IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v44y2017i3p341-353..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Invisible Constraints: The Relationship among Non-Competition Agreements, Inventor Mobility, and Patent Commercialization

Author

Listed:
  • Hsini Huang

Abstract

To advance our understanding of the institutional-level influence of intellectual property policies on innovation, this article investigates a set of hypotheses questioning the links between state-level non-competition agreements, inventor mobility, and patent commercialization. It uses US inventor survey data covering a sample of 1,900 triadic patents. Results provide some evidence in support of the prevalent, yet under-researched, proposition that mobile inventors perform better than non-mobile ones in terms of commercialization activity. This article also finds that the severity of judicial enforcement of non-competition agreements has hampered the positive contribution of inventor mobility to invention commercialization and concludes that legal infrastructure is a crucial factor in innovation and invention success stories. Findings, therefore, have considerable policy implications with respect to the role of the judiciary in the enforcement of non-competition agreements.

Suggested Citation

  • Hsini Huang, 2017. "Invisible Constraints: The Relationship among Non-Competition Agreements, Inventor Mobility, and Patent Commercialization," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(3), pages 341-353.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:44:y:2017:i:3:p:341-353.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scw067
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manuel Trajtenberg & Gil Shiff & Ran Melamed, 2009. "The "Names Game": Harnessing Inventors, Patent Data for Economic Research," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 93-94, pages 67-77.
    2. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Ashish Arora & Andrea Fosfuri & Alfonso Gambardella, 2004. "Markets for Technology: The Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262511819, December.
    4. Cockburn, Iain M & Henderson, Rebecca M, 1998. "Absorptive Capacity, Coauthoring Behavior, and the Organization of Research in Drug Discovery," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 157-182, June.
    5. Dirk Fornahl & Christian Zellner & David B. Audretsch (ed.), 2005. "The Role of Labour Mobility and Informal Networks for Knowledge Transfer," International Studies in Entrepreneurship, Springer, number 978-0-387-23140-2, December.
    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. Fiona Murray & Scott Stern, 2005. "Do Formal Intellectual Property Rights Hinder the Free Flow of Scientific Knowledge? An Empirical Test of the Anti-Commons Hypothesis," NBER Working Papers 11465, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Beck, Mathias & Junge, Martin & Kaiser, Ulrich, 2017. "Public Funding and Corporate Innovation," IZA Discussion Papers 11196, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Cappelli, Riccardo & Czarnitzki, Dirk & Kraft, Kornelius, 2014. "Sources of spillovers for imitation and innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 115-120.
    4. Laura Magazzini & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni & Maria Alessandra Rossi, 2009. "Patent disclosure and R&D competition in pharmaceuticals," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(5), pages 467-486.
    5. YoungJun Kim & Nicholas S. Vonortas, 2006. "Determinants of technology licensing: the case of licensors," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 27(4), pages 235-249.
    6. Nicola Lacetera, 2003. "Incentives and spillovers in R&D activities: an agency-theoretic analysis of industry-university relations," Microeconomics 0312004, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Katrin Hussinger, 2012. "Absorptive capacity and post-acquisition inventor productivity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 490-507, August.
    8. Magerman, Tom & Looy, Bart Van & Debackere, Koenraad, 2015. "Does involvement in patenting jeopardize one’s academic footprint? An analysis of patent-paper pairs in biotechnology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(9), pages 1702-1713.
    9. Gamal Atallah, 2004. "The Allocation Of Resources To Cooperative And Noncooperative R&D," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 435-447, December.
    10. David, Paul A. & Hall, Bronwyn H. & Toole, Andrew A., 2000. "Is public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D? A review of the econometric evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 497-529, April.
    11. Anu Wadhwa & Isabel Maria Bodas Freitas & M. B. Sarkar, 2017. "The Paradox of Openness and Value Protection Strategies: Effect of Extramural R&D on Innovative Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 873-896, October.
    12. Matt Marx & Deborah Strumsky & Lee Fleming, 2009. "Mobility, Skills, and the Michigan Non-Compete Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(6), pages 875-889, June.
    13. Effelsberg, Martin, 2011. "Wissenstransfer in Innovationskooperationen: Ergebnisse einer Literaturstudie zur "Absorptive Capacity"," Arbeitspapiere 107, University of Münster, Institute for Cooperatives.
    14. Henry Sauermann & Michael Roach, 2011. "Not All Scientists pay to be Scientists:," DRUID Working Papers 11-03, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    15. Nelson, Andrew J., 2014. "From the ivory tower to the startup garage: Organizational context and commercialization processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1144-1156.
    16. Elena Cefis, 2010. "The impact of M&A on technology sourcing strategies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 27-51.
    17. Cassiman, Bruno & Di Guardo, Maria Chiara & Valentini, Giovanni, 2010. "Organizing links with science: Cooperate or contract?: A project-level analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 882-892, September.
    18. Aaron K. Chatterji & Kira R. Fabrizio, 2016. "Does the market for ideas influence the rate and direction of innovative activity? Evidence from the medical device industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(3), pages 447-465, March.
    19. Leten, Bart & Kelchtermans, Stijn & Belderbos, Ren, 2010. "Internal Basic Research, External Basic Research and the Technological Performance of Pharmaceutical Firms," Working Papers 2010/12, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    20. Leahy, Dermot & Neary, J. Peter, 2007. "Absorptive capacity, R&D spillovers, and public policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 1089-1108, October.

    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:oup:scippl:v:44:y:2017:i:3:p:341-353.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    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.