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

Does intellectual monopoly stimulate or stifle innovation?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Chu, Angus C.
  • Cozzi, Guido
  • Galli, Silvia

Abstract

This study develops an R&D-based growth model that features both vertical and horizontal innovation to shed some light on the current debate on whether patent protection stimulates or stifles innovation. Specifically, we analyze the growth and welfare effects of patent protection in the form of profit division between sequential innovators along the quality ladder. We show that patent protection has asymmetric effects on vertical innovation (i.e., quality improvement) and horizontal innovation (i.e., variety expansion). Maximizing the incentives for vertical (horizontal) innovation requires a profit-division rule that assigns the entire flow profit to the entrant (incumbent) of a quality ladder. In light of this finding, we argue that in order to properly analyze the growth and welfare implications of patent protection, it is important to disentangle its different effects on vertical and horizontal innovation.

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://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/29061/
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

File URL: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/36266/
File Function: revised version
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 29061.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: Nov 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:29061

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: economic growth; innovation; intellectual property rights;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

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. Ryo Horii & Tatsuro Iwaisako, 2005. "Economic Growth with Imperfect Protection of Intellectual Property Rights," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 05-23-Rev., Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics and Osaka School of International Public Policy (OSIPP), revised Apr 2006.
  2. Charles I. Jones & John C. Williams, . "Too Much of a Good Thing? The Economics of Investment in R&D," Working Papers 96005, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
  3. Daron Acemoglu & Ufuk Akcigit, 2012. "Intellectual Property Rights Policy, Competition And Innovation," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 1-42, 02.
  4. Cozzi, Guido, 2005. "Animal spirits and the composition of innovation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 627-637, April.
  5. O'Donoghue, Ted & Zweimüller, Josef, 1998. "Patents in a Model of Endogenous Growth," Economics Series 56, Institute for Advanced Studies.
  6. Gene M Grossman & Edwin L Lai, 2004. "International Protection of Intellectual Property," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000000442, David K. Levine.
  7. Dinopoulos, Elias & Thompson, Peter, 1998. " Schumpeterian Growth without Scale Effects," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 313-35, December.
  8. Philippe Aghion & Peter Howitt, 1990. "A Model of Growth Through Creative Destruction," NBER Working Papers 3223, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  9. Hans Gersbach & Gerhard Sorger & Christian Amon, 2009. "Hirarchical Growth: Basic and Applied Research," Vienna Economics Papers 0912, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
  10. Carl Shapiro, 2003. "Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard-Setting," Law and Economics 0303005, EconWPA.
  11. Park, Walter G., 2008. "International patent protection: 1960-2005," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 761-766, May.
  12. Nancy Gallini & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2002. "Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2, pages 51-78 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  13. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1991. "Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(1), pages 43-61, January.
  14. Hall, Bronwyn H & Jaffe, Adam B & Trajtenberg, Manuel, 2001. "The NBER Patent Citations Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," CEPR Discussion Papers 3094, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  15. Michele Boldrin & David K Levine, 2008. "Against Intellectual Monopoly," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000002371, UCLA Department of Economics.
  16. Judd, Kenneth L, 1985. "On the Performance of Patents," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(3), pages 567-85, May.
  17. Cozzi, Guido, 2001. " Inventing or Spying? Implications for Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 55-77, March.
  18. Li, Chol-Won, 2001. "On the Policy Implications of Endogenous Technological Progress," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(471), pages C164-79, May.
  19. Eicher, Theo & García-Peñalosa, Cecilia, 2008. "Endogenous strength of intellectual property rights: Implications for economic development and growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 237-258, February.
  20. Federico Etro, 2007. "Stackelberg competition with endogenous entry," Working Papers 121, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised 2007.
  21. Elias Dinopoulos & Peter Thompson, 1999. "Scale effects in Schumpeterian models of economic growth," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 157-185.
  22. Petra Moser, 2005. "How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth-Century World's Fairs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1214-1236, September.
  23. Charles I. Jones, 1999. "Growth: With or Without Scale Effects?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(2), pages 139-144, May.
  24. Daron Acemoglu & Ufuk Akcigit, 2006. "State-Dependent Intellectual Property Rights Policy," NBER Working Papers 12775, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  25. Cozzi, Guido & Galli, Silvia, 2011. "Upstream innovation protection: common law evolution and the dynamics of wage inequality," MPRA Paper 31902, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  26. Segerstrom, Paul S & Anant, T C A & Dinopoulos, Elias, 1990. "A Schumpeterian Model of the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1077-91, December.
  27. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth Through Creative Destruction," Scholarly Articles 12490578, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  28. Gilles Koléda, 2004. "Patents' novelty requirement and endogenous growth," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 0(2), pages 201-221.
  29. 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.
  30. James Bessen & Michael J. Meurer, 2008. "Introduction to Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk
    [Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk]
    ," Introductory Chapters, Princeton University Press.
  31. Furukawa, Yuichi, 2007. "The protection of intellectual property rights and endogenous growth: Is stronger always better?," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(11), pages 3644-3670, November.
  32. Peretto, Pietro F, 1998. " Technological Change and Population Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 283-311, December.
  33. Thompson, Peter, 1996. "Technological Opportunity and the Growth of Knowledge: A Schumpeterian Approach to Measurement," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 77-97, February.
  34. Cozzi Guido, 2007. "The Arrow Effect under Competitive R&D," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-20, January.
  35. Adam B. Jaffe, 1999. "The U.S. Patent System in Transition: Policy Innovation and the Innovation Process," NBER Working Papers 7280, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  36. Cozzi, Guido & Giordani, Paolo E. & Zamparelli, Luca, 2007. "The refoundation of the symmetric equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 788-797, September.
  37. Pietro Peretto & Sjak Smulders, 2002. "Technological Distance, Growth And Scale Effects," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(481), pages 603-624, July.
  38. Futagami, Koichi & Iwaisako, Tatsuro, 2007. "Dynamic analysis of patent policy in an endogenous growth model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 306-334, January.
  39. 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.
  40. Alwyn Young, 1998. "Growth without Scale Effects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 41-63, February.
  41. Horowitz, Andrew W & Lai, Edwin L-C, 1996. "Patent Length and the Rate of Innovation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(4), pages 785-801, November.
  42. 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(04), pages 955-969, June.
  43. Cozzi, Guido & Spinesi, Luca, 2006. "Intellectual Appropriability, Product Differentiation, And Growth," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(01), pages 39-55, February.
  44. Ginarte, Juan C. & Park, Walter G., 1997. "Determinants of patent rights: A cross-national study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 283-301, October.
  45. Mukesh Eswaran & Nancy Gallini, 1996. "Patent Policy and the Direction of Technological Change," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 27(4), pages 722-746, Winter.
  46. Peter Howitt, 1999. "Steady Endogenous Growth with Population and R & D Inputs Growing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(4), pages 715-730, August.
  47. Ilya Segal & Michael D. Whinston, 2007. "Antitrust in Innovative Industries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1703-1730, December.
  48. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1996. " Research and Development in the Growth Process," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 49-73, March.
  49. Federico Etro, 2004. "Innovation by leaders," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 281-303, 04.
  50. Peretto, Pietro F., 1999. "Cost reduction, entry, and the interdependence of market structure and economic growth," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 173-195, 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. Angus C.Chu & Yuichi Furukawa & Lei Ji, 2013. "Patents RD subsidies and endogenous market structure in a Schumpeterian economy," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2013-19, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
  2. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," IDEI Working Papers 821, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
  3. Gurrieri, Antonia Rosa, 2013. "Networking entrepreneurs," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 193-204.
  4. Shiyuan Pan & Mengbo Zhang & Heng-fu Zou, 2013. "The Effects of Patent Protection: A Growth Model with Status Preference," CEMA Working Papers 574, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
  5. Cozzi, Guido & Galli, Silvia, 2013. "Sequential R&D and Blocking Patents in the Dynamics of Growth," Economics Working Paper Series 1305, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
  6. Shiyuan Pan & Mengbo Zhang & Heng-fu Zou, 2011. "Patent Protection, Financial Development and Economic Growth," CEMA Working Papers 589, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
  7. Richard M. H. Suen, 2013. "Research Policy and U.S. Economic Growth," Working papers 2013-18, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
  8. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Galli, Silvia, 2013. "Theory and Empirics of Stage-Dependent Intellectual Property Rights," Economics Working Paper Series 1306, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
  9. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2014. "The Lindahl Equilibrium in Schumpeterian Growth Models: Knowledge Diffusion, Social Value of Innovations and Optimal R&D Incentives," CESifo Working Paper Series 4678, CESifo Group Munich.
  10. Guido Cozzi & Silvia Galli, 2014. "Sequential R&D and blocking patents in the dynamics of growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 183-219, June.
  11. Chu, Angus C. & Furukawa, Yuichi, 2012. "Patents versus R&D subsidies in a Schumpeterian growth model with endogenous market structure," MPRA Paper 40469, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  12. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Galli, Silvia, 2014. "Stage-dependent intellectual property rights," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 239-249.
  13. Angus Chu & Guido Cozzi & Chih-Hsing Liao, 2013. "Endogenous fertility and human capital in a Schumpeterian growth model," Journal of Population Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 181-202, January.
  14. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," TSE Working Papers 14-469, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
  15. Furukawa, Yuichi, 2013. "The Struggle to Survive in the R&D Sector: Implications for Innovation and Growth," MPRA Paper 47728, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  16. Shiyuan Pan & Mengbo Zhang & Heng-fu Zou, 2011. "Status Preference and the Effects of Patent Protection: Theory and Evidence," CEMA Working Papers 588, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
  17. Davis, Lewis S. & Şener, Fuat, 2012. "Private patent protection in the theory of Schumpeterian growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(7), pages 1446-1460.

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:pra:mprapa:29061. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht).

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.