IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aoz/wpaper/192.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Patent Length and Breadth as Policy Instruments: A Systematic Review of Recent Contributions to the Theory of Optimal Patent Design

Author

Listed:
  • Leandro M. Meller

    (Universidad Nacional del Sur/CONICET)

Abstract

This article offers a systematic review of the last ten years of contributions to the theoretical literature on optimal patent policy, with focus on patent length and breadth as alternative tools for encouraging innovation, growth or welfare improvement. The articles were classified according to their assumptions about the interconnectedness of different innovations. Three cases have been identified: isolated innovations, cumulative innovations (which, in turn, can be divided into ”research tool” and ”qualityladder” cases) and complementary innovations. According to the results, optimal patent length is finite in some models, whereas it is infinite in others. A similar diversity of results was found in models featuring patent breadth: some of them suggest that it should be minimum, others conclude that an intermediate value would be optimal, and others are more prone to favour maximum breadth. Few works seemed to conclude that two or more kinds of soutions were possible. The four kinds of models exhibited, up to a certain degree, this seeming inconsistency. As a consequence, works presenting sufficient conditions for different sorts of optimal solutions have not been found within this period.

Suggested Citation

  • Leandro M. Meller, 2022. "Patent Length and Breadth as Policy Instruments: A Systematic Review of Recent Contributions to the Theory of Optimal Patent Design," Working Papers 192, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    • Handle: RePEc:aoz:wpaper:192
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://rednie.eco.unc.edu.ar/files/DT/192.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tobias Volpert & Marcel Riepe, 2021. "Patentdimensionen und die Entwicklung und Herstellung von Corona-Impfstoffen [Patent Dimensions in the Development and Production of COVID-19 Vaccines]," Wirtschaftsdienst, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 101(5), pages 387-393, May.
    2. Jeon, Haejun, 2019. "Patent protection and R&D subsidy under asymmetric information," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 332-354.
    3. 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.
    4. Bondarev, Anton, 2018. "Does stronger intellectual property rights protection foster structural change? Effects of heterogeneity in innovations," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 26-42.
    5. Zheng, Zhijie & Huang, Chien-Yu & Yang, Yibai, 2020. "Patent protection, innovation, and technology transfer in a Schumpeterian economy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    6. Daniel Spulber, 2021. "The Case for Patents," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 11976, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Diwakar, Bharat & Sorek, Gilad & Stern, Michael, 2021. "Patents And Growth In Olg Economy With Physical Capital," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 489-508, March.
    9. Sam Meng, 2019. "A New Design for the Patent System," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 10(3), pages 1204-1229, September.
    10. Hylton, Keith N. & Zhang, Mengxi, 2017. "Optimal remedies for patent infringement," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 44-57.
    11. Mukherjee, Arijit & Mukherjee, Soma, 2013. "Technology licensing and innovation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(3), pages 499-502.
    12. 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.
    13. Daniel F. Spulber, 2013. "Innovation Economics: The Interplay Among Technology Standards, Competitive Conduct, And Economic Performance," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(4), pages 777-825.
    14. 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.
    15. Anton Bondarev, 2016. "Intensity of R&D competition and the generation of innovations in heterogeneous setting," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 621-653, July.
    16. 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.
    17. Novelli, Elena, 2015. "An examination of the antecedents and implications of patent scope," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 493-507.
    18. Nordhaus, William D, 1972. "The Optimum Life on a Patent: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(3), pages 428-431, June.
    19. Keith N. Hylton & Wendy Xu, 2020. "Error Costs, Ratio Tests, and Patent Antitrust Law," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 56(4), pages 563-591, June.
    20. Ikeda, Takeshi & Tanno, Tadanobu & Yasaki, Yoshihito, 2021. "Optimal intellectual property rights policy by an importing country," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    21. Suzanne Scotchmer, 1991. "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 29-41, Winter.
    22. Leonard F.S. Wang & Arijit Mukherjee, 2014. "Patent Protection, Innovation and Technology Licensing," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3-4), pages 245-254, 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. 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.
    2. Nancy Gallini & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2002. "Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2, pages 51-78, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Jay Pil Choi, 2002. "A Dynamic Analysis of Licensing: The "Boomerang" Effect and Grant-Back Clauses," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 43(3), pages 203-229, August.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Erkal, Nisvan, 2005. "The decision to patent, cumulative innovation, and optimal policy," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(7-8), pages 535-562, September.
    7. Bondarev, Anton, 2018. "Does stronger intellectual property rights protection foster structural change? Effects of heterogeneity in innovations," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 26-42.
    8. 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.
    9. Kiedaisch, Christian, 2015. "Intellectual property rights in a quality-ladder model with persistent leadership," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 194-213.
    10. repec:zbw:bofism:2009_041 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Anja Breitwieser & Neil Foster-McGregor, 2012. "Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and Technology Transfer: A Survey," wiiw Working Papers 88, The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, wiiw.
    12. Gamba, Simona, 2017. "The Effect of Intellectual Property Rights on Domestic Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Sector," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 15-27.
    13. Angus C. Chu & Yuichi Furukawa & Sushanta Mallick & Pietro Peretto & Xilin Wang, 2021. "Dynamic effects of patent policy on innovation and inequality in a Schumpeterian economy," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(4), pages 1429-1465, June.
    14. Nancy Gallini, 2017. "Do patents work? Thickets, trolls and antibiotic resistance," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(4), pages 893-926, November.
    15. Yann Ménière & Sarah Parlane, 2004. "A Dynamic Model of Cross Licensing," Working Papers 200424, School of Economics, University College Dublin.
    16. Angus C. Chu, 2022. "Patent policy and economic growth: A survey," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 90(2), pages 237-254, March.
    17. Huang, Chien-Yu & Yang, Yibai & Zheng, Zhijie, 2018. "Monetary Policy in a Schumpeterian Growth Model with Two R&D Sectors," MPRA Paper 87462, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Popov, E. V. & Vlasov, M. V. & Shishkina, A. Yu. & Yakimova, A. V., 2016. "Institutional Analysis of Resource Potential for Knowledge Generation in the Enterprises of the Regional Defense-Industrial Sector," R-Economy, Ural Federal University, Graduate School of Economics and Management, vol. 2(3), pages 314-323.
    19. Yevgeniy Popov & Maksim Vlasov & Anna Shishkina & Anastasia Yakimova, 2016. "Institutional Analysis of Knowledge Generation Resource Potential at the Enterprises of Regional Military-Industrial Complex," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(3), pages 839-851.
    20. Grönqvist, Charlotta, 2009. "Empirical studies on the private value of Finnish patents," Scientific Monographs, Bank of Finland, number 2009_041.
    21. Lu, You-Xun, 2022. "Interactive effects of monetary policy and patent protection: The role of endogenous innovation size," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:aoz:wpaper:192. 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: Laura Inés D Amato (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/redniar.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.