|
on Intellectual Property Rights |
| By: | Jeitschko, Thomas D.; Zhang, Nanyun |
| 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. This conventional wisdom relies on the effects that pooling has on downstream prices. However, it does not account for the potentially significant role of the effect of pooling on downstream innovation. 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 final demand products are imperfect substitutes. When pool formation facilitates information sharing and either increases spillovers in development or decreases the degree of product differentiation, patent pools can adversely affect welfare by reducing the incentives towards product development and product market competition|even with perfectly complementary patents. The analysis modifies and even negates the conventional wisdom for some settings and suggests why patent pools are uncommon in science-based industries such as biotech and pharmaceuticals that are characterized by tacit knowledge and incomplete patents. -- |
| Keywords: | Patent Pools,Research and Development,Innovation,Tacit Knowledge,BioTechnology,Pharmaceutical |
| JEL: | O3 L1 L2 L4 L6 |
| Date: | 2013 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:dicedp:92&r=ipr |
| By: | Yang, Zhenzeng |
| Abstract: | This paper examines theoretically the impact of host intellectual property rights (IPR) protection and complexity on MNEs' investment decision to the South in order to explain why large amount of foreign direct investment (FDI) flows to low IPR protecting China and other emerging economies. There are two key assumptions, imitation cost are positively related to complexity and imitation cost is higher when imitating a product designed only for foreign market than those for host market. In the model, a strengthening of IPR protection in the South raises an MNE's profit and stimulates inward FDI and licensing simultaneously, and stronger IPR protection will also induce more higher complexity production transfered to the South. Furthermore, as cost-oriented FDI is less sensitive to host IPR protection, developing host countries with low IPR protection can attract relatively more cost-oriented FDI. The model implies that strengthening of IPR protection can help emerging economies attract more complex and market-oriented FDI. |
| Keywords: | Intellectual Property Rights, Licensing, Imitation, Multinational Enterprise, Foreign Direct Investment |
| JEL: | F21 F23 O33 O34 |
| Date: | 2013–05–07 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:46734&r=ipr |
| By: | David Carey; Christopher Hill; Brian Kahin |
| Abstract: | The US innovation system has many strengths, including world class research universities and firms that thrive in innovation-intensive sectors. However, fissures have begun to appear, notably in the areas of human capital development, the patent system and manufacturing activity, while public investments in R&D and research universities are at risk of being curtailed by budget cuts. Revitalizing the dynamism of innovation has become a priority for US policymakers. To this end, it is important that federal and state governments sustain financial support for knowledge creation. The US workforce’s skills will need to be upgraded, especially in STEM fields, and measures taken to provide more favourable framework conditions for developing advanced manufacturing in the United States. While the recent patent reform is a big step in the right direction, patent reform needs to be taken further by ensuring that the legal standards for granting injunctive relief and damages awards for patent infringement reflect realistic business practices and the relative contributions of patented components of complex technologies.<P>Renforcer l'innovation aux États Unis<BR>Le système d’innovation des États-Unis possède de nombreux atouts, en particulier des universités de recherche de rang mondial et des entreprises dynamiques dans les secteurs à forte intensité d’innovation. Cependant, certaines failles commencent à apparaître, notamment en termes de formation du capital humain, de brevets et d’activité manufacturière, et les investissements publics en faveur de la R-D et des universités de recherche risquent de pâtir des réductions budgétaires. Pour les décideurs américains, réactiver la dynamique de l’innovation est devenu une priorité. À cette fin, il importe que le gouvernement fédéral et les exécutifs des États continuent de soutenir financièrement la création de connaissances. Il faudrait améliorer le niveau de qualification de la main-d’oeuvre, en particulier dans le domaine des sciences, de la technologie, de l’ingénierie et des mathématiques (STIM), et prendre des mesures pour assurer la mise en place de conditions-cadres plus favorables au développement de la fabrication de pointe. La récente réforme des brevets représente un grand pas dans la bonne direction, mais elle doit être poursuivie en garantissant qu’en cas d’atteinte à un brevet, les critères juridiques sur lesquels se fondent les tribunaux pour prendre des décisions conservatoires et accorder des dommages-intérêts reflètent les pratiques effectives des entreprises et les contributions relatives des composantes brevetées des technologies complexes. |
| Keywords: | innovation, entrepreneurship, patents, R&D, green innovation, knowledge spillovers, MFP growth, complex technologies, cluster, advanced manufacturing, tertiary education attainment, STEM, immigration Visa, R&E tax credit, innovation, entrepreneuriat, brevets, R&D, l'innovation verte, crédits d'impôt pour R&E, externalités de connaissances, croissance de la productivité multifactorielle (PMF), pôles d'entreprises, activités manufacturières de pointe, niveau d'éducation tertiaire, STIM, visa d'immigration |
| JEL: | I2 O3 |
| Date: | 2012–11–22 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:ecoaaa:1001-en&r=ipr |
| By: | Nikulainen, Tuomo; Tahvanainen, Antti-Jussi |
| Abstract: | This paper aims to identify factors that relate to scientists’ propensity to make commercially significant scientific discoveries (inventions) and to describe how these inventions are commercialized. Based on a large survey of academics active in different fields of science at U.S. universities, the paper benchmarks the top 20 universities against the rest, identifying the impact of different institutional settings. To highlight the institutional setting, the paper also compares these results to similar survey data from Finland, representing a small, highly educated European country. This comparison addresses the ‘European paradox’ in university technology commercialization, which is characterized by high investments in university research and disappointingly low levels of inventions and related commercialization activity. The results show that the likelihood of making commercially valuable scientific discoveries in the U.S. is driven by motivations related to the identification of commercial opportunities and working in interdisciplinary research environments. There are also significant differences between the various fields of science. In the top U.S. universities, the funding sources for scientists more likely to make inventions are more diversified and unique. The results for Finland are surprisingly similar, suggesting that the cause of the ‘European paradox’ seems to originate in the commercialization of inventions rather than their generation. When focusing on inventors who actively pursue commercial goals, both U.S. and Finnish inventors prefer licensing as the most popular way of taking scientific discoveries to the market. Consulting and entrepreneurship rank second and third, respectively. The countries differ with respect to both the inventors’ motivations to commercialize inventions and their reasons to refrain from it. In Finland, the motivations for not pursuing commercial opportunities are much more prominent than among U.S. scientists. |
| Keywords: | academic inventions, innovation, commercialization of research, academic entrepreneurship |
| JEL: | O30 O38 O33 O34 |
| Date: | 2013–05–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rif:wpaper:8&r=ipr |
| By: | Nikulainen, Tuomo |
| Abstract: | Existing research argues that the keys to generating industry-relevant knowledge are interdisciplinary and networked research. The aim of this paper is to address statistically whether interdisciplinary and networked research are related to a higher potential to generate ideas with significant commercial value. Using a unique survey of academics in Finland, we identify several factors that relate to idea generation. In different types of research networks, we find a positive connection to an interdisciplinary work environment and networking. We also identify significant differences among fields of research. |
| Keywords: | universities, research, idea generation, commercial ideas, interdisciplinarity, networks, networking |
| JEL: | O30 O38 O33 O34 |
| Date: | 2013–05–03 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rif:wpaper:9&r=ipr |
| By: | Nicolas Serrano-Velarde (Oxford University); Douglas Hanley (University of Pennsylvania); Ufuk Akcigit (University of Pennsylvania) |
| Abstract: | This paper introduces endogenous technical change through basic and applied research in a growth model. Basic research differs from applied research in two significant ways. First, significant advances in technological knowledge come through basic research rather than applied research. Second, these significant advances could potentially be applicable to multiple industries. Since these applications are not immediate, the innovating firm cannot exploit all the benefits of the basic innovations for production. We analyze the impact of this appropriability problem on firmsâ basic research incentives in an endogenous growth framework with private firms and an academic sector. After characterizing the equilibrium, we estimate our model using micro level data on research expenditures and behavior by French firms. We then decompose the aggregate growth by the source and type of innovation. Moreover, we quantitatively document the size of the underinvestment in basic research and consider various research policies to alleviate this inefficiency. Our analysis highlights the need for devoting a larger fraction of GDP for basic academic research, as well as higher subsidy rates for private research. |
| Date: | 2012 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:red:sed012:665&r=ipr |
| By: | Fernando Hervas Soriano (JRC-IPTS); Joerg Zimmermann (JRC-IPTS) |
| Abstract: | This report presents the findings of the seventh survey on trends in business R&D investment. These are based on 187 responses of mainly larger companies from the 1000 EU-based companies in the 2011 EU Industrial R&D Investment Scoreboard. These 187 companies are responsible for R&D investment worth almost €56 billion, constituting around 40% of the total R&D investment by the 1000 EU Scoreboard companies. The main result is that these top R&D investing companies expect their global R&D investments to grow by 4% annually from 2012 to 2014. The average share of sales coming from new innovative products and services was 18%, varying from 33% in high R&D intensity sectors to 10% in low R&D intensity ones. The differences between the sectors were not in all cases related to R&D intensity or net sales of the companies but rather seemed to reflect different sectoral innovation cycles. Collaboration agreements are considered a more important form of knowledge sharing activities than licencing (except for high R&D intensity sectors), which could be a sign of the increasing importance of open innovation. For the impact of factors and policies on the company’s innovation activities, national public support had the most positive effect, followed by availability of qualified personnel and EU public support. As in previous surveys, labour costs and conditions of IPR (enforcement, time and costs) continued to be perceived as negative factors for company innovations. This reveals the importance of fostering an efficient IPR regime for companies’ innovation activities. |
| Keywords: | Industrial Economics, Corporate R&D and innovation; productivity; business trends; technological innovation; intangible assets; competitiveness; growth and employment; company growth; Europe 2020 strategy. |
| Date: | 2012–07 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc72991&r=ipr |
| By: | Daria Ciriaci (Inter-American Development Bank); Fernando Hervas Soriano (JRC-IPTS) |
| Abstract: | This Policy Brief presents recent results on the impact of training, marketing and design expenditures on European firms' innovative performance. The new evidence drawn from recent JRC research suggests that these expenditures, in combination with R&D, are crucial drivers of innovation. Drawing on these results, policy implications for the European Research and Innovation Agenda are discussed and additional research questions identified. |
| Keywords: | Industrial Economics, Corporate R&D and innovation; productivity; business trends; technological innovation; intangible assets; competitiveness; growth and employment; company growth; Europe 2020 strategy. |
| Date: | 2012–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc75493&r=ipr |
| By: | Walls, Margaret (Resources for the Future) |
| Abstract: | Transferable development rights (TDRs) are a market-based approach to land conservation. They allow the development rights from one property to be transferred to another, with the first “sending” property placed under a development restriction or conservation easement and the “receiving” property permitted more dense development than would otherwise be allowed by baseline zoning regulations. This paper summarizes the economics literature on TDRs and describes a long-running program in a county in Maryland, one of the few programs with an active TDR market. It updates previously published results from the program and describes some problems that have arisen in recent years as the program has matured. The paper offers some observations as to why these problems have occurred and suggestions for other communities considering TDR programs. |
| Keywords: | TDRs, zoning, sprawl, farmland preservation, easements |
| JEL: | Q24 Q28 Q15 R14 |
| Date: | 2012–12–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:rff:dpaper:dp-12-49&r=ipr |