IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00113499.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Persistence of innovation, technological change and quality-adjusted patents in the US Pharmaceutical industry

Author

Listed:
  • Gautier Duflos

    (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, CREST-LEI - ENPC - École des Ponts ParisTech)

Abstract

This paper analyzes American pharmaceutical firms' persistence in innovating prior to the wave of mergers and acquisitions that accompanied the "Biotech revolution". We evaluate the impact of past innovative activity on firms' innovation propensities using a non-linear GMM estimator for exponential models that allows for predetermined regressors and linear feedback. We find that innovative activity at the firm level depends strongly on the technological importance of past innovations. In particular, breakthroughs depend largely on past innovations' scope, and this effect is likely to deter further pioneering behaviors rather than strengthen incentives to invest on non cumulative R&D. The results also shed light on the importance of small firms for the technological change in pharmaceuticals, and suggest that large firms may persist in using patents strategically to retain sales.

Suggested Citation

  • Gautier Duflos, 2006. "Persistence of innovation, technological change and quality-adjusted patents in the US Pharmaceutical industry," Post-Print halshs-00113499, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00113499
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00113499v2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00113499v2/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-748, September.
    2. Wooldridge, Jeffrey M., 1997. "Multiplicative Panel Data Models Without the Strict Exogeneity Assumption," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(5), pages 667-678, October.
    3. Sutton, John, 1996. "Technology and market structure," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-5), pages 511-530, April.
    4. Scherer, F M, 1992. "Schumpeter and Plausible Capitalism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(3), pages 1416-1433, September.
    5. Mark Schankerman, 1998. "How Valuable is Patent Protection? Estimates by Technology Field," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(1), pages 77-107, Spring.
    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. Christian Le Bas & Nicolas Poussing, 2014. "Are Complex Innovators More Persistent Than Single Innovators? An Empirical Analysis Of Innovation Persistence Drivers," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(01), pages 1-21.
    2. Christian Le Bas & Caroline Mothe & Thuc Uyen Nguyen-Thi, 2011. "Technological innovation persistence : Literature survey and exploration of the role of organizational innovation," Working Papers halshs-00649095, HAL.
    3. Choi, Joonhwan & Lee, Jaegul, 2017. "Repairing the R&D market failure: Public R&D subsidy and the composition of private R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1465-1478.
    4. Christian Le Bas & Caroline Mothe & Thuc Uyen Nguyen-Thi, 2015. "The differentiated impacts of organizational innovation practices on technological innovation persistence," Post-Print hal-01301433, HAL.

    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. Gautier Duflos, 2006. "Persistence of innovation, technological change and quality-adjusted patents in the US pharmaceutical industry," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques bla06029, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    2. Gautier Duflos, 2006. "Persistence of innovation, technological change and quality-adjusted patents in the US Pharmaceutical industry," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00113499, HAL.
    3. 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.
    4. ISOGAWA Daiya & NISHIKAWA Kohei & OHASHI Hiroshi, 2012. "New-to-Market Product Innovation and Firm Performance: Evidence from a firm-level innovation survey in Japan," Discussion papers 12077, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    5. Christine Greenhalgh & Mark Rogers, 2007. "The Value of Intellectual Property Rights to Firms," Economics Series Working Papers 319, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    6. Christine Greenhalgh & Padraig Dixon, 2002. "The Economics of Intellectual Property: A Review to Identify Themes for Future Research," Economics Series Working Papers 135, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    7. Erkal, Nisvan, 2005. "The decision to patent, cumulative innovation, and optimal policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(7-8), pages 535-562, September.
    8. Glen M. Schmidt & Evan L. Porteus, 2000. "Sustaining Technology Leadership Can Require Both Cost Competence and Innovative Competence," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 1-18, March.
    9. Stiebale, Joel, 2012. "Cross-Border M&A and Innovative Activity: Firm-Level Evidence," VfS Annual Conference 2012 (Goettingen): New Approaches and Challenges for the Labor Market of the 21st Century 62027, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    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. O'Shea, Lucy & Ulph, Alistair, 2008. "The role of pest resistance in biotechnology R&D investment strategy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 213-228, March.
    12. Kitazawa, Yoshitsugu, 2001. "Exponential regression of dynamic panel data models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 7-13, October.
    13. Atal, Vidya & Bar, Talia & Gordon, Sidartha, 2016. "Project selection: Commitment and competition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 30-48.
    14. Alhassan Abdul-Wakeel Karakara & Evans Osabuohien, 2020. "ICT adoption, competition and innovation of informal firms in West Africa: a comparative study of Ghana and Nigeria," Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 14(3), pages 397-414, June.
    15. Symeonidis, George, 2001. "Price Competition, Innovation and Profitability: Theory and UK Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 2816, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    16. Kenneth S. Corts, 2000. "Focused Firms and the Incentive to Innovate," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 339-362, June.
    17. Schankerman, Mark & Schuett, Florian, 2016. "Screening for Patent Quality," CEPR Discussion Papers 11688, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Bettina Peters & Rebecca Riley & Iulia Siedschlag & Priit Vahter & John McQuinn, 2014. "Innovation and Productivity in Services: Evidence from Germany, Ireland and the United Kingdom," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation 2014-04, Joint Research Centre.
    19. Saul Lach & Mark Schankerman, 2008. "Incentives and invention in universities," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(2), pages 403-433, June.
    20. Schankerman, Mark & Lanjouw, Jean, 2001. "Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights," CEPR Discussion Papers 3093, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Patent citations; pharmaceutical industry; persistence in innovation; industrie pharmaceutique; persistance à innover; Citations de brevets;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00113499. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.