|
on Innovation |
| By: | Barge-Gil, Andrés; López, Alberto |
| Abstract: | R&D is considered to be the main source of innovation. We argue that R&D is too broad a measure, including activities differing in purposes, culture, people, management and other features. However, empirical studies have not analyzed them separately, mainly due to the lack of data. Using firm-level data, the aim of this paper is to estimate the differentiated effect of research and development on different innovation outputs. Results show that both research and development activities are important. However, we find that development activities are more important for product innovation, while the effect of research activities is higher on process innovation. Moreover, we analyze differences by technological intensity of the sector. When analyzing product and process innovations, we find evidence supporting the existence of higher payoffs to development and, especially to research in low-tech sectors when compared with high-tech ones. |
| Keywords: | R&D, patents, product innovation, process innovation, impact |
| JEL: | O3 L60 |
| Date: | 2011–02–23 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:29083&r=ino |
| By: | A. Blasco |
| Abstract: | Recent models of multi-stage R&D have shown that a system of weak intellectual property rights may lead to faster innovation by inducing firms to share intermediate technological knowledge. In this article I introduce a distinction between plain and sophisticated technological knowledge, which has not been noticed so far but plays a crucial role in determining how different appropriability rules affect the incentives to innovate. I argue that the positive effect of weak intellectual property regimes on the sharing of intermediate technological knowledge vanishes when technological knowledge is sophisticated, as is likely to be the case in many high tech industries. |
| JEL: | L10 O30 |
| Date: | 2011–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bol:bodewp:wp733&r=ino |
| By: | Pascal Corbel (University of Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines (UVSQ), F-78000 Versailles, France); Christian Le Bas (Université de Lyon, Lyon, F-69003, France ; CNRS, GATE Lyon St Etienne,F-69130 Ecully, France) |
| Abstract: | Recent publications in the field of Intellectual Property (IP) have shown that the previous literature did not grasp how complex patents are. The goal of this paper is to present an overview of all identified functions of patents and of the main strategic implications of such a complex picture. We first survey the main patent functions : innovation protection, functions related to trade and finance, defensive roles, and patent as an input in the innovation process. We then define each function and analyse their main evolution trends in relation with the current environment. We finally identify the strategic implications of each function. We focus on the implications of the newly identified functions and on the interaction between the different functions. |
| Keywords: | Patent, Intellectual Property, Strategic Management, Functions, Motives to patent |
| JEL: | F12 F15 F18 Q28 |
| Date: | 2011 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:gat:wpaper:1106&r=ino |
| By: | Spyros Arvanitis (KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich, Switzerland); Barbara Fuchs (KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich, Switzerland); Martin Woerter (University of Liechtenstein, Liechtenstein) |
| Abstract: | Research about users as a source of innovation has been largely restricted to case studies exploring specific innovation projects at the firm level. This study assesses empirically the relationship between external end users’ knowledge as an input factor to innovation and firms’ innovation success. The results strongly support the hypotheses: (i) that external end users have the potential to essentially improve the innovative performance of firms; (ii) that the technique of interaction during the innovation process and the characteristics of involved external users matter as well. The more firms make use of emphatic design and select specific users to acquire hard-to-articulate customer needs, the stronger is the relationship between access to external end users’ knowledge and firm innovation success measured in sales of innovative products. |
| Keywords: | user innovation, user interaction, lead user, innovation performance |
| JEL: | O31 |
| Date: | 2011–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:kof:wpskof:11-276&r=ino |
| By: | Thomas Jeitschko (Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice and Department of Economics, Michigan State University); Nanyun Zhang (Department of Economics, Towson University) |
| Abstract: | The conventional wisdom is that the formation of patent pools is welfare enhancing when patents are complementary, since the pool avoids a double-marginalization problem associated with independent licensing. The focus of this paper is on (downstream) product development and commercialization on the basis of perfectly complementary patents. We consider development technologies that entail spillovers between rivals, and assume that nal demand products are imperfect substitutes. If pool formation either increases spillovers in development or decreases the degree of product dierentiation, pool formation can actually adversely aect overall welfare by reducing incentives towards product development and product market competition|even with perfectly complementary patents. This significantly modifies and possibly even negates the conventional wisdom for many settings. The paper provides insights into why patent pools are uncommon in science-based industries such as biotech, despite there being strong policy advocacy for them. |
| Keywords: | Patent Pools, Research and Development, Innovation, BioTechnology, Electronics. |
| JEL: | L1 L2 L4 L6 D2 D4 |
| Date: | 2011–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:tow:wpaper:2011-02&r=ino |
| By: | Kaz Miyagiwa; Huasheng Song; Hylke Vandenbussche |
| Abstract: | We study the effect of contingency trade policy in a multi-country oligopoly model with and without R&D opportunities. We show that firms benefit from unilateral protection but initiate antidumping (AD) only against the targets domiciled in substantially smaller countries. Also, AD filings are more likely when firms face R&D opportunities. These results are consistent with recent empirical findings, namely, (1) actions are mostly between industrial and developing countries, (2) developing countries use AD to retaliate against industrial countries, and (3) AD is concentrated in R&D-intensive industries. Interestingly, intellectual property rights violations in developing countries have no connection to AD filings. |
| Date: | 2010–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:emo:wp2003:1009&r=ino |
| By: | Erik Stam; Bart Nooteboom |
| Abstract: | This paper discusses the nature of entrepreneurship and its relation to innovation along a cycle in which exploration and exploration follow upon each other. We place the roles of entrepreneurship in innovation policy within this cycle of innovation. Different types of innovation along the cycle of innovation are realized with different forms of entrepreneurship, which are constrained or enabled by different legal institutions. One of the key roles of governments is to design, change or destruct institutions in order to improve societal welfare. The question is what governments should do in the context of innovation policy. Here, social scientists can make a contribution by providing insight into what entrepreneurship and innovation is (theories about these phenomena), and how institutions affect them in reality (empirical evidence about their effects). This requires social scientists to be engaged scholars and to provide new policy options as an honest broker between the academic world and the policy world. The key question of this paper is: How can policy best enable innovation based entrepreneurship? The answer is derived from looking at both theoretical tenets and empirical evidence using an institutional design perspective, which aims at providing arguments for the design, change and/or destruction of institutions, given the goals of the governments. We provide an overview of some (empirically tests of) institutions that enable or restrain particular types of entrepreneurship. Examples of these institutions are intellectual property rights and the Small Business Innovation Research program, employment protection, and non-compete covenants. |
| Keywords: | entrepreneurship, innovation, institutions, innovation policy |
| JEL: | E61 G38 H57 K29 L26 L53 M13 O12 O31 O33 O38 |
| Date: | 2011–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:use:tkiwps:1103&r=ino |
| By: | Mario Cimoli; Giovanni Dosi; Roberto Mazzoleni; Bhaven Sampat |
| Abstract: | An essential aspect of "catching up" by developing countries is the emulation of technological leaders and the rapid accumulation by individuals and organizations of the knowledge and capabilities needed in order to sustain processes of technical learning. The rates and patterns of development of such capabilities are fundamentally shaped by the opportunities that indigenous organizations have to enter and operate in particular markets and technology areas. However, knowledge accumulation is also influenced by the governance of intellectual property rights (IPRs). The purpose of this work - prepared for a volume of the Initiative for Policy Dialogue, Columbia University, Intellectual and Property Rights Taskforce - is to offer an assessment of such influences in the long term, beginning with the early episodes of industrialization all the way to the present regime. The historical record is indeed quite diverse and variegated. However if there is a robust historical fact, it is the laxity or sheer absence of intellectual property rights in nearly all instances of successful catching up. We begin by reviewing a few theoretical arguments that economists have formulated on the effects of a system of patent protection. We will then review the historical evidence on the roles of patents in economic development. Next we discuss the changes in the IPR regime that have taken place roughly over the last third of a century in the United States. The reason for focusing on the United States is that doing so will outline the broad template of patent policy reform that has been adopted by policy makers in many other countries as a result of a varying mix of external pressures, myopia, corruption and ideological blindness. The final part of this essay, explores the likely impact of harmonization of international patent laws - including TRIPS - on developing countries. |
| Keywords: | Intellectual Property Rights, Catching-up, Imitation, Development, TRIPS |
| Date: | 2011–02–28 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ssa:lemwps:2011/06&r=ino |
| By: | Ambec, Stefan; Cohen, Mark A. (Resources for the Future); Elgie, Stewart; Lanoie, Paul |
| Abstract: | Twenty years ago, Harvard Business School economist and strategy professor Michael Porter stood conventional wisdom about the impact of environmental regulation on business on its head by declaring that well-designed regulation could actually enhance competitiveness. The traditional view of environmental regulation held by virtually all economists until that time was that requiring firms to reduce an externality like pollution necessarily restricted their options and thus by definition reduced their profits. After all, if profitable opportunities existed to reduce pollution, profit-maximizing firms would already be taking advantage of those opportunities. Over the past 20 years, much has been written about what has since become known simply as the Porter Hypothesis (PH). Yet even today, we find conflicting evidence and alternative theories that might explain the PH, and oftentimes a misunderstanding of what the PH does and does not say. This paper provides an overview of the key theoretical and empirical insights into the PH to date, draws policy implications from these insights, and sketches out major research themes going forward. |
| Keywords: | Porter Hypothesis, environmental policy, innovation, performance |
| Date: | 2011–01–19 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-11-01&r=ino |
| By: | Karol Jan Borowiecki (Department of Economics, Trinity College Dublin) |
| Abstract: | The relationship between conflict and artistic output is ambiguous. This paper proposes an explanation for the contradiction in research, which we term the war-art puzzle. We employ a global sample of 115 prominent classical composers born after 1800 and link their annual productivity with the incidence of wars. We construct age-productivity profiles and find that the impact of wars on creative production is markedly heterogeneous - composers’ productivity was significantly higher during defensive or victorious international wars and lower during intra-state conflicts, offensive or lost international wars. the long-run. |
| Keywords: | productivity, conflict, war, innovation, composer |
| JEL: | D24 D74 J24 F51 O31 N40 Z10 |
| Date: | 2011–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:tcd:tcduee:tep0711&r=ino |