IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Defensive strategies in quality ladders

  • Ledezma, Ivan

This paper analyses the potentially defensive behaviour of patent-race winners and the ensuing effect on aggregate R&D effort. We propose a quality-ladder model where leaders strategically acquire a technology advantage and are able to innovate. In this context, product-market regulation, by affecting this strategic behaviour, may have either a positive or negative effect on aggregate R&D intensity. The negative effect is likely to pertain in liberal markets, whereas the positive influence arises in more regulated environments, and can be stronger for larger jumps in innovation. These steady-state equilibrium outcomes are consistent with the puzzling patterns in data from manufacturing industries in 14 OECD countries over the 1987–2003 period.

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.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165188912001613
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control.

Volume (Year): 37 (2013)
Issue (Month): 1 ()
Pages: 176-194

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:dyncon:v:37:y:2013:i:1:p:176-194
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jedc

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. Aghion, P. & Howitt, P., 1989. "A Model Of Growth Through Creative Destruction," Working papers 527, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
  2. Alain de Serres & Shuji Kobayakawa & Torsten Sløk & Laura Vartia, 2006. "Regulation of Financial Systems and Economic Growth," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 506, OECD Publishing.
  3. 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.
  4. Park, Walter G., 2008. "International patent protection: 1960-2005," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 761-766, May.
  5. Wesley M Cohen & Richard R Nelson & John P Walsh, 2003. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (Or Not)," Levine's Working Paper Archive 618897000000000624, David K. Levine.
  6. Chol-Won Li, 1998. "Endogenous Growth Without Scale Effects: Comment," Working Papers 9819, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
  7. Crepon, B. & Duguet, E., 1995. "Research and Development, Competition and Innovation; Pseudo Maximum Likelihood and Simulated Maximum Likelihood Methods Applied to Count Data Models with Heterogeneity," Papiers d'Economie Mathématique et Applications 95.08, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
  8. Alwyn Young, 1998. "Growth without Scale Effects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 41-63, February.
  9. Bruno Amable & Lilas Demmou & Ivan Ledezma, 2010. "Product market regulation, innovation, and distance to frontier," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 117-159, February.
  10. Jamasb, Tooraj & Pollitt, Michael G., 2011. "Electricity sector liberalisation and innovation: An analysis of the UK's patenting activities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 309-324, March.
  11. Philippe Aghion & Nicholas Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2002. "Competition and innovation: an inverted U relationship," IFS Working Papers W02/04, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  12. 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, vol. 15(6), pages 801-826, October.
  13. Segerstrom, Paul S, 1998. "Endogenous Growth without Scale Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1290-1310, December.
  14. Paul S. Segerstrom, 2007. "Intel Economics," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(1), pages 247-280, 02.
  15. Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 1999. "Technological entry, exit and survival: an empirical analysis of patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 643-660, August.
  16. Elias Dinopoulos & Constantinos Syropoulos, 2007. "Rent Protection as a Barrier to Innovation and Growth," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 309-332, August.
  17. Mathias Thoenig & Thierry Verdier, 2003. "A Theory of Defensive Skill-Biased Innovation and Globalization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 709-728, June.
  18. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1989. "Quality Ladders and Product Cycles," NBER Working Papers 3201, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  19. Reinganum, Jennifer F, 1983. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 741-48, September.
  20. Paul Conway & Giuseppe Nicoletti, 2006. "Product Market Regulation in the Non-Manufacturing Sectors of OECD Countries: Measurement and Highlights," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 530, OECD Publishing.
  21. Aghion, Philippe & Harris, Christopher & Vickers, John, 1997. "Competition and growth with step-by-step innovation: An example," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3-5), pages 771-782, April.
  22. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-26, June.
  23. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1989. "Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth," NBER Working Papers 3099, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  24. Federico Etro, 2004. "Innovation by leaders," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(495), pages 281-303, 04.
  25. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth Through Creative Destruction," Scholarly Articles 12490578, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  26. Boone, Jan, 2001. "Intensity of competition and the incentive to innovate," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 705-726, April.
  27. Denicolo, Vincenzo, 2001. "Growth with non-drastic innovations and the persistence of leadership," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1399-1413, August.
  28. Gilbert, Richard J & Newberry, David M G, 1984. "Uncertain Innovation and the Persistence of Monopoly: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(1), pages 238-42, March.
  29. 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.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:dyncon:v:37:y:2013:i:1:p:176-194. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.