IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/jespps/jes-01-2016-0002.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The search for new drugs: a theory of R&D in the pharmaceutical industry

Author

Listed:
  • Massoud Khazabi
  • Nguyen Van Quyen

Abstract

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to use a dynamic model of optimal patent design and, in the presence of information externalities, to study the evolution of technological progress in the context of a pharmaceutical industry. Design/methodology/approach - A theoretical analysis approach is adopted to drive the paper’s findings. Findings - Pharmaceutical firms with an active drug discovery program behave strategically in their R&D and in the product markets. It is shown that a firm holding an earlier-expiring patent only chooses to proceed with R&D activates when the patent it holds expires if the expected discounted payoff net of R&D costs yielded by this action is positive. The expected discounted payoff net of R&D costs obtained by this firm is then decreasing in R&D costs, increasing in the cumulative quality discovered in the past R&D activates, and decreasing in the number of past R&D activities, etc. Originality/value - The preceding literature on the topic works with only one brand, the brand with the highest quality. As well, the demand is assumed to be completely inelastic. In the conventional models of patent design, the role of competitive fringe firms is discussed implicitly. The model presented in this research is a rigorous continuous in-time dynamic model. It considers several differentiated products. Furthermore, the demand for a brand is taken to be a function of income, its price, and the prices of other brands. The interaction of the fringe firm with other patent-holding firms is also explicitly considered under this framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Massoud Khazabi & Nguyen Van Quyen, 2017. "The search for new drugs: a theory of R&D in the pharmaceutical industry," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 44(5), pages 690-726, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:jespps:jes-01-2016-0002
    DOI: 10.1108/JES-01-2016-0002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JES-01-2016-0002/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JES-01-2016-0002/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/JES-01-2016-0002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Arrow, Kenneth J. & Chang, Sheldon, 1982. "Optimal pricing, use, and exploration of uncertain natural resource stocks," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, March.
    2. Suzanne Scotchmer & Jerry Green, 1990. "Novelty and Disclosure in Patent Law," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 131-146, Spring.
    3. Edwin Mansfield, 1984. "R&D and Innovation: Some Empirical Findings," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 127-154, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Tuomas Takalo, 2001. "On the optimal patent policy," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 33-40, Spring.
    5. N. V. Quyen, 1991. "Exhaustible Resources: A Theory of Exploration," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(4), pages 777-789.
    6. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1, March.
    7. Eaton, Jonathan & Kortum, Samuel, 2001. "Technology, trade, and growth: A unified framework," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(4-6), pages 742-755, May.
    8. Tandon, Pankaj, 1982. "Optimal Patents with Compulsory Licensing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(3), pages 470-486, June.
    9. Ted O'Donoghue & Suzanne Scotchmer & Jacques‐François Thisse, 1998. "Patent Breadth, Patent Life, and the Pace of Technological Progress," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(1), pages 1-32, March.
    10. Cairns, Robert D. & Van Quyen, Nguyen, 1998. "Optimal Exploration for and Exploitation of Heterogeneous Mineral Deposits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 164-189, March.
    11. repec:fth:bosecd:110 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Appio, Francesco Paolo & Baglieri, Daniela & Cesaroni, Fabrizio & Spicuzza, Lucia & Donato, Alessia, 2022. "Patent design strategies: Empirical evidence from European patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    2. Emilio Castillo, 2020. "Mineral Exploration and the Discovery of New Deposits," Working Papers 2020-06, Colorado School of Mines, Division of Economics and Business.

    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. Grönqvist, Charlotta, 2009. "Empirical studies on the private value of Finnish patents," Bank of Finland Scientific Monographs, Bank of Finland, volume 0, number sm2009_041.
    2. Grönqvist, Charlotta, 2009. "Empirical studies on the private value of Finnish patents," Scientific Monographs, Bank of Finland, number 2009_041.
    3. Matthew Mitchell, 2000. "Rewarding Sequential Innovators: Patents Prizes and Buyouts," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1650, Econometric Society.
    4. Hugo Hopenhayn & Gerard Llobet & Matthew Mitchell, 2006. "Rewarding Sequential Innovators: Prizes, Patents, and Buyouts," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(6), pages 1041-1068, December.
    5. 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.
    6. Horbulyk, Theodore M., 2000. "Strategy And Incentives In The Compulsory Licensing Of Intellectual Property In Agriculture," Transitions in Agbiotech: Economics of Strategy and Policy, June 24-25, 1999, Washington, D.C. 26011, Regional Research Project NE-165 Private Strategies, Public Policies, and Food System Performance.
    7. Encaoua, David & Guellec, Dominique & Martinez, Catalina, 2006. "Patent systems for encouraging innovation: Lessons from economic analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1423-1440, November.
    8. Luca Lambertini, 2014. "Exploration For Nonrenewable Resources In A Dynamic Oligopoly: An Arrovian Result," International Game Theory Review (IGTR), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(02), pages 1-11.
    9. Christian Riis & Xianwen Shi, 2012. "Sequential Innovation and Optimal Patent Design," Working Papers tecipa-447, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    10. Yang, Xuebing, 2013. "Horizontal inventive step and international protection of intellectual property," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 338-355.
    11. repec:zbw:bofism:2009_041 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Emilio Castillo, 2020. "Mineral Exploration and the Discovery of New Deposits," Working Papers 2020-06, Colorado School of Mines, Division of Economics and Business.
    13. Jakobsson, Kristofer & Söderbergh, Bengt & Snowden, Simon & Li, Chuan-Zhong & Aleklett, Kjell, 2012. "Oil exploration and perceptions of scarcity: The fallacy of early success," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 1226-1233.
    14. Ted O'Donoghue, 1998. "A Patentability Requirement for Sequential Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(4), pages 654-679, Winter.
    15. Jeffrey A. Krautkraemer, 1998. "Nonrenewable Resource Scarcity," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(4), pages 2065-2107, December.
    16. Yuan, Michael Y., 2005. "Does decrease in copying cost support copyright term extension?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 471-494, October.
    17. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity, R&D, and Basic Research at the Firm Level in the 1970s," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 82-99, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Corinne Langinier, 2005. "Using patents to mislead rivals," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 520-545, May.
    19. Aoki, R. & Spiegel, Y., 1998. "Public Disclosure of Patent Applications, R&D, and Welfare," Papers 30-98, Tel Aviv.
    20. Erkal, Nisvan & Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2007. "Scarcity of Ideas and Options to Invest in R&D," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt2hq9s5kg, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    21. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Ham Ziedonis, Rosemarie, 1999. "Patent Paradox Revisited: Determinants of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1980-94," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1rg1088v, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    R&D; Patent; Pharmaceutical industry; Spillovers;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:eme:jespps:jes-01-2016-0002. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.