IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/red/issued/17-109.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effects of Patents versus R&D subsidies on Income Inequality

Author

Listed:
  • Angus Chu

    (Fudan University)

  • Guido Cozzi

    (University of St. Gallen)

Abstract

This study explores the effects of patent protection and R&D subsidies on economic growth and income inequality using a Schumpeterian growth model with heterogeneous households. We find that although strengthening patent protection and raising R&D subsidies have the same macroeconomic effect of stimulating economic growth, they have drastically different microeconomic implications on income inequality. Specifically, strengthening patent protection increases income inequality whereas raising R&D subsidies decreases (increases) it if the quality step size is sufficiently small (large). An empirically realistic quality step size is smaller than the threshold, implying a negative effect of R&D subsidies on income inequality. We also calibrate the model to provide a quantitative analysis and find that strengthening patent protection causes a moderate increase in income inequality and a negligible increase in consumption inequality whereas raising R&D subsidies causes a relatively large decrease in both income inequality and consumption inequality. (Copyright: Elsevier)

Suggested Citation

  • Angus Chu & Guido Cozzi, 2018. "Effects of Patents versus R&D subsidies on Income Inequality," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 29, pages 68-84, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:red:issued:17-109
    DOI: 10.1016/j.red.2017.12.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.red.2017.12.006
    Download Restriction: Access to full texts is restricted to ScienceDirect subscribers and institutional members. See http://www.sciencedirect.com/ for details.

    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. 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.
    2. Reto Foellmi & Josef Zweimuller, 2006. "Income Distribution and Demand-Induced Innovations," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 73(4), pages 941-960.
    3. Ryo Horii & Tatsuro Iwaisako, 2007. "Economic Growth with Imperfect Protection of Intellectual Property Rights," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 45-85, January.
    4. Daniel Garcia-Macia & Chang-Tai Hsieh & Peter J. Klenow, 2016. "How Destructive is Innovation?," NBER Working Papers 22953, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    6. 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, February.
    7. Belo, Frederico & Gala, Vito D. & Li, Jun, 2013. "Government spending, political cycles, and the cross section of stock returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 305-324.
    8. Zeng, Jinli & Zhang, Jie, 2007. "Subsidies in an R&D growth model with elastic labor," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 861-886, March.
    9. Laitner, John & Stolyarov, Dmitriy, 2004. "Aggregate returns to scale and embodied technical change: theory and measurement using stock market data," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 191-233, January.
    10. A. B. Atkinson, 2003. "Income Inequality in OECD Countries: Data and Explanations," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo, vol. 49(4), pages 479-513.
    11. Kiedaisch, Christian, 2015. "Intellectual property rights in a quality-ladder model with persistent leadership," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 194-213.
    12. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1991. "Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 58(1), pages 43-61.
    13. repec:ucp:jpolec:doi:10.1086/699190 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Reed, Deborah & Cancian, Maria, 2001. "Sources of Inequality: Measuring the Contributions of Income Sources to Rising Family Income Inequality," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 47(3), pages 321-333, September.
    15. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    16. Venturini, Francesco, 2012. "Looking into the black box of Schumpeterian growth theories: An empirical assessment of R&D races," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(8), pages 1530-1545.
    17. Hwan C. Lin, 2015. "Creative Destruction and Optimal Patent Life in a Variety-Expanding Growth Model," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 803-828, January.
    18. Giammario Impullitti, 2010. "International Competition And U.S. R&D Subsidies: A Quantitative Welfare Analysis," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 51(4), pages 1127-1158, November.
    19. Anthony B. Atkinson, 2000. "The Changing Distribution of Income: Evidence and Explanations," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 1(1), pages 3-18, February.
    20. Richard Gilbert & Carl Shapiro, 1990. "Optimal Patent Length and Breadth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 106-112, Spring.
    21. Francisco L. Rivera-Batiz & Luis A. Rivera-Batiz, 2018. "Economic Integration and Endogenous Growth," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: International Trade, Capital Flows and Economic Development, chapter 1, pages 3-32 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    22. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Galli, Silvia, 2012. "Does intellectual monopoly stimulate or stifle innovation?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 727-746.
    23. Daron Acemoglu, 1998. "Why Do New Technologies Complement Skills? Directed Technical Change and Wage Inequality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 113(4), pages 1055-1089.
    24. Richard Blundell & Luigi Pistaferri & Ian Preston, 2008. "Consumption Inequality and Partial Insurance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 1887-1921, December.
    25. 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.
    26. Hwan C. Lin, 2002. "Shall the Northern Optimal R&D Subsidy Rate Inversely Respond to Southern Intellectual Property Protection?," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 69(2), pages 381-397, October.
    27. Diego Comin, 2004. "R&D: A Small Contribution to Productivity Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 391-421, December.
    28. Dirk Krueger & Fabrizio Perri, 2006. "Does Income Inequality Lead to Consumption Inequality? Evidence and Theory -super-1," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 73(1), pages 163-193.
    29. Daron Acemoglu, 2002. "Directed Technical Change," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(4), pages 781-809.
    30. 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.
    31. Charles I. Jones & John C. Williams, 1998. "Measuring the Social Return to R&D," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 113(4), pages 1119-1135.
    32. Santiago Budria Rodriguez & Javier Diaz-Gimenez & Vincenzo Quadrini & Jose-Victor Rios-Rull, 2002. "Updated facts on the U.S. distributions of earnings, income, and wealth," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, issue Sum, pages 2-35.
    33. Tatsuro Iwaisako & Koichi Futagami, 2013. "Patent protection, capital accumulation, and economic growth," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(2), pages 631-668, March.
    34. Chou, Chien-Fu & Talmain, Gabriel, 1996. "Redistribution and Growth: Pareto Improvements," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 1(4), pages 505-523, December.
    35. Angus C. Chu, 2010. "Effects of Patent Policy on Income and Consumption Inequality in a R&D Growth Model," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 77(2), pages 336-350, October.
    36. repec:wly:emetrp:v:86:y:2018:i:1:p:37-83 is not listed on IDEAS
    37. Shiyuan Pan & Tailong Li & Heng-fu Zou, 2012. "Patent Protection, Technological Change and Wage Inequality: Theory," CEMA Working Papers 537, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
    38. Yibai Yang, 2018. "On the Optimality of IPR Protection with Blocking Patents," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 27, pages 205-230, January.
    39. Chu, Angus C., 2011. "The welfare cost of one-size-fits-all patent protection," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 876-890, June.
    40. 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.
    41. Cecilia García-Peñalosa & Stephen Turnovsky, 2006. "Growth and income inequality: a canonical model," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 28(1), pages 25-49, May.
    42. Boldrin,Michele & Levine,David K., 2010. "Against Intellectual Monopoly," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521127264.
    43. Peretto, Pietro F, 1998. "Technological Change and Population Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 283-311, December.
    44. Spinesi Luca, 2011. "Probabilistic Heterogeneous Patent Protection and Innovation Incentives," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-44, August.
    45. 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.
    46. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    47. Brown, James R. & Martinsson, Gustav & Petersen, Bruce C., 2017. "What promotes R&D? Comparative evidence from around the world," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 447-462.
    48. 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.
    49. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 2018. "Growth, Trade, and Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(1), pages 37-83, January.
    50. John Laitner & Dmitriy Stolyarov, 2013. "Derivative Ideas And The Value Of Intangible Assets," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 54(1), pages 59-95, February.
    51. Minniti, Antonio & Venturini, Francesco, 2017. "The long-run growth effects of R&D policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 316-326.
    52. James Bessen & Michael J. Meurer, 2008. "Introduction to Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk," Introductory Chapters,in: Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk Princeton University Press.
    53. Adams, Samuel, 2008. "Globalization and income inequality: Implications for intellectual property rights," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 725-735.
    54. Charles I. Jones & Jihee Kim, 2018. "A Schumpeterian Model of Top Income Inequality," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(5), pages 1785-1826.
    55. 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 1077-1091, December.
    56. 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.
    57. Christian Kiedaisch, 2016. "Growth and welfare effects of intellectual property rights when consumers differ in income," ECON - Working Papers 221, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Jul 2017.
    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. repec:eee:eecrev:v:111:y:2019:i:c:p:191-210 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:red:issued:18-328 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Chu, Angus C. & Wang, Xilin, 2019. "Effects of R&D Subsidies in a Hybrid Model of Endogenous Growth and Semi-Endogenous Growth," MPRA Paper 94620, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Chen, Ping-ho & Chu, Angus C. & Chu, Hsun & Lai, Ching-Chong, 2019. "Optimal Capital Taxation in an Economy with Innovation-Driven Growth," MPRA Paper 92319, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Angus C. Chu & Guido Cozzi & Haichao Fang & Yuichi Furukawa & Chih-Hsing Liao, 2019. "Innovation and Inequality in a Monetary Schumpeterian Model with Heterogeneous Households and Firms," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 34, pages 141-164, October.
    6. Aysun, Uluc & Kabukcuoglu, Zeynep, 2019. "Interest rates, R&D investment and the distortionary effects of R&D incentives," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 191-210.
    7. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Furukawa, Yuichi & Liao, Chih-Hsing, 2018. "Should the Government Subsidize Innovation or Automation?," MPRA Paper 88276, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    R&D subsidies; Patents; Income inequality; Economic growth;

    JEL classification:

    • D30 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - General
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - General

    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:red:issued:17-109. 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: (Christian Zimmermann). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/sedddea.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.