IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fip/fedpbr/y1999inovp15-29.html

Patent reform: a mixed blessing for the U.S. economy?

Author

Listed:
  • Robert M. Hunt

Abstract

The 1980s represented a period of dramatic change in the design and enforcement of U.S. intellectual property law. Many of these changes were adopted in the hopes of stimulating private research and development and improving the technological competitiveness of American industries. This article examines the effects of an especially important aspect of these changes: many more inventions qualify for patent protection than before. While it seems logical that making patents easier to obtain will encourage more inventive activity, economic analysis reveals this is not always true, and it is less likely to be true in industries that innovate rapidly.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert M. Hunt, 1999. "Patent reform: a mixed blessing for the U.S. economy?," Business Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, issue Nov, pages 15-29.
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedpbr:y:1999:i:nov:p:15-29
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.philadelphiafed.org/-/media/frbp/assets/economy/articles/business-review/1999/november-december/brnd99rh.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mansfield, Edwin & Schwartz, Mark & Wagner, Samuel, 1981. "Imitation Costs and Patents: An Empirical Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(364), pages 907-918, December.
    2. Hall, B.H., 1999. "Innovation and Market Value," Economics Papers 1999-w3, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    3. Zvi Griliches, 1984. "R&D, Patents, and Productivity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number gril84-1, January-J.
    4. Kortum, Samuel & Lerner, Josh, 1999. "What is behind the recent surge in patenting?1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-22, January.
    5. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Robert M. Hunt, 1999. "Nonobviousness and the incentive to innovate: an economic analysis of intellectual property reform," Working Papers 99-3, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    8. Leonard I. Nakamura, 1999. "Intangibles: what put the new in the new economy?," Business Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, issue Jul, pages 3-16.
    9. Pakes, Ariel, 1985. "On Patents, R&D, and the Stock Market Rate of Return," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(2), pages 390-409, April.
    10. Charles I. Jones & John C. Williams, 1998. "Measuring the Social Return to R&D," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(4), pages 1119-1135.
    11. Mark Schankerman, 1998. "How Valuable is Patent Protection? Estimates by Technology Field," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(1), pages 77-107, Spring.
    12. Ted O'Donoghue, 1998. "A Patentability Requirement for Sequential Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(4), pages 654-679, Winter.
    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. Adam P. Balcerzak & Elżbieta Rogalska, 2011. "The Significance of Intellectual Protection Rights System in the Knowledge Based Economy," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 27.
    2. Robert M. Hunt, 2004. "Patentability, Industry Structure, and Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 401-425, September.

    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. Jaffe, Adam B., 2000. "The U.S. patent system in transition: policy innovation and the innovation process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 531-557, April.
    2. Austin, David, 2000. "Patents, Spillovers and Competition in Biotechnology," RFF Working Paper Series dp-00-53, Resources for the Future.
    3. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2007. "Patents only live twice: a patent survival analysis in Europe," Working Papers CEB 07-028.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Elizabeth Webster, 2002. "Intangible and Intellectual Capital: A Review of the Literature," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2002n10, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    5. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," 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 129-213, Elsevier.
    6. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    7. Blazsek, Szabolcs & Escribano, Alvaro, 2010. "Knowledge spillovers in US patents: A dynamic patent intensity model with secret common innovation factors," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 159(1), pages 14-32, November.
    8. 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.
    9. Popp, David & Newell, Richard, 2012. "Where does energy R&D come from? Examining crowding out from energy R&D," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(4), pages 980-991.
    10. Yongqiang Gao & Jian Wu & Taïeb Hafsi, 2017. "The Inverted U‐Shaped Relationship between Corporate Philanthropy and Spending on Research and Development: A Case of Complementarity and Competition Moderated by Firm Size and Visibility," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(6), pages 465-477, November.
    11. 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.
    12. Nikulainen, Tuomo & Pajarinen, Mika & Palmberg, Christopher, 2005. "Patents and Technological Change - A Review with Focus on the FEPOCI Database," Discussion Papers 984, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    13. Blazsek, Szabolcs & Escribano, Álvaro, 2012. "Patents, secret innovations and firm's rate of return : differential effects of the innovation leader," UC3M Working papers. Economics we1202, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    14. Antonio Cubel & Vicente Esteve & Maria Teresa Sanchis & Juan A. Sanchis-Llopis, 2014. "The effect of foreign and domestic patents on total factor productivity during the second half of the 20th century," Working Papers 06/14, Instituto Universitario de Análisis Económico y Social.
    15. Andrew Eckert & Corinne Langinier & Long Zhao, 2022. "Determinants of locational patenting behavior of Canadian firms," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(4), pages 268-291, May.
    16. Ufuk Akcigit, 2009. "Firm Size, Innovation Dynamics and Growth," 2009 Meeting Papers 1267, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    17. Deepak Somaya & Ian O. Williamson & Xiaomeng Zhang, 2007. "Combining Patent Law Expertise with R&D for Patenting Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(6), pages 922-937, December.
    18. Bosch, Mariano & Lederman, Daniel & Maloney, William F., 2005. "Patenting and research and development : a global view," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3739, The World Bank.
    19. Jean Olson Lanjouw, 1993. "Patent Protection: Of What Value and for How Long?," NBER Working Papers 4475, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Hagedoorn, John & Cloodt, Myriam, 2003. "Measuring innovative performance: is there an advantage in using multiple indicators?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(8), pages 1365-1379, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    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:fip:fedpbr:y:1999:i:nov:p:15-29. 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: Beth Paul (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbphus.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.