IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpdc/0410002.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation, Inequality and Intellectual Property Rights

Author

Listed:
  • Diana Weinhold

    (London School of Economics)

  • Usha Nair- Reichert

    (Georgia Institute of Technology)

Abstract

The existing literature on the sources and nature of productivity growth during the early industrialization stages of U.S. has identified the combination of intellectual property rights (IPRs) with a large middle class and broad participation in markets as explanations for the extraordinary level and growth of patenting. This paper considers whether these factors could play a role in the contemporaneous evolution of innovation in a broad cross section of countries today. Our results indicate that IPRs and the size of the middle class help explain patterns of resident, but not non-resident patenting. Overall, the evidence suggests that non-resident patenting patterns are driven more by exogenous factors and global integration, while 'home grown' innovation is more sensitive to internal structural and institutional factors.

Suggested Citation

  • Diana Weinhold & Usha Nair- Reichert, 2004. "Innovation, Inequality and Intellectual Property Rights," Development and Comp Systems 0410002, EconWPA, revised 10 Feb 2005.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpdc:0410002
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 26
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/dev/papers/0410/0410002.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sokoloff, Kenneth L., 1988. "Inventive Activity in Early Industrial America: Evidence From Patent Records, 1790–1846," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(04), pages 813-850, December.
    2. Christine Greenhalgh & Padraig Dixon, 2002. "The Economics of Intellectual Property: A Review to Identify Themes for Future Research," Economics Series Working Papers 135, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    3. Easterly, William, 2007. "Inequality does cause underdevelopment: Insights from a new instrument," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 755-776, November.
    4. Deininger, Klaus & Squire, Lyn, 1996. "A New Data Set Measuring Income Inequality," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 10(3), pages 565-591, September.
    5. Chen, Yongmin & Puttitanun, Thitima, 2005. "Intellectual property rights and innovation in developing countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 474-493, December.
    6. Sokoloff, Kenneth L. & Khan, B. Zorina, 1990. "The Democratization of Invention During Early Industrialization: Evidence from the United States, 1790–1846," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 50(02), pages 363-378, June.
    7. Maskus, Keith E. & Penubarti, Mohan, 1995. "How trade-related are intellectual property rights?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 227-248, November.
    8. Alberto Alesina & Dani Rodrik, 1994. "Distributive Politics and Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 109(2), pages 465-490.
    9. Peter H. Lindert & Jeffrey G. Williamson, 2003. "Does Globalization Make the World More Unequal?," NBER Chapters,in: Globalization in Historical Perspective, pages 227-276 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. David H. Romer & Jeffrey A. Frankel, 1999. "Does Trade Cause Growth?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 379-399, June.
    11. Ginarte, Juan C. & Park, Walter G., 1997. "Determinants of patent rights: A cross-national study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 283-301, October.
    12. Alberto Chong & Mark Gradstein, 2007. "Inequality and Institutions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(3), pages 454-465, August.
    13. Roland Benabou, 2000. "Unequal Societies: Income Distribution and the Social Contract," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(1), pages 96-129, March.
    14. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 1998. "Law and Finance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(6), pages 1113-1155, December.
    15. Mattias Lundberg & Lyn Squire, 2003. "The simultaneous evolution of growth and inequality," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(487), pages 326-344, April.
    16. Kenneth L Sokoloff & Zorina Kahn, 2003. "Intellectual Property Institutions in the United States: Early Development and Comparative Perspective," Levine's Working Paper Archive 618897000000000525, David K. Levine.
    17. 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.
    18. Easterly, William, 2001. "The Middle Class Consensus and Economic Development," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 6(4), pages 317-335, December.
    19. Michael Ferrantino, 1993. "The effect of intellectual property rights on international trade and investment," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 129(2), pages 300-331, June.
    20. Mendez, Rodrigue, 2002. "Creative Destruction and the Rise of Inequality," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 259-281, September.
    21. Philippe Aghion, 2002. "Schumpeterian Growth Theory and the Dynamics of Income Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(3), pages 855-882, May.
    22. Robert E. Hall & Charles I. Jones, 1999. "Why do Some Countries Produce So Much More Output Per Worker than Others?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 114(1), pages 83-116.
    23. Zweimuller, Josef, 2000. "Schumpeterian Entrepreneurs Meet Engel's Law: The Impact of Inequality on Innovation-Driven Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 185-206, June.
    24. Lindert, Peter H., 2000. "Three centuries of inequality in Britain and America," Handbook of Income Distribution,in: A.B. Atkinson & F. Bourguignon (ed.), Handbook of Income Distribution, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 3, pages 167-216 Elsevier.
    25. Daron Acemoglu & Simon Johnson & James A. Robinson, 2001. "The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(5), pages 1369-1401, December.
    26. Furman, Jeffrey L. & Porter, Michael E. & Stern, Scott, 2002. "The determinants of national innovative capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 899-933, August.
    27. Anne O. Krueger, 1978. "Liberalization Attempts and Consequences," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number krue78-1, July.
    28. Jagdish N. Bhagwati, 1978. "Appendix to "Anatomy and Consequences of Exchange Control Regimes"," NBER Chapters,in: Anatomy and Consequences of Exchange Control Regimes, pages 219-221 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    29. Daniel Kaufmann & Aart Kraay & Massimo Mastruzzi, 2004. "Governance Matters III: Governance Indicators for 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 18(2), pages 253-287.
    30. Kevin M. Murphy & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 1989. "Income Distribution, Market Size, and Industrialization," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 104(3), pages 537-564.
    31. Daron Acemoglu, 2002. "Technical Change, Inequality, and the Labor Market," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 40(1), pages 7-72, March.
    32. Maria Luisa Mancusi, 2004. "International Spillovers and Absorptive Capacity: A cross-country, cross-sector analysis based on European patents and citations," STICERD - Economics of Industry Papers 35, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    33. Banerjee, Abhijit V & Duflo, Esther, 2003. "Inequality and Growth: What Can the Data Say?," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 8(3), pages 267-299, September.
    34. Persson, Torsten & Tabellini, Guido, 1994. "Is Inequality Harmful for Growth?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(3), pages 600-621, June.
    35. Laura Bottazzi & Giovanni Peri, 2005. "The International Dynamics of R&D and Innovation in the Short and in the Long Run," NBER Working Papers 11524, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    36. B. Zorina Khan & Kenneth L. Sokoloff, 2001. "The Early Development of Intellectual Property Institutions in the United States," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 233-246, Summer.
    37. Edwards, Sebastian, 1992. "Trade orientation, distortions and growth in developing countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 31-57, July.
    38. 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.
    39. Barro, Robert J & Lee, Jong Wha, 1996. "International Measures of Schooling Years and Schooling Quality," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(2), pages 218-223, May.
    40. Jagdish N. Bhagwati, 1978. "Anatomy and Consequences of Exchange Control Regimes," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number bhag78-1, July.
    41. Huw Lloyd-Ellis, 1999. "Endogenous Technological Change and Wage Inequality," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 47-77, March.
    42. Agell, Jonas & Lommerud, Kjell Erik, 1997. "Minimum wages and the incentives for skill formation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 25-40, April.
    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. Castellacci, Fulvio & Natera, Jose Miguel, 2013. "The dynamics of national innovation systems: A panel cointegration analysis of the coevolution between innovative capability and absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 579-594.
    2. William R. DiPietro, 2013. "Effects of Connectivity and Freedom on Innovation: An Empirical Test Using Different Data Sources," Review of Economics & Finance, Better Advances Press, Canada, vol. 3, pages 83-89, February.
    3. Ugur, Mehmet, 2012. "Market Power, Governance and Innovation: OECD Evidence," MPRA Paper 44141, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Caiani, Alessandro & Russo, Alberto & Gallegati, Mauro, 2016. "Does Inequality Hamper Innovation and Growth?," MPRA Paper 71864, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Caiani, Alessandro & Russo, Alberto & Gallegati, Mauro, 2017. "Are higher wages good for business? An assessment under alternative innovation and investment scenarios," MPRA Paper 80439, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Ozan Hatipoglu, 2007. "An Empirical Analysis of the Relationship Between Inequality and Innovation in a Schumpeterian Framework," Working Papers 2007/10, Bogazici University, Department of Economics.
    7. repec:eac:articl:04/15 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. repec:spr:jknowl:v:8:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s13132-016-0363-y is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Sirine Mnif, 2015. "Impact of Inequalities on Technological Changes: Case of the Developing Countries," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 5(3), pages 460-478, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    intellectual property rights; innovation; income inequality;

    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:

    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:wpa:wuwpdc:0410002. 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: (EconWPA). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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.