IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/epo/papers/2015-11.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Patent Monopolies and the Costs of Mismarketing Drugs

Author

Listed:
  • Ravi Katari, Dean Baker

Abstract

Patent monopolies have long been used as a mechanism for financing innovation and research. The logic is that the government awards a monopoly on a product or process for a limited period of time in order to reward innovation. However, in addition to providing incentives for innovation and research, patent monopolies also provide incentives for a wide-range of rent-seeking behaviors, many of which can have major social costs. This paper attempts to calculate one category of these costs for prescription drugs. It produces estimates of the costs associated with mismarketing drugs. The estimates are based on assessments of the costs in the form of increased morbidity and mortality associated with five prominent cases of mismarketing over the last two decades.

Suggested Citation

  • Ravi Katari, Dean Baker, 2015. "Patent Monopolies and the Costs of Mismarketing Drugs," CEPR Reports and Issue Briefs 2015-11, Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR).
    • Handle: RePEc:epo:papers:2015-11
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cepr.net/documents/mismarketing-drugs-2015-04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michele Boldrin & David K. Levine, 2013. "The Case against Patents," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 3-22, Winter.
    2. Van Zee, A., 2009. "The promotion and marketing of oxycontin: Commercial triumph, public health tragedy," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 99(2), pages 221-227.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Dean Baker, 2016. "The International Trade Commission’s Assessment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Main Findings and Implications," CEPR Reports and Issue Briefs 2016-20, Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR).
    2. Eileen Appelbaum, 2017. "Domestic Outsourcing, Rent Seeking, and Increasing Inequality," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 49(4), pages 513-528, December.
    3. Dean Baker, 2015. "Measuring Recovery: The Impact of Exempting the Pharmaceutical Industry from Patent Reviews," CEPR Reports and Issue Briefs 2015-17, Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR).
    4. Dean Baker, 2016. "Working Paper: Rents and Inefficiency in the Patent and Copyright System: Is There a Better Route?," CEPR Reports and Issue Briefs 2016-12, Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR).

    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. Lirios Alos-Simo & Antonio J. Verdu-Jover & Jose M. Gomez-Gras, 2020. "Knowledge Transfer in Sustainable Contexts: A Comparative Analysis of Periods of Financial Recession and Expansion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-24, June.
    2. Raza, Werner G., 2021. "COVID-19 and the failure of pharmaceutical innovation for the global South: The example of "neglected diseases" and emerging infectious diseases," Briefing Papers 32a, Austrian Foundation for Development Research (ÖFSE).
    3. Jonathan Trerise, 2016. "The influence of patents on science," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 15(4), pages 424-450, November.
    4. Liotard, Isabelle & Revest, Valérie, 2018. "Contests as innovation policy instruments: Lessons from the US federal agencies' experience," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 57-69.
    5. Mori, Tomoya & Sakaguchi, Shosei, 2018. "Collaborative knowledge creation: Evidence from Japanese patent data," MPRA Paper 88716, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen & Heidi Williams, 2019. "A toolkit of policies to promote innovation," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 10.
    7. Elert, Niklas & Henrekson, Magnus & Stenkula, Mikael, 2017. "Institutional Reform for Innovation and Entrepreneurship: An Agenda for Europe," Working Paper Series 1150, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 16 Feb 2017.
    8. Niklas Elert & Magnus Henrekson, 2019. "The collaborative innovation bloc: A new mission for Austrian economics," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 32(4), pages 295-320, December.
    9. William Encinosa & Didem Bernard & Thomas M. Selden, 2022. "Opioid and non-opioid analgesic prescribing before and after the CDC’s 2016 opioid guideline," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 1-52, March.
    10. Sasan Bakhtiari & Antonio Minniti & Alireza Naghavi, 2013. "Multiproduct Multinationals and the Quality of Innovation," Working Papers 2013.69, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    11. Stefan, Ioana & Bengtsson, Lars, 2017. "Unravelling appropriability mechanisms and openness depth effects on firm performance across stages in the innovation process," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 252-260.
    12. Abhimanyu Sud & Darren K. Cheng & Rahim Moineddin & Erin Zlahtic & Ross Upshur, 2021. "Time series-based bibliometric analysis of a systematic review of multidisciplinary care for opioid dose reduction: exploring the origins of the North American opioid crisis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(11), pages 8935-8955, November.
    13. Joel Blit & Mauricio Zelaya, 2015. "Do Firms Respond to Stronger Patent Protection by Doing More R&D?," Working Papers 1501, University of Waterloo, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2015.
    14. Griffith, Rachel & Lee, Sokbae & Straathof, Bas, 2017. "Recombinant innovation and the boundaries of the firm," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 34-56.
    15. Norbäck Pehr-Johan & Persson Lars & Olofsson Charlotta, 2020. "Acquisitions for Sleep," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(2), pages 1-13, April.
    16. David S. Abrams & Ufuk Akcigit & Jillian Grennan, 2013. "Patent Value and Citations: Creative Destruction or Strategic Disruption?," NBER Working Papers 19647, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Adam Karbowski, 2017. "Kontrowersje związane z moralnym uzasadnieniem ochrony patentowej w biotechnologii / Controversies over the Moral Justification for Patent Protection in Biotechnology," Annales. Ethics in Economic Life, University of Lodz, Faculty of Economics and Sociology, vol. 20(1), pages 83-94, February.
    18. Dosi, Giovanni & Palagi, Elisa & Roventini, Andrea & Russo, Emanuele, 2023. "Do patents really foster innovation in the pharmaceutical sector? Results from an evolutionary, agent-based model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 564-589.
    19. Valentina Bosetti & Elena Verdolini, 2013. "Clean and Dirty International Technology Diffusion," Working Papers 2013.43, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    20. Carla Marchese & Fabio Privileggi, 2018. "Endogenous economic growth with disembodied knowledge," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 20(3), pages 437-449, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    trade deficit; pharmaceuticals; off-label; rent-seeking; mismarketing; Vioxx; Avandia; Bextra; OxyContin; Zyprexa; Pfizer; Merck; GlaxoSmithKline; Eli Lilly; Purdue;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I - Health, Education, and Welfare
    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health

    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:epo:papers:2015-11. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ceprdus.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.