IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/zewdip/5441.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of Patents and Secrecy on Knowledge Spillovers

Author

Listed:
  • Schmidt, Tobias

Abstract

Theoretical considerations suggest that secrecy reduces spillovers almost completely through non-disclosure, while the disclosure requirement of patents generates some spillover and at the same time allows firms to appropriate knowledge. In this paper we empirically analyze whether protection by secrecy or protection by patents is associated with lower knowledge spillovers. Since the amount of knowledge spillovers is hard to measure directly, we look at the impact of the usage of protection methods in an industry on the innovation activities of firms using external knowledge. One goal is to assess if firms have moved to a more open innovation business model, i.e. allow more knowledge spillovers to occur despite using protection methods. Our estimations show that the usage of both, patents and secrecy, hinders the innovation activities of firms through the reduction of spillovers to firms in their own industry. We conclude that the appropriability effect of patents outweighs the disclosure effect. We also find some evidence that the open innovation business model has not been implemented widely.

Suggested Citation

  • Schmidt, Tobias, 2006. "An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of Patents and Secrecy on Knowledge Spillovers," ZEW Discussion Papers 06-048, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:5441
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/24503/1/dp06048.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klaus Kultti & Tuomas Takalo & Juuso Toikka, 2007. "Secrecy versus patenting," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(1), pages 22-42, March.
    2. Sofka, Wolfgang & Schmidt, Tobias, 2004. "I Like The Way You Move: An Empirical Investigation into the Mechanisms Behind First Mover and Follower Strategies," ZEW Discussion Papers 04-87, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    3. Bonte, Werner & Keilbach, Max, 2005. "Concubinage or marriage? Informal and formal cooperations for innovation," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 23(3-4), pages 279-302, April.
    4. Antoine Bureth & Rachel Levy & Julien Pénin & Sandrine Wolff, 2005. "Strategic Reasons for Patenting: Between Exclusion and Coordination Rationales," Rivista di Politica Economica, SIPI Spa, vol. 95(5), pages 19-46, September.
    5. Penin, Julien, 2005. "Patents versus ex post rewards: A new look," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 641-656, June.
    6. Tobias Schmidt, 2010. "Absorptive capacity-one size fits all? A firm-level analysis of absorptive capacity for different kinds of knowledge," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(1), pages 1-18.
    7. Inkmann, Joachim, 2000. "Horizontal and Vertical R&D Cooperation," CoFE Discussion Papers 00/02, University of Konstanz, Center of Finance and Econometrics (CoFE).
    8. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 2002. "R&D Cooperation and Spillovers: Some Empirical Evidence from Belgium," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 1169-1184, September.
    9. Michele Cincera, 2005. "Firms' productivity growth and R&D spillovers: An analysis of alternative technological proximity measures," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(8), pages 657-682.
    10. Belderbos, Rene & Carree, Martin & Diederen, Bert & Lokshin, Boris & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2004. "Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(8-9), pages 1237-1263, November.
    11. repec:dau:papers:123456789/13785 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Kaiser, Ulrich, 2002. "Measuring knowledge spillovers in manufacturing and services: an empirical assessment of alternative approaches," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 125-144, January.
    13. Schmidt, Tobias, 2005. "Knowledge Flows and R&D Co-operation: Firm-level Evidence from Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 05-22, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    14. Nancy T. Gallini, 2002. "The Economics of Patents: Lessons from Recent U.S. Patent Reform," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 131-154, Spring.
    15. Arundel, Anthony & Kabla, Isabelle, 1998. "What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 127-141, June.
    16. Peter Kennedy, 2003. "A Guide to Econometrics, 5th Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 5, volume 1, number 026261183x, December.
    17. Bessen, James, 2005. "Patents and the diffusion of technical information," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 121-128, January.
    18. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
    19. 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.
    20. Keld Laursen & Ammon Salter, 2005. "My Precious. The Role of Appropriability Strategies in Shaping Innovative Performance," DRUID Working Papers 05-02, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    21. James J. Anton & Dennis A. Yao, 2004. "Little Patents and Big Secrets: Managing Intellectual Property," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(1), pages 1-22, Spring.
    22. Nooteboom, Bart, 1999. "Innovation, Learning and Industrial Organisation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 23(2), pages 127-150, March.
    23. Monjon, Stephanie & Waelbroeck, Patrick, 2003. "Assessing spillovers from universities to firms: evidence from French firm-level data," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1255-1270, November.
    24. Cohen, Wesley M. & Goto, Akira & Nagata, Akiya & Nelson, Richard R. & Walsh, John P., 2002. "R&D spillovers, patents and the incentives to innovate in Japan and the United States," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1349-1367, December.
    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. Chen, Victor Zitian & Li, Jing & Shapiro, Daniel M., 2012. "International reverse spillover effects on parent firms: Evidences from emerging-market MNEs in developed markets," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 204-218.
    2. HanGyeol Seo & Yanghon Chung & Chungwon Woo & Dongphil Chun & Soojeen Sarah Jang, 2016. "SME’s Appropriability Regime for Sustainable Development-the Role of Absorptive Capacity and Inventive Capacity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-16, July.
    3. Faria, Pedro & Schmidt, Tobias, 2007. "International Cooperation on Innovation: Empirical Evidence for German and Portuguese Firms," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-060, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Olga Slivko & Bernd Theilen, 2014. "Innovation or imitation? The effect of spillovers and competitive pressure on firms’ R&D strategy choice," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 112(3), pages 253-282, July.
    5. Slivko, Olga, 2012. "Innovation strategies of German firms: The effect of competition and intellectual property protection," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-089, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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. Crass, Dirk & Garcia Valero, Francisco & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2016. "Protecting innovation through patents and trade secrets: Determinants and performance impacts for firms with a single innovation," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Crass, Dirk & Valero, Francisco Garcia & Pitton, Francesco & Rammer, Christian, 2019. "Protecting Innovation Through Patents and Trade Secrets: Evidence for Firms with a Single Innovation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 117-156.
    3. Bos, Brenda & Broekhuizen, Thijs L.J. & de Faria, Pedro, 2015. "A dynamic view on secrecy management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2619-2627.
    4. Faria, Pedro & Schmidt, Tobias, 2007. "International cooperation on innovation: empirical evidence for German and Portuguese firms," Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies 2007,30, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    5. Bronwyn H. Hall & Vania Sena, 2017. "Appropriability mechanisms, innovation, and productivity: evidence from the UK," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1-2), pages 42-62, February.
    6. Klein, Michael A., 2022. "The reward and contract theories of patents in a model of endogenous growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    7. Segarra-Blasco, Agusti­ & Arauzo-Carod, Josep-Maria, 2008. "Sources of innovation and industry-university interaction: Evidence from Spanish firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1283-1295, September.
    8. Capponi, Giovanna & Criscuolo, Paola & Martinelli, Arianna & Nuvolari, Alessandro, 2019. "Profiting from innovation: Evidence from a survey of Queen's Awards winners," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 155-169.
    9. 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.
    10. Spyros Arvanitis, 2009. "How do different motives for R&D cooperation affect firm performance?," KOF Working papers 09-233, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    11. Bronwyn Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2014. "The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(2), pages 375-423, June.
    12. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    13. Malte Mosel, 2012. "The role of patents and secrecy for intellectual property protection: theory and evidence," Working Papers 117, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    14. Telg, Nina & Lokshin, Boris & Letterie, Wilko, 2023. "How formal and informal intellectual property protection matters for firms' decision to engage in coopetition: The role of environmental dynamism and competition intensity," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    15. Birgit Aschhoff & Tobias Schmidt, 2008. "Empirical Evidence on the Success of R&D Cooperation—Happy Together?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 33(1), pages 41-62, August.
    16. de Faria, Pedro & Sofka, Wolfgang, 2010. "Knowledge protection strategies of multinational firms--A cross-country comparison," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 956-968, September.
    17. Leiponen, Aija & Byma, Justin, 2009. "If you cannot block, you better run: Small firms, cooperative innovation, and appropriation strategies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 1478-1488, November.
    18. Daniel P. Gross, 2023. "The Hidden Costs of Securing Innovation: The Manifold Impacts of Compulsory Invention Secrecy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 2318-2338, April.
    19. Klein, Michael A., 2020. "Secrecy, the patent puzzle and endogenous growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    20. Barros, Henrique M., 2008. "The interaction between patents and other appropriability mechanisms: firm-level evidence from UK manufacturing," Insper Working Papers wpe_105, Insper Working Paper, Insper Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Knowledge Spillovers; patents; secrecy; open innovation; ordered probit;
    All these keywords.

    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:zbw:zewdip:5441. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zemande.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.