Reinforcing the patent system? Patent fencing, knowledge diffusion and welfare
This article develops an evolutionary model of industry dynamics in order to carry out a richer theoretical analysis of the consequences of a stronger patent system. This model explicitly takes into account the potentially positive effects of the patents: Publication of patents participates to the building of a collective knowledge stock on which the innovations can rely, and dropped patents can provide a source of technological progress for firms that are lagging behind the leaders of the industry. These dimensions of the patent system are used to question the negative results of Vallée & Yildizoglu (2006). The main results of the new model show that these positive effects do not counterbalance the negative effects of a stronger patent system on social welfare and global technological progress, even if it is a source of better protection and higher profits for the firms.
|Date of creation:||2006|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://gres.u-bordeaux4.fr/|
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.:
- Nancy Gallini and Suzanne Scotchmer., 2001.
"Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?,"
Economics Working Papers
E01-303, University of California at Berkeley.
- 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.
- Nancy Gallini & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2003. "Intellectual Property: When is it the Best Incentive System?," Levine's Working Paper Archive 618897000000000532, David K. Levine.
- Gallini, Nancy & Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2001. "Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt9wx2c2hz, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Nancy Gallini & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2002. "Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?," Law and Economics 0201001, EconWPA.
- Thomas Vallée & Murat YıLdızoğlu, 2006.
"Social and technological efficiency of patent systems,"
Journal of Evolutionary Economics,
Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 189-206, April.
- Thomas VALLEE (LEN-C3E) & Murat YILDIZOGLU (E3i, IFReDE-GRES), 2004. "Social and Technological Efficiency of Patent Systems," Cahiers du GRES (2002-2009) 2004-11, Groupement de Recherches Economiques et Sociales.
- Jaffe Adam B. & Lerner Josh, 2006.
"Innovation and Its Discontents,"
Capitalism and Society,
De Gruyter, vol. 1(3), pages 1-36, December.
- O'DONOGHUE, Ted & SCOTCHMER, Suzanne & THISSE, Jacques-François, .
"Patent breadth, patent life, and the pace of technological progress,"
CORE Discussion Papers RP
-1314, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
- 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, 03.
- Edwin Mansfield, 1986. "Patents and Innovation: An Empirical Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 173-181, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:grs:wpegrs:2006-23. 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: (Vincent Frigant)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.