IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/innchp/978-1-4614-1272-4_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Policy Propositions

In: Trade in Ideas

Author

Listed:
  • Eskil Ullberg

    (George Mason University)

Abstract

A short discussion is presented in terms of empirical propositions (from laboratory experiments presented in Chaps. 2–4) for the performance of patent institutions in social exchange and market exchange in technology (knowledge). In the economic experiments, the institutional learning that has taken place in history (manifested in the principles of the patent system and national and international regulations and administrative rules) is implemented, at a level of principle, in an economic system design focusing on the (social and market) exchange mechanisms with (transparent) prices and dynamic interaction between specialized agents for invention, intermediary investment (Trader), and innovation (Experiment 1), and willingness to search for incentive compatible (socially preferable) technology focuses through price signals (Experiment 2). The results from these partly heuristic experiments (e.g., probing the design institutions and linear contract) and partly nomothetic experiments (e.g., testing the informal price theory and establishing risk-sharing behavior) add to the institutional learning of proper integration of information and mechanisms/rules measured by dynamic performance and management of risk in pricing, taking into account the behavioral properties of the institutions studied. What we can learn from these experimental results (institutional learning) – through the data they generate and hypothesis that can be tested – in terms of implications to economic development policy (institutional and taxation policy) are summarized as propositions. The fundamental policy question touched upon is how to coordinate what the patent system does (given its current principles and practices) with the purpose of the patent system (exchanging human ideas on the use of the forces of natures in a market for the benefit of society as a whole). Policies on national versus international harmonization are discussed with pricing and coordination mechanisms. An important proposition is that the strength of the patent matters for the incentives to both invest in the protected technology and to trade the technology (allocate to highest bidders). Weak patents are almost systematically used for blocking the use of the patented technology, reducing the competition in technology development and use, contrary to the motivation of the patent system which has, as discussed, from its conception been growth in economically useful (i.e., nonmilitary) technology from social and market exchange in technology. The greater information content of these impersonal auctions (compared to personal exchange) generates rich message history (and not only an outcome history) in which strategic behavior of both buyers and sellers can be observed, useful for further institutional design. Market mechanism that allows buyers to independently and simultaneously express the blocking and investment values, yield 100% higher efficiency than sellers posting prices, suggesting that our knowledge of institutional mechanisms may be critical to achieve the purpose of the patent system as a trade system.

Suggested Citation

  • Eskil Ullberg, 2012. "Policy Propositions," Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management, in: Trade in Ideas, chapter 0, pages 151-158, Springer.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:innchp:978-1-4614-1272-4_6
    DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4614-1272-4_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    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:spr:innchp:978-1-4614-1272-4_6. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.