nep-ipr New Economics Papers
on Intellectual Property Rights
Issue of 2010‒10‒02
nine papers chosen by
Roland Kirstein
Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg

  1. Improving the Energy-Efficiency of Buildings: The Impact of Environmental Policy on Technological Innovation By Joëlle Noailly
  2. Prolific inventors: who are they and where do they locate? Evidence from a five countries US patenting data se By Christian Le Bas; Alexandre Cabagnols; Riad Bouklia-Hassane
  3. Patent Medicine? By Paul Grootendorst; Aidan Hollis; David K Levine; Thomas Pogge; Aled M Edwards
  4. the roles of intellectual property rights in the networked enterprise: the growing importance of coordination in innovation networks By Blandine LAPERCHE
  5. The Size of the EU Public Domain By Pollock, R.; Stepan, P.
  6. Innovation and Institutional Ownership By Philippe Aghion; John Van Reenen; Luigi Zingales
  7. Competition and growth: reinterpreting their relationship By ONORI, Daria
  8. The Value of the EU Public Domain By Pollock, R.; Stepan, P.; Välimäki, M.
  9. Determinants of Locating R&D Activity in the Philippines: Policy Implications By Gonzales, Kathrina G.; Yap, Josef T.; Macasaquit, Mari-Len R.

  1. By: Joëlle Noailly (CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis The Hague)
    Abstract: This paper investigates the impact of alternative environmental policy instruments on technological innovations aiming to improve energy-efficiency in buildings. The empirical analysis focuses on three main types of policy instruments, namely regulatory energy standards in buildings codes, energy taxes as captured by energy prices and specific governmental energy R&D expenditures. Technological innovation is measured using patent counts for specific technologies related to energy-efficiency in buildings (e.g. insulation, high-efficiency boilers, energy-saving lightings). The estimates for seven European countries over the 1989-2004 period imply that a strengthening of 10% of the minimum insulation standards for walls would increase the likelihood to file additional patents by about 3%. In contrast, energy prices have no significant effect on the likelihood to patent. Governmental energy R&D support has a small positive significant effect on patenting activities.
    Keywords: Innovation, Technological Change, Patents, Energy-Efficiency, Buildings, Environmental Policy
    JEL: O31 O34 Q55
    Date: 2010–09
  2. By: Christian Le Bas; Alexandre Cabagnols; Riad Bouklia-Hassane
    Abstract: The prolific (serial) inventors set up the core of the paper. Prolific inventors tend to have a high productivity in terms of inventions (patents) having in general more economic value. The capacity to produce a lot of inventions (patents) is termed “prolificness”. We want to deepen our knowledge about the size of their population, some of their main characteristics, the factors that explain the number patents applied. We exploit a rich data set built onto information available released by the US Patent and Trade Mark Office (USPTO) for the five more important countries as far as technological activities are concerned: Great-Britain, France, USA, Germany, Japan over a long time period (1975-2002). We give insights upon the size of the population of prolific inventors and provide new information about some of their characteristics. We carry out an empirical study in order to explain the prolific inventor patents distribution. We suggest models for estimating the effects of the main variable explaining their productivity. Binomial regressions explaining the inventor productivity after controlling for patent duration and time concentration (among others factors) show that interfirm and international mobility and technological variety (at the inventor level) affects positively the inventor productivity. But there is simultaneity. The overall results suggest that the same factors impact positively productivity with no difference across countries (with exceptions).
    Date: 2010–09
  3. By: Paul Grootendorst; Aidan Hollis; David K Levine; Thomas Pogge; Aled M Edwards
    Date: 2010–09–21
  4. By: Blandine LAPERCHE
    Abstract: The networked enterprise simultaneously seeks to develop new knowledge in order to be able to compete on international markets thanks to its innovation capacity and to improve its process of allocation of resources, notably by reducing its production and organisational costs. In this paper, we study the functions of intellectual property rights in these productive and organisational objectives of the networked enterprise. Intellectual property rights are usually studied in relation to their incentive/defensive and offensive roles. But do they play a role in the organisation and notably in the coordination of activities within the networked enterprise? We consider that they have an important ‘coordination function’, making easier the relationships between all the fragmented parts of the networked enterprise. This coordination role is moreover gaining ground in the context of collaborative innovation (innovation networks). It is thus associated to the ‘incentive/defensive function’ of IPRs, aiming at protecting and thus giving incentives to the constitution of the firm’s innovation potential, called here ‘knowledge capital’. This coordination function is also associated to the ‘offensive one’, relying on the construction and the reinforcement of entry barriers which largely contribute to define the position of the networked enterprise within the innovation network to which it usually belongs. The paper concludes by stressing the relationship between the functions of IPRs in networked enterprises and the extension and strengthening of IPRs at the global leve
    Keywords: intellectual property rights, networked enterprise, growth, coordination, innovation network
    JEL: Q55 D23 D85
    Date: 2010
  5. By: Pollock, R.; Stepan, P.
    Abstract: This paper reports results from a large recent study of the public domain in the European Union. Based on a combination of catalogue and survey data our figures for the number of items (and works) in the public domain extend across a variety of media and provide one of the first quantitative estimates of the `size' of the public domain in any jurisdiction.
    Keywords: Copyright; Public Domain; Intellectual Property; Europe
    Date: 2010–04–30
  6. By: Philippe Aghion (Harvard University and CEPR); John Van Reenen (London School of Economics (LSE), Centre for Economic Performance, NBER and CEPR); Luigi Zingales (University of Chicago, NBER and CEPR)
    Abstract: We find that institutional ownership in publicly traded companies is associated with more innovation (measured by cite-weighted patents). To explore the mechanism through which this link arises, we build a model that nests the lazy-manager hypothesis with career-concerns, where institutional owners increase managerial incentives to innovate by reducing the career risk of risky projects. The data supports the career concerns model. First, whereas the lazy manager hypothesis predicts a substitution effect between institutional ownership and product market competition (and managerial entrenchment generally), the career-concern model allows for complementarity. Empirically, we reject substitution effects. Second, CEOs are less likely to be fired in the face of profit downturns when institutional ownership is higher. Finally, using instrumental variables, policy changes and disaggregating by type of owner we find that the effect of institutions on innovation does not appear to be due to endogenous selection.
    Keywords: Career Concerns, Innovation, Institutional Ownership, Productivity and R&D
    JEL: G20 G32 O31 O32 O33
    Date: 2010–07
  7. By: ONORI, Daria (Université catholique de Louvain, CORE, B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium; University of Rome "La Sapienza", Faculty of Economics, I-00161 Rome, Italy)
    Abstract: In this paper we modify a standard quality ladder model by assuming that R&D is driven by outsider firms and the winners of the race sell licenses over their patents, instead of entering directly the inter- mediate good sector. As a reward they get the aggregate profit of the industry. Moreover, in the intermediate good sector firms compete à la Cournot and it is assumed that there are spillovers represented by strategic complementarities on costs. Our goal is to prove that there exists an interval of values of the spillover parameter such that the relationship between competition and growth is an inverted-U-shape.
    Keywords: quality ladder, Cournot oligopoly, strategic complementarities, competition and growth
    JEL: L13 L16 O31 O52
    Date: 2010–07–01
  8. By: Pollock, R.; Stepan, P.; Välimäki, M.
    Abstract: This paper reports results from a large recent study of the public domain in the European Union. Based on a combination of catalogue, commercial and survey data we present detailed figures both on the prices (and price dierences) of in copyright and public domain material and on the usage of that material. Combined with the estimates for the size of the EU public domain presented in the companion paper Pollock and Stepan (2009) our results allow us to provide the first quantitative estimate for the `value' of the public domain (i.e. welfare gains from its existence) in any jurisdiction.
    Keywords: Copyright; Public Domain; Intellectual Property; Europe
    Date: 2010–04–30
  9. By: Gonzales, Kathrina G.; Yap, Josef T.; Macasaquit, Mari-Len R.
    Abstract: <p>Research and development (R&D) is an important resource for sustained economic growth. New knowledge created by a firm has spillover effects that improve the productivity of other firms and even other sectors. This is the heart of endogenous growth theory. In this framework, government policies can affect the rate of long-term economic growth by impacting the accumulation of both physical and human capital and the effort dedicated to research and development and the creation of new knowledge. A country can supplement its R&D efforts by enticing R&D firms to locate in the country or encourage local firms and multinational corporations operating there to conduct R&D activities. Factors that affect these decisions can be classified into push factors, pull factors, policy factors, and enabling factors. The last three are relevant for the host country while the first set of factors relate to the home country.</p> <p>A survey of firms operating in the Philippines was conducted to determine which factors are deemed important and areas where the Philippines is deemed inadequate. The findings have important policy implications. Push factors are found to be important, particularly the need to remain competitive. The pull factors that rate highly are (i) availability of talented skills at low cost; and (ii) size of market. The main policy factors that encourage firms to locate in the Philippines are: (i) good quality of education; and (ii) protection of intellectual property rights. The enabling factors are: (i) low cost of doing business; (ii) good physical and communication infrastructure; (iii) legal system; and (iv) availability of R&D support services. Two aspects are prominent in terms of discouraging R&D activity in the Philippines: (i) the high cost of R&D equipment and technology; and (ii) lack of technical manpower/engineers.</p> <p>Policies can look into the host country factors that do not rate highly and address the areas that are evaluated poorly. Policymakers should also be aware of the source of outward R&D spending which are mainly firms from the US and Japan. Most R&D of these firms is conducted in the ICT, automotive, and pharmaceutical industries. Meanwhile, interviews with associations of firms indicate that there is no cooperation among individual firms in terms of conducting R&D. The government can also initiate, strengthen, and support joint R&D efforts among firms in a specific sector given that there will likely be significant spillover effects in this type of endeavor.</p>
    Keywords: economic growth, foreign investment, technological innovation, intellectual property rights, research and development, Philippines, outsourcing, knowledge spillover, endogenous growth theory, push and pull factors, R&D spending, R&D investment
    Date: 2010

This nep-ipr issue is ©2010 by Roland Kirstein. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.