nep-tid New Economics Papers
on Technology and Industrial Dynamics
Issue of 2011‒03‒12
six papers chosen by
Rui Baptista
Technical University of Lisbon

  1. R versus D: Estimating the differentiated effect of research and development on innovation results By Barge-Gil, Andrés; López, Alberto
  2. Patent Races with Dynamic Complementarity By A. Blasco
  3. External End Users and Firm Innovation Performance By Spyros Arvanitis; Barbara Fuchs; Martin Woerter
  4. Patent Pools and Product Development By Thomas Jeitschko; Nanyun Zhang
  5. The evolution of patent functions: New trends, main challenges and implications for firm strategy By Pascal Corbel; Christian Le Bas
  6. Market Integration and Technological Leadership in Europe. By Belderbos, Rene; Sleuwaegen, Leo; Veugelers, Reinhilde; Boiardi, Priscilla; Leten, Bart; Stroobants, Jesse

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6. By: Belderbos, Rene; Sleuwaegen, Leo; Veugelers, Reinhilde; Boiardi, Priscilla; Leten, Bart; Stroobants, Jesse
    Abstract: This study traces and analyses the changes in firm and industry structure due to EU market integration and the integration of the EU in the global economy. It focuses on changes in competitiveness based on innovation and technology development. The study provides information on the production, technology structure and geographical distribution of leading European firms. A database with firm-level data has been established and complemented by estimates of indicators of industry structure, including the diversification and technological advancement of a firm's production, the intra-EU multinationality of firms, as well as the degree of concentration and geographical agglomeration of industries. An in-dept empirical analysis of the relationship between technological leadership and market leadership has been conducted. The results indicate an increasing importance of technology for production leadership. Firms with the strongest market positions combine a broader technology portfolio strategy, while ensuring a deeper technology position in the sector of dominance. Technology leadership has a strong impact on the production share that new entrants can attain. The study confirms a positive link between technology and market leadership growth.
    Date: 2010–02

This nep-tid issue is ©2011 by Rui Baptista. 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.