IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2102.13434.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Quest for Knowledge

Author

Listed:
  • Christoph Carnehl
  • Johannes Schneider

Abstract

Is more novel research always desirable? We develop a model in which knowledge shapes society's policies and guides the search for discoveries. Researchers select a question and how intensely to study it. The novelty of a question determines both the value and difficulty of discovering its answer. We show that the benefits of discoveries are nonmonotone in novelty. Knowledge expands endogenously step-by-step over time. Through a dynamic externality, moonshots -- research on questions more novel than what is myopically optimal -- can improve the evolution of knowledge. Moonshots induce research cycles in which subsequent researchers connect the moonshot to previous knowledge.

Suggested Citation

  • Christoph Carnehl & Johannes Schneider, 2021. "A Quest for Knowledge," Papers 2102.13434, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2023.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2102.13434
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.13434
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alessandro Iaria & Carlo Schwarz & Fabian Waldinger, 2018. "Frontier Knowledge and Scientific Production: Evidence from the Collapse of International Science," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(2), pages 927-991.
    2. Philippe Aghion & Mathias Dewatripont & Jeremy C. Stein, 2008. "Academic freedom, private‐sector focus, and the process of innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 617-635, September.
    3. Igor Letina, 2016. "The road not taken: competition and the R&D portfolio," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 47(2), pages 433-460, May.
    4. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    5. Igor Letina & Armin Schmutzler & Regina Seibel, 2020. "Killer acquisitions and beyond: policy effects on innovation strategies," ECON - Working Papers 358, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Jul 2023.
    6. George A. Akerlof & Pascal Michaillat, 2018. "Persistence of false paradigms in low-power sciences," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 115(52), pages 13228-13233, December.
    7. Pierre Azoulay & Danielle Li, 2020. "Scientific Grant Funding," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation and Public Policy, pages 117-150, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Steven Callander & Nicolas S. Lambert & Niko Matouschek, 2021. "The Power of Referential Advice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(11), pages 3073-3140.
    9. Steven Callander & Niko Matouschek, 2019. "The Risk of Failure: Trial and Error Learning and Long-Run Performance," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(1), pages 44-78, February.
    10. Pierre Azoulay & Danielle Li, 2020. "Scientific Grant Funding," NBER Working Papers 26889, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. 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.
    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. Tania Babina & Alex Xi He & Sabrina T. Howell & Elisabeth Ruth Perlman & Joseph Staudt, 2020. "The Color of Money: Federal vs. Industry Funding of University Research," NBER Working Papers 28160, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Heidi L. Williams, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from Health Care Markets," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 53-87.
    3. Galasso, Alberto & Schankerman, Mark, 2013. "Patents and cumulative innovation: causal evidence from the courts," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 51539, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman, 2013. "Patents and Cumulative Innovation: Causal Evidence from the Courts," CEP Discussion Papers dp1205, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    5. Nisvan Erkal & Deborah Minehart, 2013. "Optimal Sharing Strategies in Dynamic," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 1174, The University of Melbourne.
    6. Jing-Yuan Chiou & Laura Magazzini & Fabio Pammolli & Massimo Riccaboni, 2016. "Learning from successes and failures in pharmaceutical R&D," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 271-290, May.
    7. Boudreau, Kevin J. & Lakhani, Karim R., 2015. "“Open” disclosure of innovations, incentives and follow-on reuse: Theory on processes of cumulative innovation and a field experiment in computational biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 4-19.
    8. Steven Callander & Niko Matouschek, 2022. "The Novelty of Innovation: Competition, Disruption, and Antitrust Policy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(1), pages 37-51, January.
    9. Ozgur Aydogmus & Erkan Gürpinar, 2022. "Science, Technology and Institutional Change in Knowledge Production: An Evolutionary Game Theoretic Framework," Dynamic Games and Applications, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 1163-1188, December.
    10. Galasso, Alberto & Schankerman, Mark, 2013. "Patents and Cumulative Innovation:Causal Evidence from the Courts," IIR Working Paper 13-16, Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    11. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563, Elsevier.
    12. Gauguier, Jean-Jacques, 2009. "L’industrialisation de l’Open Source," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/4388 edited by Toledano, Joëlle.
    13. Adrien Hervouet & Marc Baudry, 2011. "Promoting innovation in the seed market and biodiversity: the role of IPRs and commercialization rules," Post-Print hal-02012239, HAL.
    14. Bernhard Ganglmair & Imke Reimers, 2019. "Visibility of Technology and Cumulative Innovation: Evidence from Trade Secrets Laws," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2019_119v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    15. Aalbers, Rob & Shestalova, Victoria & Kocsis, Viktória, 2013. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1240-1250.
    16. Mukherjee, Arijit & Stern, Scott, 2009. "Disclosure or secrecy? The dynamics of Open Science," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 449-462, May.
    17. Bergemann, Dirk & Ottaviani, Marco, 2021. "Information Markets and Nonmarkets," CEPR Discussion Papers 16459, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. A. Blasco, 2011. "Patent Races with Dynamic Complementarity," Working Papers wp733, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    19. Pierre Azoulay & Danielle Li, 2020. "Scientific Grant Funding," NBER Working Papers 26889, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Daniel P. Gross & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2022. "Crisis Innovation Policy from World War II to COVID-19," Entrepreneurship and Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(1), pages 135-181.

    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:arx:papers:2102.13434. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.