IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Creative Destruction and Productive Preemption

  • Pehr-Johan Norbäck
  • Lars Persson
  • Roger Svensson

We develop a theory of innovation for entry and sale into oligopoly, and show that inventions of higher quality are more likely to be sold (or licensed) to an incumbent due to strategic product market effects on the sales price. Such preemptive acquisitions by incumbents are shown to stimulate the process of creative destruction by increasing the entrepreneurial effort allocated to high-quality invention projects. Using data on patents granted to small firms and individuals, we find evidence that high-quality inventions are sold under preemptive bidding competition. Asymmetric information problems are shown to be solved by verification through entry for sale.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by CESifo Group Munich in its series CESifo Working Paper Series with number 4075.

in new window

Date of creation: 2013
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_4075
Contact details of provider: Postal: Poschingerstrasse 5, 81679 Munich
Phone: +49 (89) 9224-0
Fax: +49 (89) 985369
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  2. Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 1999. "The Quality of Ideas: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators," NBER Working Papers 7345, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Anton, James J & Yao, Dennis A, 1994. "Expropriation and Inventions: Appropriable Rents in the Absence of Property Rights," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(1), pages 190-209, March.
  4. Pehr-Johan Norbäck & Lars Persson, 2009. "The Organization of the Innovation Industry: Entrepreneurs, Venture Capitalists, and Oligopolists," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 7(6), pages 1261-1290, December.
  5. Jehiel, Phillipe & Moldovanu, Benny & Stacchetti, E., 1997. "Multidimensional Mechanism Design for Auctions with Externalities," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 97-04, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
  6. Svensson, Roger, 2004. "Commercialization of Patents and External Financing during the R&D-Phase," Working Paper Series 624, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
  7. William J. Baumol, 2004. "Entrepreneurial Enterprises, Large Established Firms and Other Components of the Free-Market Growth Machine," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 9-21, 08.
  8. Pehr-Johan Norbäck & Lars Persson & Roger Svensson, 2013. "Creative Destruction and Productive Preemption," CESifo Working Paper Series 4075, CESifo Group Munich.
  9. Chen, Yongmin, 2000. "Strategic Bidding by Potential Competitors: Will Monopoly Persist?," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(2), pages 161-75, June.
  10. Thomas W. Gilligan, 2004. "Lemons and Leases in the Used Business Aircraft Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(5), pages 1157-1186, October.
  11. repec:oup:restud:v:52:y:1985:i:4:p:647-63 is not listed on IDEAS
  12. repec:oup:qjecon:v:84:y:1970:i:3:p:488-500 is not listed on IDEAS
  13. Carlos J. Serrano, 2010. "The dynamics of the transfer and renewal of patents," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 686-708.
  14. Granstrand, Ove & Sjolander, Soren, 1990. "The acquisition of technology and small firms by large firms," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 367-386, June.
  15. Joshua S. Cans & Scott Stern, 2000. "Incumbency and R&D Incentives: Licensing the Gale of Creative Destruction," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(4), pages 485-511, December.
  16. Morgan, Robert P & Kruytbosch, Carlos & Kannankutty, Nirmala, 2001. " Patenting and Invention Activity of U.S. Scientists and Engineers in the Academic Sector: Comparisons with Industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 26(1-2), pages 173-83, January.
  17. repec:oup:qjecon:v:101:y:1986:i:3:p:567-89 is not listed on IDEAS
  18. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
  19. Gilbert, Richard J & Newbery, David M G, 1982. "Preemptive Patenting and the Persistence of Monopoly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 514-26, June.
  20. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
  21. Genesove, David, 1993. "Adverse Selection in the Wholesale Used Car Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(4), pages 644-65, August.
  22. Van de Ven, Wynand P. M. M. & Van Praag, Bernard M. S., 1981. "The demand for deductibles in private health insurance : A probit model with sample selection," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 229-252, November.
  23. Bond, Eric W, 1982. "A Direct Test of the "Lemons" Model: The Market for Used Pickup Trucks," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(4), pages 836-40, September.
  24. Granstrand, Ove & Sjölander, Sören, 1990. "The Acquisition of Technology and Small Firms by Large Firms," Working Paper Series 213, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
  25. repec:oup:qjecon:v:101:y:1986:i:3:p:471-91 is not listed on IDEAS
  26. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_4075. 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: (Julio Saavedra)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.