Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Intangible and Intellectual Capital: A Review of the Literature

Contents:

Author Info

  • Elizabeth Webster

    ()
    (Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne)

Abstract

This paper reviews theoretical and empirical academic economic studies that discuss what is intangible and intellectual capital and why is it important for society. It begins by discussing issues such as the nature of this capital and how has it changed over time. Subsequently it reviews measures of the importance of intangible and intellectual capital, whether optimal levels of investment in intangible and intellectual capital can be said to exist and, accordingly, whether governments should intervene in the market. On balance, theory favours the view that for reasons associated with uncertainty, non-mortgageability and economies of scale, there is an under-investment in these types of investment. However the extent to which this holds will differ according to the prevalence of uncertainty, non-mortgageability and scale economies for each type of capital item. The most common policies to stimulate the production of intangible capital, especially intellectual capital, are government grants, especially for basic research, patents and other forms of intellectual property, subsidies and research consortia. Optimal policies adjust the incentive to produce so that the marginal costs to society are equal to the marginal benefits.

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.melbourneinstitute.com/downloads/working_paper_series/wp2002n10.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne in its series Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series with number wp2002n10.

as in new window
Length: 48 pages
Date of creation: Jun 2002
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:iae:iaewps:wp2002n10

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne, Victoria 3010 Australia
Phone: +61 3 8344 2100
Fax: +61 3 8344 2111
Email:
Web page: http://www.melbourneinstitute.com/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  2. Geroski, P A, 1991. "Innovation and the Sectoral," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(409), pages 1438-51, November.
  3. Klette, Tor Jakob & Moen, Jarle & Griliches, Zvi, 2000. "Do subsidies to commercial R&D reduce market failures? Microeconometric evaluation studies1," Research Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 471-495, April.
  4. Kahn, J. & Lim, J.S., 1997. "Skilled Labor-Augmenting Technical Progress in U.S. Manufacturing," RCER Working Papers 437, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
  5. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 1995. "Trade in Ideas: Patenting and Productivity in the OECD," NBER Working Papers 5049, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Miller, Paul & Mulvey, Charles & Martin, Nick, 1997. "Family Characteristics and the Returns to Schooling: Evidence on Gender Differences from a Sample of Australian Twins," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 64(253), pages 119-36, February.
  7. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
  8. Maskus, Keith E. & Penubarti, Mohan, 1995. "How trade-related are intellectual property rights?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 227-248, November.
  9. Daron Acemoglu, 1998. "Why Do New Technologies Complement Skills? Directed Technical Change And Wage Inequality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, MIT Press, vol. 113(4), pages 1055-1089, November.
  10. Borland, J., 1995. "Education and the Structure of Earnings in Australia," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series, The University of Melbourne 494, The University of Melbourne.
  11. Adams, James D, 1990. "Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(4), pages 673-702, August.
  12. Charles I. Jones & John C. Williams, . "Measuring the Social Return to R&D," Working Papers, Stanford University, Department of Economics 97002, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
  13. Bronwyn H. Hall & Robert E. Hall, 1993. "The Value and Performance of U.S. Corporations," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 24(1), pages 1-50.
  14. Hall, Bronwyn & Van Reenen, John, 2000. "How effective are fiscal incentives for R&D? A review of the evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 449-469, April.
  15. Martin, Stephen & Scott, John T., 2000. "The nature of innovation market failure and the design of public support for private innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 437-447, April.
  16. Michael Kremer, 1997. "Patent Buy-Outs: A Mechanism for Encouraging Innovation," NBER Working Papers 6304, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  17. Kevin W. Chauvin & Mark Hirschey, 1993. "Advertising, R&D Expenditures and the Market Value of the Firm," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, Financial Management Association, vol. 22(4), Winter.
  18. Dosi, Giovanni, 1988. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 1120-71, September.
  19. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 388-410, April.
  20. Adam B. Jaffe & Michael S. Fogarty & Bruce A. Banks, 1997. "Evidence from Patents and Patent Citations on the Impact of NASA and Other Federal Labs on Commercial Innovation," NBER Working Papers 6044, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  21. Joanna Poyago-Theotoky & John Beath & Donald S. Siegel, 2002. "Universities and Fundamental Research: Reflections on the Growth of University--Industry Partnerships," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 10-21, Spring.
  22. 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.
  23. Lanjouw, Jean O & Pakes, Ariel & Putnam, Jonathan, 1998. "How to Count Patents and Value Intellectual Property: The Uses of Patent Renewal and Application Data," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(4), pages 405-32, December.
  24. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 1996. "Measuring Technology Diffusion and the International Sources of Growth," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 22(4), pages 401-410, Fall.
  25. Irwin, Douglas A. & Klenow, Peter J., 1996. "High-tech R&D subsidies Estimating the effects of Sematech," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-4), pages 323-344, May.
  26. Kortum, Samuel & Lerner, Josh, 1999. "What is behind the recent surge in patenting?1," Research Policy, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-22, January.
  27. Samuel Kortum & Josh Lerner, 1997. "Stronger Protection or Technological Revolution: What is Behind the Recent Surge in Patenting?," NBER Working Papers 6204, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  28. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
  29. Derek Bosworth & Joanne Loundes, 2002. "The Dynamic Performance of Australian Enterprises," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne wp2002n03, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
  30. McGaughey, Sara L. & Liesch, Peter W. & Poulson, Duncan, 2000. "An unconventional approach to intellectual property protection: the case of an Australian firm transferring shipbuilding technologies to China," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-20, April.
  31. M. Ishaq Nadiri, 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 4423, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  32. Jean O. Lanjouw & Ariel Pakes & Jonathan Putnam, 1996. "How to Count Patents and Value Intellectual Property: Uses of Patent Renewal and Application Data," NBER Working Papers 5741, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  33. Pakes, Ariel, 1985. "On Patents, R&D, and the Stock Market Rate of Return," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(2), pages 390-409, April.
  34. Griliches, Zvi, 1990. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 28(4), pages 1661-1707, December.
  35. James A. Kahn & Jong-Soo Lim, 1998. "Skilled Labor-Augmenting Technical Progress In U.S. Manufacturing," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, MIT Press, vol. 113(4), pages 1281-1308, November.
  36. Bosworth, Derek & Rogers, Mark, 2001. "Market Value, R&D and Intellectual Property: An Empirical Analysis of Large Australian Firms," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 77(239), pages 323-37, December.
  37. Richard Levin & Peter C. Reiss, 1984. "Tests of a Schumpeterian Model of R&D and Market Structure," NBER Chapters, in: R & D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 175-208 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  38. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2002. "The Assessment: Technology Policy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 1-9, Spring.
  39. George Symeonidis, 1996. "Innovation, Firm Size and Market Structure: Schumpeterian Hypotheses and Some New Themes," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 161, OECD Publishing.
  40. James Heckman & Hidehiko Ichimura & Jeffrey Smith & Petra Todd, 1998. "Characterizing Selection Bias Using Experimental Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 66(5), pages 1017-1098, September.
  41. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi & Peretto, Pietro, 1997. "Persistence of innovative activities, sectoral patterns of innovation and international technological specialization," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 801-826, October.
  42. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1995. "Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 47-65, February.
  43. Jorgenson, Dale W, 1971. "Econometric Studies of Investment Behavior: A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 1111-47, December.
  44. Nadiri, M.I., 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," Working Papers, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University 93-31, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
  45. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Economics of Invention: A Survey of the Literature," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32, pages 101.
  46. Henry G. Grabowksi & Dennis C. Mueller, 1978. "Industrial Research and Development, Intangible Capital Stocks, and Firm Profit Rates," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 328-343, Autumn.
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. Konstantinos Drakos, 2006. "A note on uncertainty and investment across the spectrum of irreversibility," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(13), pages 873-876.

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:iae:iaewps:wp2002n10. 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: (James Davis).

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.