IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lec/leecon/20-03.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Stronger Patents Lead to Faster Innovation? The Effect of Duplicative Search

Author

Listed:
  • Kaustav Das
  • Nicolas Klein

Abstract

We analyse a model of two firms that are engaged in a patent race. Firms have to choose in continuous time between a traditional and an innovative method of pursuing the decisive breakthrough. They share a common belief about the likelihood of the innovative method being good. The unique Markov perfect equilibrium coincides with the cartel solution if and only if firms are symmetric in their abilities of leveraging a good innovative method or there is no patent protection. Otherwise, equilibrium will entail excessive duplication of efforts in the innovative method, as compared to the cartel benchmark, for any level of patent protection. We show that the expected time to a breakthrough is minimised at an interior level of patent protection, providing a possible explanation for the decrease in R&D productivity sometimes associated with stronger patent protections.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaustav Das & Nicolas Klein, 2020. "Do Stronger Patents Lead to Faster Innovation? The Effect of Duplicative Search," Discussion Papers in Economics 20/03, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    • Handle: RePEc:lec:leecon:20/03
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.le.ac.uk/economics/research/RePEc/lec/leecon/dp20-03.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gustavo Manso, 2011. "Motivating Innovation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(5), pages 1823-1860, October.
    2. Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni & Laura Magazzini, 2010. "The productivity crisis in pharmaceutical R&D," Working Papers 06/2010, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    3. Igor Letina, 2016. "The road not taken: competition and the R&D portfolio," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(2), pages 433-460, May.
    4. Kaustav Das & Nicolas Klein & Katharina Schmid, 2020. "Strategic experimentation with asymmetric players," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 69(4), pages 1147-1175, June.
    5. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    6. Jay Pil Choi & Heiko Gerlach, 2014. "Selection Biases in Complementary R&D Projects," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(4), pages 899-924, December.
    7. James Bessen & Robert M. Hunt, 2007. "An Empirical Look at Software Patents," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 157-189, March.
    8. Tom Lee & Louis L. Wilde, 1980. "Market Structure and Innovation: A Reformulation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 94(2), pages 429-436.
    9. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2009. "Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 611-635, December.
    10. Klein, Nicolas, 2016. "The importance of being honest," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(3), September.
    11. Diana M. Negoescu & Kostas Bimpikis & Margaret L. Brandeau & Dan A. Iancu, 2018. "Dynamic Learning of Patient Response Types: An Application to Treating Chronic Diseases," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3469-3488, August.
    12. 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.
    13. David Besanko & Jianjun Wu, 2013. "The Impact of Market Structure and Learning on the Tradeoff between R&D Competition and Cooperation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 166-201, March.
    14. Kaylan Chatterjee & Robert Evans, 2004. "Rivals' Search for Buried Treasure: Competition and Duplication in R&D," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(1), pages 160-183, Spring.
    15. Bryan, Kevin A. & Lemus, Jorge, 2017. "The direction of innovation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 247-272.
    16. Marina Halac & Navin Kartik & Qingmin Liu, 2016. "Optimal Contracts for Experimentation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 83(3), pages 1040-1091.
    17. Tor Klette & David de Meza, 1986. "Is the Market Biased Against Risky R&D?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 17(1), pages 133-139, Spring.
    18. Yi Qian, 2007. "Do National Patent Laws Stimulate Domestic Innovation in a Global Patenting Environment? A Cross-Country Analysis of Pharmaceutical Patent Protection, 1978-2002," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(3), pages 436-453, August.
    19. Kostas Bimpikis & Shayan Ehsani & Mohamed Mostagir, 2019. "Designing Dynamic Contests," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(2), pages 339-356, March.
    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. Johannes Hoelzemann & Nicolas Klein, 2021. "Bandits in the lab," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 12(3), pages 1021-1051, July.

    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. Jay Pil Choi & Heiko Gerlach, 2014. "Selection Biases in Complementary R&D Projects," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(4), pages 899-924, December.
    2. Rob Aalbers & Victoria Shestalova & Viktoria Kocsis, 2012. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," CPB Discussion Paper 223, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    3. Aalbers, Rob & Shestalova, Victoria & Kocsis, Viktória, 2013. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1240-1250.
    4. Joel Blit & Mauricio Zelaya, 2015. "Do Firms Respond to Stronger Patent Protection by Doing More R&D?," Working Papers 1501, University of Waterloo, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2015.
    5. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2009. "Business And Financial Method Patents, Innovation, And Policy," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 56(4), pages 443-473, September.
    6. Yongmin Chen & Shiyuan Pan & Tianle Zhang, 2018. "Patentability, R&D Direction, And Cumulative Innovation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(4), pages 1969-1993, November.
    7. Rentocchini, Francesco, 2011. "Sources and characteristics of software patents in the European Union: Some empirical considerations," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 141-157, March.
    8. 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.
    9. Bento Pedro, 2021. "Quantifying the Effects of Patent Protection on Innovation, Imitation, Growth, and Aggregate Productivity," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 21(1), pages 1-35, January.
    10. Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Does fragmented or heterogeneous IP ownership stifle investments in innovation?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-096, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    11. 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.
    12. Gamba, Simona, 2017. "The Effect of Intellectual Property Rights on Domestic Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Sector," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 15-27.
    13. Elizabeth Webster & Paul H. Jensen, 2011. "Do Patents Matter for Commercialization?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(2), pages 431-453.
    14. Silvana Krasteva, 2014. "Imperfect Patent Protection and Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 62(4), pages 682-708, December.
    15. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107687899, January.
    16. Chen, Yongmin & Pan, Shiyuan & Zhang, Tianle, 2014. "(When) Do stronger patents increase continual innovation?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 115-124.
    17. Larry D. Qiu & Huayang Yu, 2010. "Does the Protection of Foreign Intellectual Property Rights Stimulate Innovation in the US?," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(5), pages 882-895, November.
    18. Alessandro Spiganti, 2022. "Wealth Inequality and the Exploration of Novel Alternatives," Working Papers 2022:02, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    19. Michael Noel & Mark Schankerman, 2013. "Strategic Patenting and Software Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 481-520, September.
    20. Heidi L. Williams, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from Health Care Markets," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 53-87.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    R&D competition; Duplication; Two-armed Bandit; Learning;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives

    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:lec:leecon:20/03. 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: Abbie Sleath (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deleiuk.html .

    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.