IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uto/labeco/201207.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Compulsory licensing: the foundations of an institutional innovation

Author

Abstract

Compulsory licensing is an important institutional innovation that improves the knowledge governance and can help fostering the pace of generation of technological knowledge and the rate of introduction of technological innovations. Recent advances in the economics of knowledge have confirmed the medieval wisdom according to which to make knowledge it is necessary to stand on giants’ shoulders. The generation of new technological knowledge is possible only if the stock of existing knowledge can be used as an input. All barriers and delays in the access to existing knowledge risk to reducing the capability to generate new technological knowledge. Intellectual property right regimes based upon exclusivity may increase the incentives to generate new technological knowledge but reduce the efficiency and the actual viability of the knowledge generation process. The costs of the reduction in the access to existing knowledge are larger the larger the scope of application of new technology. Compulsory licensing for technological knowledge can increase the rate of generation of new technological knowledge. The paper contributes the debate with a simple model that enables to identify the correct levels of royalties for compulsory licensing in both product and knowledge markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Antonelli Cristiano, 2012. "Compulsory licensing: the foundations of an institutional innovation," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 201207, University of Turin.
    • Handle: RePEc:uto:labeco:201207
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.est.unito.it/do/home.pl/Download?doc=/allegati_wp/wp2012dip_l_b/7_wp_momigliano.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2005. "Models of knowledge and systems of governance," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 51-73, June.
    2. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    3. Jean Lanjouw & Josh Lerner, 1998. "The Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights: A Survey of the Empirical Literature," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 49-50, pages 223-246.
    4. R. H. Coase, 2013. "The Problem of Social Cost," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 837-877.
    5. Shavell, Steven & van Ypersele, Tanguy, 2001. "Rewards versus Intellectual Property Rights," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(2), pages 525-547, October.
    6. Buzzacchi, Luigi & Scellato, Giuseppe, 2008. "Patent litigation insurance and R&D incentives," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 272-286, December.
    7. Ottoz, Elisabetta & Cugno, Franco, 2011. "Choosing the scope of trade secret law when secrets complement patents," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 219-227.
    8. Martin L. Weitzman, 1998. "Recombinant Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(2), pages 331-360.
    9. Penin, Julien, 2005. "Patents versus ex post rewards: A new look," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 641-656, June.
    10. Cugno Franco & Ottoz Elisabetta, 2006. "Trade Secret vs. Broad Patent: The Role of Licensing," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(2), pages 209-221, September.
    11. Antonelli, Cristiano & Crespi, Francesco & Scellato, Giuseppe, 2012. "Inside innovation persistence: New evidence from Italian micro-data," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 341-353.
    12. Richard Gilbert & Carl Shapiro, 1990. "Optimal Patent Length and Breadth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 106-112, Spring.
    13. Machlup, Fritz & Penrose, Edith, 1950. "The Patent Controversy in the Nineteenth Century," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 1-29, May.
    14. Weitzman, Martin L, 1996. "Hybridizing Growth Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(2), pages 207-212, May.
    15. Michele Boldrin & David Levine, 2002. "The Case Against Intellectual Property," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 209-212, May.
    16. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Richard R. Nelson, 1982. "The Role of Knowledge in R&D Efficiency," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 97(3), pages 453-470.
    18. Petra Moser & Alessandra Voena, 2012. "Compulsory Licensing: Evidence from the Trading with the Enemy Act," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 396-427, February.
    19. Nelson, Richard R, 1980. "Production Sets, Technological Knowledge, and R & D: Fragile and Overworked Constructs for Analysis of Productivity Growth?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(2), pages 62-67, May.
    20. Paul M. Romer, 1994. "The Origins of Endogenous Growth," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(1), pages 3-22, Winter.
    21. Bessen, James, 2005. "Patents and the diffusion of technical information," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 121-128, January.
    22. Dalle, Jean Michel & David, Paul A. & Besten, Matthijs den & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2008. "Empirical issues in open source software," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 301-304, December.
    23. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    24. F. M. Scherer & Jayashree Watal, 2002. "Post-TRIPS Options for Access to Patented Medicines in Developing Nations," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(4), pages 913-939, December.
    25. Cristiano Antonelli, 2007. "Technological knowledge as an essential facility," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 451-471, August.
    26. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
    27. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2009. "Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 611-635, December.
    28. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    29. Tandon, Pankaj, 1982. "Optimal Patents with Compulsory Licensing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(3), pages 470-486, June.
    30. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67(3), pages 297-297.
    31. 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)

    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. Bernhard Ganglmair & Imke Reimers, 2019. "Visibility of Technology and Cumulative Innovation: Evidence from Trade Secrets Laws," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2019_119v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    2. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    3. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 315-380, Elsevier.
    4. Encaoua, David & Guellec, Dominique & Martinez, Catalina, 2006. "Patent systems for encouraging innovation: Lessons from economic analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1423-1440, November.
    5. Cristiano Antonelli, 2011. "The Economic Complexity of Technological Change: Knowledge Interaction and Path Dependence," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Antonelli Cristiano & Colombelli Alessandra, 2013. "Knowledge cumulability and complementarity in the knowledge generation function," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201305, University of Turin.
    7. Giacomo A. M. Ponzetto, 2008. "Intellectual property rights and efficient firm organization," Economics Working Papers 1254, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised May 2014.
    8. Cristiano Antonelli & Alessandra Colombelli, 2018. "The cost of knowledge," Chapters, in: The Evolutionary Complexity of Endogenous Innovation, chapter 6, pages 128-150, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Antonelli, Cristiano & Amidei, Federico Barbiellini & Fassio, Claudio, 2014. "The mechanisms of knowledge governance: State owned enterprises and Italian economic growth, 1950–1994," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 43-63.
    10. Wright, Brian D. & Pardey, Philip G. & Nottenburg, Carol & Koo, Bonwoo, 2007. "Agricultural Innovation: Investments and Incentives," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: Robert Evenson & Prabhu Pingali (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 48, pages 2533-2603, Elsevier.
    11. Penin, Julien, 2005. "Patents versus ex post rewards: A new look," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 641-656, June.
    12. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2013. "Globalization Localized Technological Change and the Knowledge Economy," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201325, University of Turin.
    13. Julien Pénin, 2013. "Devrait-on obliger les entreprises à investir en R&D ? Vers une approche des politiques d’innovation par la responsabilité des entreprises," Working Papers of BETA 2013-11, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    14. Quatraro, Francesco, 2010. "Knowledge coherence, variety and economic growth: Manufacturing evidence from Italian regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(10), pages 1289-1302, December.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. Rentocchini, Francesco, 2011. "Sources and characteristics of software patents in the European Union: Some empirical considerations," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 141-157, March.
    18. Archibugi, Daniele & Filippetti, Andrea, 2018. "The retreat of public research and its adverse consequences on innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 97-111.
    19. Cristiano Antonelli & Federico Barbiellini Amidei, 2011. "The Dynamics of Knowledge Externalities," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13292.
    20. Marchese, Carla & Marsiglio, Simone & Privileggi, Fabio & Ramello, Giovanni, 2014. "Endogenous Recombinant Growth through Market Production of Knowledge and Intellectual Property Rights," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201413, University of Turin.

    More about this item

    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:uto:labeco:201207. 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: Piero Cavaleri or Marina Grazioli (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/leifrit.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.