IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/108009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Growth and Welfare Effects of Interventions in Patent Licensing Negotiations

Author

Listed:
  • Kishimoto, Shin
  • Suzuki, Keishun

Abstract

Policy makers sometimes intervene in patent licensing negotiations to guide licensing fees, but the impacts of such interventions on economic growth and welfare are relatively unknown. This paper develops a novel Schumpeterian growth model featuring a cooperative game-theoretic framework that describes negotiations about licensing fees. We find that the growth effect of intervention is negative if firms can raise unlimited external funds for their R&D investment. However, when the amount of external funds available is limited, both the growth and the welfare effects of intervention can be positive. This result means that interventions are desirable when the internal funds of firms are the main source of their R&D investment.

Suggested Citation

  • Kishimoto, Shin & Suzuki, Keishun, 2021. "Growth and Welfare Effects of Interventions in Patent Licensing Negotiations," MPRA Paper 108009, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:108009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/108009/1/MPRA_paper_108009.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tanaka, Hitoshi & Iwaisako, Tatsuro & Futagami, Koichi, 2007. "Dynamic analysis of innovation and international transfer of technology through licensing," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 189-212, September.
    2. Aamir Rafique Hashmi, 2013. "Competition and Innovation: The Inverted-U Relationship Revisited," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(5), pages 1653-1668, December.
    3. Mitsuru Igami, 2017. "Estimating the Innovator’s Dilemma: Structural Analysis of Creative Destruction in the Hard Disk Drive Industry, 1981–1998," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(3), pages 798-847.
    4. Jones, Charles I & Williams, John C, 2000. "Too Much of a Good Thing? The Economics of Investment in R&D," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 65-85, March.
    5. Sen, Debapriya & Tauman, Yair, 2007. "General licensing schemes for a cost-reducing innovation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 163-186, April.
    6. Carol A. Robbins, 2009. "Measuring Payments for the Supply and Use of Intellectual Property," NBER Chapters, in: International Trade in Services and Intangibles in the Era of Globalization, pages 139-171, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Mariko Sakakibara, 2010. "An empirical analysis of pricing in patent licensing contracts," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(3), pages 927-945, June.
    8. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Lerner, Josh, 2010. "The Financing of R&D and Innovation," 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 609-639, Elsevier.
    9. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Galli, Silvia, 2012. "Does intellectual monopoly stimulate or stifle innovation?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 727-746.
    10. AUMANN, Robert J. & DREZE, Jacques H., 1974. "Cooperative games with coalition structures," LIDAM Reprints CORE 217, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    11. Angus Chu, 2009. "Effects of blocking patents on R&D: a quantitative DGE analysis," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 55-78, March.
    12. Myers, Stewart C. & Majluf, Nicholas S., 1984. "Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 187-221, June.
    13. Yang, Lei & Maskus, Keith E., 2009. "Intellectual property rights, technology transfer and exports in developing countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 231-236, November.
    14. Sumiko Niwa, 2018. "Effects of a blocking patent on R&D with endogenous survival activities," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 125(3), pages 263-277, November.
    15. Naoki Watanabe & Shigeo Muto, 2008. "Stable profit sharing in a patent licensing game: general bargaining outcomes," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 37(4), pages 505-523, December.
    16. Chin-Sheng Chen, 2017. "Endogenous Market Structure and Technology Licensing," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 68(1), pages 115-130, March.
    17. Park, Walter G., 2008. "International patent protection: 1960-2005," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 761-766, May.
    18. Yibai Yang, 2018. "On the Optimality of IPR Protection with Blocking Patents," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 27, pages 205-230, January.
    19. Yuandi Wang & Zhao Zhou & Jason Li-Ying, 2013. "The impact of licensed-knowledge attributes on the innovation performance of licensee firms: evidence from the Chinese electronic industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 38(5), pages 699-715, October.
    20. Stewart C. Myers & Nicholas S. Majluf, 1984. "Corporate Financing and Investment Decisions When Firms Have InformationThat Investors Do Not Have," NBER Working Papers 1396, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Chu, Angus C. & Pan, Shiyuan, 2013. "The Escape-Infringement Effect Of Blocking Patents On Innovation And Economic Growth," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(4), pages 955-969, June.
    22. Anne Layne-Farrar & A. Jorge Padilla & Richard Schmalensee, 2007. "Pricing Patents for Licensing in Standard Setting Organizations: Making Sense of FRAND Commitments," Working Papers wp2007_0702, CEMFI.
    23. Suzuki, Keishun, 2020. "Patent Protection, Optimal Licensing, And Innovation With Endogenous Entry," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(8), pages 2033-2059, December.
    24. Morton I. Kamien & Yair Tauman, 1986. "Fees Versus Royalties and the Private Value of a Patent," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(3), pages 471-491.
    25. Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), 2010. "Handbook of the Economics of Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    26. 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.
    27. Niwa, Sumiko, 2016. "Patent claims and economic growth," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 377-381.
    28. Chin-Sheng Chen, 2017. "Endogenous Market Structure and Technology Licensing," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 115-130, March.
    29. Yang, Guifang & Maskus, Keith E., 2001. "Intellectual property rights, licensing, and innovation in an endogenous product-cycle model," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 169-187, February.
    30. Yair Tauman & Naoki Watanabe, 2007. "The Shapley Value of a Patent Licensing Game: the Asymptotic Equivalence to Non-cooperative Results," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 30(1), pages 135-149, January.
    31. Kishimoto, Shin & Watanabe, Naoki & Muto, Shigeo, 2011. "Bargaining outcomes in patent licensing: Asymptotic results in a general Cournot market," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 114-123, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Suzuki, Keishun, 2020. "Patent Protection, Optimal Licensing, And Innovation With Endogenous Entry," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 24(8), pages 2033-2059, December.
    2. Chu, Angus, 2021. "Macroeconomic Effects of Intellectual Property Rights: An Updated Survey," MPRA Paper 110839, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Lu, You-Xun, 2022. "Interactive effects of monetary policy and patent protection: The role of endogenous innovation size," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    4. Angus C. Chu, 2022. "Patent policy and economic growth: A survey," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 90(2), pages 237-254, March.
    5. Klein, Michael A., 2022. "The reward and contract theories of patents in a model of endogenous growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    6. Suzuki, Keishun, 2020. "Patent Puzzle, Inflation, and Internal Financial Constraint," MPRA Paper 101937, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Hirai, Toshiyuki & Watanabe, Naoki, 2018. "von Neumann–Morgenstern stable sets of a patent licensing game: The existence proof," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 1-12.
    8. Hu, Mei-Ying & Lu, You-Xun & Lai, Ching-chong, 2023. "Patent term extensions and commercialization lags in the pharmaceutical industry: A growth-theoretic analysis," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    9. Michael Klein & Yibai Yang, 2024. "Blocking Patents, Rent Protection and Economic Growth"," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 52, pages 1-20, April.
    10. Sudipto Bhattacharya & Claude d’Aspremont & Sergei Guriev & Debapriya Sen & Yair Tauman, 2014. "Cooperation in R&D: Patenting, Licensing, and Contracting," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Kalyan Chatterjee & William Samuelson (ed.), Game Theory and Business Applications, edition 2, chapter 0, pages 265-286, Springer.
    11. Angus C. Chu & Guido Cozzi & Haichao Fan & Shiyuan Pan & Mengbo Zhang, 2020. "Do Stronger Patents Stimulate or Stifle Innovation? The Crucial Role of Financial Development," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 52(5), pages 1305-1322, August.
    12. Yibai Yang, 2018. "On the Optimality of IPR Protection with Blocking Patents," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 27, pages 205-230, January.
    13. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Galli, Silvia, 2014. "Stage-dependent intellectual property rights," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 239-249.
    14. Kishimoto, Shin, 2013. "Stable bargaining outcomes in patent licensing: A cooperative game approach without side payments," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 183-195.
    15. Hirai, Toshiyuki & Watanabe, Naoki & Muto, Shigeo, 2019. "Farsighted stability in patent licensing: An abstract game approach," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 141-160.
    16. Suzuki, Keishun, 2019. "Corporate Tax Cuts and Economic Growth," MPRA Paper 97829, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Ana Mauleon & Vincent Vannetelbosch & Cecilia Vergari, 2013. "Bargaining and delay in patent licensing," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 9(4), pages 279-302, December.
    18. Kishimoto, Shin & Watanabe, Naoki, 2017. "The kernel of a patent licensing game: The optimal number of licensees," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 37-50.
    19. Zhang, Xiang & Zhou, Han, 2022. "The effect of market competition on corporate cash holdings: An analysis of corporate innovation and financial constraint," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    20. Masahiko Hattori & Yasuhito Tanaka, 2020. "Entry of Innovator and License in Oligopoly," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 20(4), pages 709-731, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Patent licensing negotiations; Schumpeterian growth; Cooperative game; Patent protection; Financial constraints.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C71 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Cooperative Games
    • D45 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Rationing; Licensing
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General

    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:pra:mprapa:108009. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.