IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

IPRs, technological and industrial development and growth: the case of the pharmaceutical industry


  • Francesco Laforgia

    (Brescia University and CESPRI - Bocconi University, Milan, Italy.)

  • Fabio Montobbio

    (University of Insubria and CESPRI, Bocconi University, Milan, Italy.)

  • Luigi Orsenigo

    (Brescia University, CESPRI - Bocconi University, Milan, Italy, and The Open University, UK.)


In this paper we provide an introduction to some of the most salient aspects of the debate regarding the relationships between stronger intellectual property rights (IPRs) regimes and innovation in the pharmaceutical industry. We emphasize that, despite increased knowledge on the subject, little is known on the relationships between IPRs, innovation, and growth, especially as developing countries are concerned. We report on preliminary research on the patenting activities in Brazil using domestic patent data, rather than – as it is customary – international patents. Firstly, we show that the adoption of the TRIPs had substantial positive impact on the number of patent applications in Brazil, but that the great majority of these new patent applications have come from nonresidents, most likely as extensions of foreign patents. However it is too early to assess if this substantial increase in (foreign) patents is a permanent characteristic of patenting activity in Brazil. Secondly, the introduction of TRIPs has not changed the technological composition of patenting activity in Brazil, with one major exception, the growth of the share of the chemical and pharmaceutical patents, few years after the upsurge of patenting in other fields.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Laforgia & Fabio Montobbio & Luigi Orsenigo, 2007. "IPRs, technological and industrial development and growth: the case of the pharmaceutical industry," KITeS Working Papers 206, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Oct 2007.
  • Handle: RePEc:cri:cespri:wp206

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Petra Moser, 2005. "How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth-Century World's Fairs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1214-1236, September.
    2. Lanjouw, J.O., 1997. "The Introduction of Pharmaceutical Product Patents in India: "Heartless Exploitation of the Poor and Suffering"?," Papers 775, Yale - Economic Growth Center.
    3. Kortum, Samuel & Lerner, Josh, 1998. "Stronger protection or technological revolution: what is behind the recent surge in patenting?," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 247-304, June.
    4. Benjamin Coriat & Fabienne Orsi & Cristina d'Almeida, 2006. "TRIPS and the international public health controversies: issues and challenges," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 15(6), pages 1033-1062, December.
    5. Montobbio, Fabio & Rampa, Francesco, 2005. "The impact of technology and structural change on export performance in nine developing countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 527-547, April.
    6. Farrell, Joseph & Gilbert, Richard & Katz, Michael, 2002. "Market Structure, Organizational Structure, and R&D Diversity," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt8md3920f, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    7. Partha Dasgupta & Joseph Stiglitz, 1980. "Uncertainty, Industrial Structure, and the Speed of R&D," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(1), pages 1-28, Spring.
    8. Hsin-Ting Huang & Marcela Miozzo, 2004. "Patterns of technological specialisation in Latin American and East Asian countries: an analysis of patents and trade flows," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(7), pages 615-653.
    9. Merges, Robert P. & Nelson, Richard R., 1994. "On limiting or encouraging rivalry in technical progress: The effect of patent scope decisions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-24, September.
    10. Helpman, Elhanan, 1993. "Innovation, Imitation, and Intellectual Property Rights," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(6), pages 1247-1280, November.
    11. Dasgupta, Partha & Stiglitz, Joseph, 1980. "Industrial Structure and the Nature of Innovative Activity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(358), pages 266-293, June.
    12. Lall, Sanjaya, 2003. "Indicators of the relative importance of IPRs in developing countries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(9), pages 1657-1680, October.
    13. Partha Dasgupta & Richard J. Gilbert & Joseph E. Stiglitz, 1982. "Invention and Innovation Under Alternative Market Structures: The Case of Natural Resources," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 49(4), pages 567-582.
    14. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2009. "Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 611-635.
    15. Daron Acemoglu & Joshua Linn, 2004. "Market Size in Innovation: Theory and Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 119(3), pages 1049-1090.
    16. Dasgupta, Partha & Stiglitz, Joseph, 1981. "Entry, innovation, exit : Towards a dynamic theory of oligopolistic industrial structure," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 137-158.
    17. Ashish Arora & Andrea Fosfuri & Alfonso Gambardella, 2004. "Markets for Technology: The Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262511819, July.
    18. Josh Lerner, 2002. "150 Years of Patent Protection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 221-225, May.
    19. Murray, Fiona & Stern, Scott, 2007. "Do formal intellectual property rights hinder the free flow of scientific knowledge?: An empirical test of the anti-commons hypothesis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 648-687, August.
    20. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2002. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 1-23, January.
    21. 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 514-526, June.
    22. Fink, Carsten, 2000. "How stronger patent protection in India might affect the behavior of transnational pharaceutical industries," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2352, The World Bank.
    23. Keith E. Maskus, 2000. "Parallel Imports," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(9), pages 1269-1284, September.
    24. Baumol, William J., 1996. "Entrepreneurship: Productive, unproductive, and destructive," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 3-22, January.
    25. Thursby, Jerry & Fuller, Anne W. & Thursby, Marie, 2009. "US faculty patenting: Inside and outside the university," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 14-25, February.
    26. Horowitz, Andrew W & Lai, Edwin L-C, 1996. "Patent Length and the Rate of Innovation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(4), pages 785-801, November.
    27. Frank R. Lichtenberg & Tomas J. Philipson, 2002. "The Dual Effects of Intellectual Property Regulations: Within- and Between-Patent Competition in the U.S. Pharmaceuticals Industry," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(S2), pages 643-672.
    28. Jean Olson Lanjouw, 1998. "Patent Protection in the Shadow of Infringement: Simulation Estimations of Patent Value," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 65(4), pages 671-710.
    29. Keith Maskus, 1998. "The international regulation of intellectual property," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 134(2), pages 186-208, June.
    30. Nancy T. Gallini, 2002. "The Economics of Patents: Lessons from Recent U.S. Patent Reform," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 131-154, Spring.
    31. Ajay Agrawal & Rebecca Henderson, 2002. "Putting Patents in Context: Exploring Knowledge Transfer from MIT," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(1), pages 44-60, January.
    32. Mark Schankerman, 1998. "How Valuable is Patent Protection? Estimates by Technology Field," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(1), pages 77-107, Spring.
    33. Stefano Breschi & Francesco Lissoni & Fabio Montobbio, 2005. "From Publishing to Patenting : do Productive Scientists Turn into Academi Inventors ?," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 110(1), pages 75-102.
    34. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    35. 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)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Fabio Montobbio & Valerio Sterzi, 2011. "Inventing together: exploring the nature of international knowledge spillovers in Latin America," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 53-89, February.

    More about this item


    Intellectual Property Rights; Patents; Pharmaceuticals; Brazil; Developing Countries.;

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:cri:cespri:wp206. 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: (Valerio Sterzi). General contact details of provider: .

    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.