Samuel, 1981. "Imitation Costs and Patents: An Empirical Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(364), pages 907-18, December.
  11. Harabi, Najib, 1994. "Appropriability of Technical Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," MPRA Paper 26267, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  12. 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.
  13. Fabienne Orsi & Benjamin Coriat, 2005. "Are "strong patents" beneficial to innovative activities? Lessons from the genetic testing for breast cancer controversies," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(6), pages 1205-1221, December.
  14. James Bessen & Michael J. Meurer, 2008. "Do Patents Perform Like Property?," Working Papers 0801, Research on Innovation.
  15. Giovanni Dosi & Franco Malerba & Giovanni B. Ramello & Francesco Silva, 2006. "Information, appropriability, and the generation of innovative knowledge four decades after Arrow and Nelson: an introduction," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(6), pages 891-901, December.
  16. 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.
  17. Saviotti, Pier Paolo, 1998. "On the dynamics of appropriability, of tacit and of codified knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 843-856, April.
  18. Ashish Arora & Marco Ceccagnoli, 2006. "Patent Protection, Complementary Assets, and Firms' Incentives for Technology Licensing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 293-308, February.
  19. Emmanuel Dechenaux & Brent Goldfarb & Scott Shane & Marie Thursby, 2008. "Appropriability and Commercialization: Evidence from MIT Inventions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 893-906, May.
  20. Lee Branstetter & Yoshiaki Nakamura, 2003. "Is Japan's Innovative Capacity in Decline?," NBER Working Papers 9438, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  21. Suzanne Scotchmer, 1991. "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 29-41, Winter.
  22. Nerkar, Atul A. & McGrath, Rita Gunther & MacMillan, Ian C., 1996. "Three facets of satisfaction and their influence on the performance of innovation teams," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 167-188, May.
  23. 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.
  24. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3), pages 783-832.
  25. Pisano, Gary P., 1991. "The governance of innovation: Vertical integration and collaborative arrangements in the biotechnology industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 237-249, June.
  26. Amesse, Fernand & Desranleau, Claude & Etemad, Hamid & Fortier, Yves & Seguin-Dulude, Louise, 1991. "The individual inventor and the role of entrepreneurship : A survey of the Canadian evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 13-27, February.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Simon Wakeman, 2012. "How does obtaining intellectual property rights impact technology commercialization strategy for start-up innovators? Reconciling the effects on licensing vs. financing," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-12-03 (R1), ESMT European School of Management and Technology, revised 11 Jul 2012.
  2. Russell Thomson & Elizabeth Webster, 2011. "The Design of R&D Support Schemes for Industry," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2011n24, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:doi:10.1086/658487. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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