IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/109470.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Quantitative Assessment on Frictions in Technology Market

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Yiran

Abstract

In this paper, I first document several novel stylized facts from Chinese patent transaction data matched with manufacturing firm data. A key finding is that Chinese patent market is significantly less developed than the U.S. To understand the causes and consequences, I build a model that endogenizes firm R&D investment, patent trading decision and productivity growth. I structurally estimate the model and find the following two main results. First, Chinese patent market plays a small role in growth. It only accounts for 5% of China’s GDP growth rate, as opposed to 17% in the U.S. Second, I evaluate the importance of three frictions calibrated to Chinese patent market: search cost, fixed transaction cost and information asymmetry. Search cost turns out to be the main friction to explain the gap of patent market size. If search cost was reduced to the US level, China’s productivity growth would increase by 0.16 percentage points.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Yiran, 2021. "Quantitative Assessment on Frictions in Technology Market," MPRA Paper 109470, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:109470
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/109470/1/MPRA_paper_109470.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Romer, Paul M, 1986. "Increasing Returns and Long-run Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(5), pages 1002-1037, October.
    2. , & Lorenz, Jan & ,, 2016. "Innovation vs. imitation and the evolution of productivity distributions," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 11(3), September.
    3. Emmanuel Dhyne & Ayumu Ken Kikkawa & Magne Mogstad & Felix Tintelnot, 2021. "Trade and Domestic Production Networks," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(2), pages 643-668.
    4. Kevin Donovan & Will Jianyu Lu & Todd Schoellman, 2020. "Labor Market Dynamics and Development," Staff Report 596, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
    5. Daron Acemoglu & Philippe Aghion & Fabrizio Zilibotti, 2006. "Distance to Frontier, Selection, and Economic Growth," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(1), pages 37-74, March.
    6. Jovanovic, Boyan & MacDonald, Glenn M, 1994. "The Life Cycle of a Competitive Industry," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(2), pages 322-347, April.
    7. David Autor & David Dorn & Lawrence F Katz & Christina Patterson & John Van Reenen, 2020. "The Fall of the Labor Share and the Rise of Superstar Firms [“Automation and New Tasks: How Technology Displaces and Reinstates Labor”]," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(2), pages 645-709.
    8. Pol Antràs & Teresa C. Fort & Felix Tintelnot, 2017. "The Margins of Global Sourcing: Theory and Evidence from US Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(9), pages 2514-2564, September.
    9. Rasmus Lentz & Dale T. Mortensen, 2008. "An Empirical Model of Growth Through Product Innovation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(6), pages 1317-1373, November.
    10. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    11. Guido Menzio & Shouyong Shi, 2011. "Efficient Search on the Job and the Business Cycle," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 119(3), pages 468-510.
    12. Greg Kaplan & Giovanni L. Violante, 2014. "A Model of the Consumption Response to Fiscal Stimulus Payments," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(4), pages 1199-1239, July.
    13. Kevin Donovan & Jianyu Lu & Todd Schoellman, 2018. "Labor Market Flows and Development," 2018 Meeting Papers 976, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    14. Storesletten, Kjetil & Koenig, Michael & Song, Zheng & Zilibotti, Fabrizio, 2020. "From Imitation to Innovation: Where Is all that Chinese R&D Going?," CEPR Discussion Papers 14966, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    15. Christopher A. Pissarides, 2000. "Equilibrium Unemployment Theory, 2nd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262161877, December.
    16. Stantcheva, Stefanie & Akcigit, Ufuk & Caicedo Soler, Santiago & Miguelez, Ernest & Sterzi, Valerio, 2018. "Dancing with the Stars: Innovation through Interactions," CEPR Discussion Papers 12819, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. David S. Abrams & Ufuk Akcigit & Jillian Popadak, 2013. "Patent Value and Citations: Creative Destruction or Strategic Disruption?," PIER Working Paper Archive 13-065, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    18. Ufuk Akcigit & Murat Alp Celik & Jeremy Greenwood, 2016. "Buy, Keep, or Sell: Economic Growth and the Market for Ideas," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 943-984, May.
    19. Costas Arkolakis, 2010. "Market Penetration Costs and the New Consumers Margin in International Trade," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(6), pages 1151-1199.
    20. Tor Jakob Klette & Samuel Kortum, 2004. "Innovating Firms and Aggregate Innovation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(5), pages 986-1018, October.
    21. Jesse Perla & Christopher Tonetti, 2014. "Equilibrium Imitation and Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 122(1), pages 52-76.
    22. Stokey, Nancy L, 1988. "Learning by Doing and the Introduction of New Goods," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(4), pages 701-717, August.
    23. Kevin Lim, 2017. "Firm-to-firm Trade in Sticky Production Networks," 2017 Meeting Papers 280, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    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. Kjetil Storesletten & Bo Zhao & Fabrizio Zilibotti, 2019. "Business Cycle during Structural Change: Arthur Lewis' Theory from a Neoclassical Perspective," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2191, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    2. Storesletten, Kjetil & Koenig, Michael & Song, Zheng & Zilibotti, Fabrizio, 2020. "From Imitation to Innovation: Where Is all that Chinese R&D Going?," CEPR Discussion Papers 14966, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Mori, Tomoya & Sakaguchi, Shosei, 2018. "Collaborative knowledge creation: Evidence from Japanese patent data," MPRA Paper 88716, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Daron Acemoglu & Pablo D. Azar, 2020. "Endogenous Production Networks," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 33-82, January.
    5. Tomoya Mori & Shosei Sakaguchi, 2019. "Creation of knowledge through exchanges of knowledge: Evidence from Japanese patent data," Papers 1908.01256, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2020.
    6. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2013_028 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Ufuk Akcigit & William R. Kerr, 2018. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1374-1443.
    8. Jess Benhabib & Jesse Perla & Christopher Tonetti, 2021. "Reconciling Models of Diffusion and Innovation: A Theory of the Productivity Distribution and Technology Frontier," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(5), pages 2261-2301, September.
    9. Nancy L Stokey, 2017. "Technology, Skill and Long Run Growth," 2017 Meeting Papers 199, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    10. Ufuk Akcigit & William R. Kerr, 2018. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1374-1443.
    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. Laurent Cavenaile & Pau Roldan-Blanco, 2021. "Advertising, Innovation, and Economic Growth," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 251-303, July.
    13. Ufuk Akcigit & Salomé Baslandze & Francesca Lotti, 2023. "Connecting to Power: Political Connections, Innovation, and Firm Dynamics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(2), pages 529-564, March.
    14. Maarten de Ridder, 2022. "Market power and innovation in the intangible economy," POID Working Papers 064, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    15. Pietro Garibaldi & Espen Moen & Dag-Einar Sommervoll, 2016. "Competitive On-the-job Search," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 19, pages 88-107, January.
    16. Daron Acemoglu & Ufuk Akcigit & Harun Alp & Nicholas Bloom & William Kerr, 2018. "Innovation, Reallocation, and Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(11), pages 3450-3491, November.
    17. Gabrovski, Miroslav, 2017. "Coordination Frictions and Economic Growth," MPRA Paper 81298, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 17 Jul 2017.
    18. David S. Abrams & Ufuk Akcigit & Gokhan Oz & Jeremy G. Pearce, 2019. "The Patent Troll: Benign Middleman or Stick-Up Artist?," NBER Working Papers 25713, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Raphael Auer & Philip Sauré, 2011. "Spatial Competition in Quality, Demand Induced Innovation, and Schumpeterian Growth," DEGIT Conference Papers c016_067, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    20. Douglas Hanley & Ufuk Akcigit & Nicolas Serrano-Velarde, 2014. "Back to Basics: Basic Research Spillovers, Innovation Policy and Growth," Working Paper 535, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2014.
    21. Etro, Federico, 2017. "Research in economics and macroeconomics," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 373-383.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Under-developed Patent Market; patent quality; search cost; fixed cost; information asymmetry;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O3 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights

    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:pra:mprapa:109470. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.