Using patents in growth models

Economics of Innovation and New Technology

Volumn 10, Issue 6, 2001, Pages 449-492

  Keely, Louise C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

Growth; Intellectual Property; Technological Change

Indexed keywords

EID: 0010560203     PISSN: 10438599     EISSN: 14768364     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10438590100000018     Document Type: Article

References (142)

1. Philippe, Aghion, and Peter, Howitt. 1992. A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60: 323–351.
2. Philippe, Aghion, and Peter, Howitt. 1998. Endogenous Growth Theory, The MIT Press.
3. Cristiano, Antonelli. 1999. The Microdynamics of Technological Change, Routledge.
4. Reiko Aoki and Jin-Li Hu. A cooperative game approach to patent litigation, settlement, and allocation of legal costs. Working paper, University of Auckland, January 1999a.
5. Reiko Aoki and Jin-Li Hu. Imperfect patent enforcement, legal rules and settlement. Working paper, University of Auckland, November 1999b.
6. Reiko Aoki and Yossi Spiegel. Public disclosure of patent applications, R&D, and welfare. Working paper, University of Auckland, June 2000.
7. Anthony, Arundel, and Isabelle, Kabla. 1998. What percentage of innovations are patented? Empirical estimates for European firms. Research Policy, 27 (2): 127–141.
8. David H., Austin. 1993. An event-study approach to measuring innovative output: The case of biotechnology. American Economic Review, 83 (2): 253–258.
9. Kyle Bagwell and Robert W. Staiger. Risky R&D in oligopolistic product markets. Working Paper 872, Northwestern Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science Working Papers, January 1990.
10. Francis, Bloch, and Paul, Markowitz. 1996. Optimal disclosure delay in multistage R&D. Intenational Journal of Industrial Organization, 14 (2): 159–179.
11. Erik, Brouwer, and Alfred, Kleinknechl. 1999. Innovative output, and a firm's propensity to patent. An exploration of CIS micro data. Research Policy, 28 (6): 615–624.
12. Ricardo J, Caballero, and Adam B, Jaffe., 1993. “ How high are the giants' shoulders: An empirical assessment of knowledge spillovers and creative destruction in a model of economic growth. In Olivier Blanchard and Stanley Fischer, editors ”. In NBER Macroeconomics Annual, The MIT Press. 1993
13. Paul, Chaney, Timothy, Devinney, and Russell, Winer. 1991. The impact of new product introductions on the market value of firms. Journal of Business, 64 (4): 573–610.
14. lain, Cockburn, and Zvi, Griliches. 1988. Industry effects and appropriability measures in stock market's valuation of R&D and patents. American Economic Review, 78 (2): 419–423.
15. lain Cockburn and Rebecca Henderson. Measuring core competence?: Evidence from the pharmaceutical industry. Working paper, MIT, 1994.
16. Wesley M. Cohen, Richard R. Nelson, and John Walsh. Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not) Working Paper 7552. NBER, February 2000.
17. Francesca, Cornelli, and Mark, Schankerman. 1999. Patent renewals and R&D incentives. RAND Journal of Economics, 30 (2): 197–213.
18. Claude Crampes and Corinne Langinier. Litigation and settlement in patent infringement cases. Working paper, Universite des Sciences Sociales de Toulouse, May 2000.
19. Partha, Dasgupta, and Joseph, Stiglitz. 1980. Industrial structure and the nature of innovative activity. Economic Journal, 90 (358): 26–293.
20. Paul A., David. Knowledge, property and the system dynamics of technological change. In Proceedings of the World Bank Annual Conference on Development Economics. pp. 213–255. World Bank.
21. David, Paul A., 1993. “ Intellectual property institutions and the panda's thumb: Patents, copyrights, and trade secrets in economic theory and history ”. In Global Dimensions of Intellectual Property Rights in Science and Technology, Edited by: Wallerstein, M.B., Mogee, M.E., and Schoen, R.A., 19–61. National Academy Press.
22. Paul A, David. 1994. “ The evolution of intellectual property institutions ”. In Economics in a Changing World, Edited by: Aganbegyan, Abel, Bogomolor, Oleg, and Kaser, Michael. Vol. 1, 126–147. St. Martin's Press.
23. Paul A, David. 1997. “ Rethinking technology transfers: Incentives, institutions and knowledge-based industrial development ”. In Chinese Technology Transfer in the 1990s: Current Experience, Historical Problems, and International Perspectives, Edited by: Fernstein, Charles, and Howe, Christopher. 13–37. Edward Elgar.
24. Paul A., David, David, Mowery, and Edward Steinmuller, W., 1992. Analysing the economic payoffs from basic research. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 2 (1): 73–90.
25. Paul A, David, and Trond E, Olsen. 1992. Technology adoption learning spillovers and the optimal duration of patent-based monopolies. lnternational Journal of Industrial Organization, 10 (4): 517–543.
26. Lawrence, M., 1985. DeBrock. ‘Market structure, innovation and optimal patent life. Journal of Law and Economics, 28 (1): 223–244.
27. Flavio, Delbono, and Vincenzo, Denicolo. 1993. Regulating innovation activity. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 11 (1): 35–48.
28. Vincenzo, Denicolo. 1996. Patent races and optimal patent breadth and length. The Journal of lndustrial Economics, 44 (3): 249–265.
29. Mukesh, Eswaran, and Nancy T, Gallini. 1996. Patent policy and the direction of technological change. RAND Journal of Economics, 27 (4): 722–746.
30. Robert, Evenson. 1993. Patents. R&D and invention potential: International evidence. American Economic Review, 83 (2): 463–468.
31. Gallini, Nancy T., 1992. Patent policy and costly imitation. RAND Journal of Economics, 23 (1): 52–63.
32. Richard, Gilbert, and Carl, Shapiro. 1990. Optimal patent length and breadth. Rand Journal of Economics, 21 (1): 106–113.
33. Gittleman, Maury, and Wolff, Edward N., 1995. R&D activity and cross-country growth comparisons. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19 (1): 189–207.
34. Jerry, Green, and Suzanne, Scotchmer. 1995. On the division of profit in sequential innovation. RAND Journal of Economics, 26 (1): 20–33.
35. Jerry, Green, and Stokey, Nancy L., 1983. A comparison of tournaments and contracts. Journal of Political Economy, 91 (3): 349–364.
36. Zvi, Griliches. 1989. Patents: Recent trends and puzzles. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics 1989,: 291–319.
37. Zvi, Griliches. 1990. Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28 (4): 1661–1707.
38. Zvi, Griliches, Hall, Bronwyn H., and Ariel, Pakes. 1991. R&D, patents, and market value revisited: Is there a second (technological opportunity) factor?. Economics of lnnovation and New Technology, l (3): 183–201.
39. Griliches, Zvi, Pakes, Ari, and Hall, Bronwyn. 1987. “ The value of patents as indicators of inventive activity ”. In Economic Policy and Technological Performance, Edited by: Partha, Dasgupta, and Stoneman, Paul. Cambridge University Press.
40. Grossman, Gene M., and Helpman, Elhanan. 1991. Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy, The MIT Press.
41. Grossman, Gene M., and Shapiro, Carl. 1987. Dynamic R&D competition. Economic Journal, 97 (386): 372–387.
42. Grossman, Gene M., and Shapiro, Carl. 1988. Counterfeit product trade. American Economic Review, 78 (1): 59–75.
43. Grossman, Gene M., and Shapiro, Carl. 1989. Foreign counterfeiting of status goods. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 103 (1): 79–100.
44. Hall, Bronwyn H., 1993. The stock market's valuation of R&D investment during the 1980's. AEA Papers and Proceedings, 83 (2): 259–264.
45. Bronwyn H. Hall. Innovation and market value. Working Paper 6984, NBER, February 1999.
46. Hall, Bronwyn H., Griliches, Zvi, and Jerry, Hausman. 1986. Patents and R&D: Is there a lag?. International Economic Review, 27 (2): 265–283.
47. Bronwyn H. Hall, Adam Jaffe, and Manuel Trajtenberg. Market value and patent citations: A first look. Working Paper 7741, NBER, June 2000.
48. Harhoff, Dietmar, Narin, Francis, Scherer, F.M., and Vopel, Katrin. 1999. Citation frequency and the value of patented inventions. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 81 (3): 511–515.
49. Hausman, Jerry, Hall, Bronwyn H., and Griliches, Zvi. 1984. Econometric models for count data with an application to the patents-R&D relationship. Econometrica, 52 (4): 909–936.
50. Hayashi, F., 1982. Tobin's marginal q and average q: A neoclassical interpretation. Econometrica, 50 (1): 213–224.
51. Henderson, Rebecca, Jaffe, Adam B., and Trajtenberg, Manuel. 1998. Universities as a source of commercial technology: A detailed analysis of university patenting 1965–1988. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80 (1): 199–227.
52. Hugo A. Hopenhayn and Matthew F. Mitchell. Innovation fertility and patent design. Working Paper 7070, NBER Working Paper, April 1999.
53. Joachim Inkmann. Horizontal and vertical R&D cooperation. Discussion Paper 02/2000, Center of Finance and Econometrics at the University of Konstanz, 2000.
54. Irwin, Douglas, and Klenow, Peter. 1994. Learning by doing spillovers in the semiconductor industry. Journal of Political Economy, 102 (6): 1200–1227.
55. Jaffe, Adam B., 1986. Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: Evidence from firms' patents, profits and market value. American Economic Review, 76 (5): 984–1001.
56. Jaffe, Adam B., 2000. The U.S. patent system in transition: Policy innovation and the innovation process. Research Policy, 29 (4–5): 531–557.
57. Jaffe, Adam B., Fogarty, Michael S., and Banks, Bruce A., 1999. Evidence from patents and patent citations on the impact of NASA and other federal labs of commercial innovation. The Journal of lndustrial Economics, 46 (2): 183–205.
58. Adam B. Jaffe and Josh Lerner. Privatizing R&D: Patent policy and the commercialization of national laboratory technologies. Working Paper 7064, NBER, April 1999.
59. Johnson, William R., 1985. The economics of copying. Journal of Political Economy, 93 (1): 158–174.
60. Judd, Kenneth L., 1985. On the performance of patents. Econometrica, 53 (3): 567–585.
61. Ulrich Kaiser. Research cooperation and research expenditures with endogenous absorptive capacity: Theory and microeconometric evidence for the German service sector. Discussion Paper 00–25, ZEW, 2000.
62. Ulrich Kaiser and Georg Licht. R&D cooperation and R&D intensity: Theory and micro-econometric evidence for German manufacturing industries. Discussion Paper 98–32, ZEW, 1998.
63. Michael L. Katz and Janusz A. Ordover. R&D cooperation and competition. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics 1990. pages 137–203, 1990.
64. Louise C. Keely. A note on life (of patents) and learning (by doing) Working paper, Oxford University, September 1999.
65. Louise C. Keely. Intellectual property regimes in the long run. Working paper, Oxford University, May 2000.
66. Keely, Louise C., and Quah, Danny. 2000. Technology in growth. In Thijs de Ruyter van Steveninck, editor, Economic Growth and its Determinants, Kluwer.
67. Kitch, Edmund W., 1977. The nature and function of the patent system. Journal of Law and Economics, 20 (2): 265–290.
68. Kleinknecht, A., Measuring and analysing innovation in services and manufacturing. Discussion Paper Paper 98–52. Rotterdam Institute for Business Studies.
69. Kleinknecht, A., and Reijnen, J.O.N., 1992. Why do firms cooperate on R&D? An empirical study. Research Policy, 21 (4): 347–360.
70. Klemperer, Paul. 1990. How broad should the scope of patent protection be?. Rand Journal of Economics, 21 (1): 113–130.
71. Kortum, Samuel S., 1993. Equilibrium R&D and the patent-R&D ratio: U.S. evidence. AEA Papers and Proceedings, 83 (2): 450–457.
72. Kortum, Samuel S., 1997. A model of research, patenting and technological change. Econometrica, 65 (6): 1389–1419.
73. Kortum, Samuel S., and Lerner, Josh. 1998. Stronger protection or technological revolution: What is behind the recent surge in patenting?. Carregie-Rochester Series on Public Policy, 48 (1): 247–304.
74. La Manna, Manfredi M., MacLeod, Ross, and de Meza, David. 1989. The case for permissive patents. European Economic Review, 33 (7): 1427–1443.
75. La Manna, Manfredi M.A., 1992. Optimal patent life versus optimal patentability standards. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 10 (1): 81–89.
76. Jean O. Lanjouw. Patent protection: Of what value and for how long? Working Paper 4475, NBER, September 1993.
77. Jean O. Lanjouw. Economic consequences of a changing litigation environment: The case of patents. Working Paper 4835, NBER, August 1994.
78. Lanjouw, Jean O., 1998. Patent protection in the shadow of infringement: Simulation estimations of patent value. Review of Economic Studies, 65 (4): 671–710.
79. Jean O. Lanjouw and Josh Lerner. Preliminary injunctive relief: Theory and evidence from patent litigation. Working Paper 5689, NBER, July 1996.
80. Lanjouw, Jean O., and Lerner, Josh. 1998. The enforcement of intellectual property rights. Annales d'Economie et de Statistique, 10 (49/50): 223–246.
81. Lanjouw, Jean O., Pakes, Ariel, and Putnam, Jonathan. 1998. How to count patents and value intellectual property: the uses of patent renewal and application data. Journal of Industrial Economics, 46 (4): 405–432.
82. Jean O. Lanjouw and Mark Schankerman. Stylized facts of patent litigation: Value, scope and ownership. Working Paper 6297, NBER, December 1997.
83. Edward P. Lazear. Incentives in basic research. Working Paper 5444, NBER, January 1996.
84. Leibowitz, S.J., 1985. Copying and indirect appropriability. Journal of Political Economy, 93 (5): 945–951.
85. Lerner, Josh. 1995. Patenting in the shadow of competitors. Journal of Law and Economics, 38 (2): 463–495.
86. Josh Lerner. 150 years of patent ofice practice. Working paper, Harvard Business School, 1999a.
87. Josh Lerner. 150 years of patent protection. Working paper, Harvard Business School, 1999b.
88. Lerner, Joshua. 1994. The importance of patent scope: an empirical analysis. RAND Journal of Economics, 25 (2): 319–333.
89. Levin, Richard C., Klevorick, Alvin K., Nelson, Richard R., and Winter, Sidney G., 1987. Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3 (10): 783–820.
90. Lucas, Robert E., and Rescott, Edward C., 1971. Investment under uncertainty. Econometrica, 39 (5): 659–681.
91. Mansfield, Edwin. 1984. “ R&D and innovation: Some empirical findings ”. In R&D. Patents, and Productivity, Edited by: Griliches, Zvi. University of Chicago Press.
92. Mansfield, Edwin. 1986. The R&D tax credit and other technology policy issues. The American Economic Review, 76 (2): 190–194.
93. Mansfield, Edwin, Schwartz, Mark, and Wagner, Samuel. 1981. Imitation costs and patents: An empirical study. The Economic Journal, 91 (364): 907–918.
94. Matutes, Carmen, Regibeau, Pierre, and Rockett, Katharine. 1996. Optimal patent design and the diffusion of innovations. RAND Journal of Economics, 27 (1): 60–83.
95. Stephen M. Maurer and Suzanne Scotchmer. The independent-invention defense in intellectual property. Working paper, University of California at Berkeley, October 1998.
96. Megna, Pamela, and Klock, Mark. 1993. The impact of intangible capital on Tobin's q in the semiconductor industry. American Economic Association Papers and Proceedings, 83 (2): 265–269.
97. Megna, Pamela, and Mueller, Dennis C., 1991. Profit rates and intangible capital. Review of Economics and Statistics, 73 (4): 632–642.
98. Merges, Robert P., and Nelson, Richard R., 1990. On the complex economics of patent scope. Columbia Law Review, 90 (4): 839–916.
99. Merges, Robert P., and Nelson, Richard R., 1994. On limiting or encouraging rivalry in technical progress: The effect of patent scope decisions. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 25 (1): 1–24.
100. Nelson, Richard R., 1986. Institutions supporting technical advance in industry. The American Economic Review, 76 (2): 186–189.
101. Nelson, Richard R., 1988. “ Institutions supporting technical change in the United States ”. In Technical Change and Economic Theory, Edited by: Dosi, Giovanni. 312–329. Columbia University Press.
102. Nelson, Richard R., 1992. “ What is ‘commercial’ and what is ‘public’ about technology, and what should be? ”. In Technology and the Wealth of Nations, Edited by: Rosenberg, Nathan, Landau, Ralph, and Mowery, D.C., 57–71. Stanford University Press.
103. Novos, Ian E., and Waldman, Michael. 1984. The effects of increased copyright protection: An analytical approach. Journal of Political Economy, 92 (2): 236–246.
104. O'Donoghue, Ted. 1998. A patentability requirement for sequential innovations. RAND Journal of Economics, 29 (4): 654–679.
105. O'Donoghue, Ted, Scotchmer, Suzanne, and Thisse, Jacques-Francois. 1998. Patent breadth, patent life and the pace of technological progress. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 7 (1): 1–32.
106. Ted O'Donoghue and Josef Zweimuller. Patents in a model of endogenous growth. Working Paper 1951, CEPR, 1998.
107. Ordover, Janusz A., 1991. A patent system for both diffusion and exclusion. Journal of Econotnic Perspectives, 5 (1): 43–60.
108. Pakes, Ariel. 1985. On patents, R&D and the stock market rate of return. Journal of Political Economy, 93 (2): 390–409.
109. Pakes, Ariel. 1986. Patents as options: Some estimates of the value of holding European patent stocks. Econometrica, 54 (4): 755–784.
110. Ariel, Pakes, and Griliches, Zvi. R&D. Patents and Productivity. NBER Conference Report. Discussion Paper Paper 98–52. Edited by: Griliches, Zvi. pp. 55–72. University of Chicago Press.
111. Pakes, Ariel, and Schankerman, Mark. 1984. “ The rate of obsolescence of patents, research gestation lags, and the private rate of return to research resources ”. In R&D, Patents and Productivity, Edited by: Griliches, Zvi. University of Chicago Press.
112. Pavitt, Keith. 1985. Patent statistics as indicators of innovative activities: possibilities and problems. Scientometrics, 7: 77–99.
113. Pavitt, Keith. 1988. “ Uses and abuses of international patent statistics ”. In Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science and Technology, Edited by: Raan, A.F.J. van. 509–536. Elsevier Science Publishers.
114. Jonathan Putnam. The value of international patent rights. Working paper, Charles River Associates, 1997.
115. Danny Quah. Superstar knowledge products in a model of growth. Working paper, LSE, March 1998.
116. Rafiquzzaman, M., 1987. The optimal patent term under uncertainty. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 5 (2): 233–246.
117. Rajan, Raghuram G., and Zingales, Luigi. 1998. Financial dependence and growth. American Economic Review, 88 (3): 559–586.
118. Romano, Richard E., 1989. Aspects of R&D subsidization. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 104 (4): 863–873.
119. Romano, Richard E., 1991. The optimal R&D policy: Patents, public funding, or both?. Southern Economic Journal, 57 (3): 703–718.
120. Romer, Paul M., 1986. Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94 (5): 1002–1037.
121. Romer, Paul M., 1990. Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98 (5): s71–s102.
122. Mariko Sakakibara and Lee Branstetter. Do stronger patents induce more innovation? Evidence from the 1988 Japanese patent law reforms. Working Paper 7066, NBER, 1999.
123. Schankerman, Mark. 1998. How valuable is patent protection? Estimates by technology field using patent renewal data. RAND Journal of Economics, 29 (1): 77–107.
124. Schankerman, Mark, and Pakes, Ariel. 1986. Estimates of the value of patent rights in European countries during the post-1950 period. Economic Journal, 96: 1052–1076.
125. Mark Schankerman and Suzanne Scotchmer. Damages and injunctions in the protection of proprietary research tools. Working Paper 7086, NBER, April 1999.
126. Scherer, F.M., and Harhoff, Dietmar. 2000. Technology policy for a world of skew-distributed outcomes. Research Policy, 29 (4–5): 559–566.
127. Scherer, F.M., and Weisburst, Sandy. 1995. Economic effects of strengthening pharmaceutical patent protection in Italy. IIC: The International Reveiw of Industrial Property and Copyright Law, 26 (6): 1009–1024.
128. Schmookler, Jacob. 1966. Invention and Economic Growth, Harvard University Press.
129. Scotchmer, Suzanne. 1991. Standing on the shoulders of giants: Cumulative research and the patent law. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5 (1): 29–41.
130. Scotchmer, Suzanne. 1996. Protecting early innovations: Should second-generation products be patentable?. RAND Journal of Economics, 27 (2): 322–331.
131. Suzanne Scotchmer. Cumulative innovation in theory and practice. Working paper, University of California at Berkeley, January 1999.
132. Scotchmer, Suzanne. 1999. On the optimality of the patent renewal system. RAND Journal of Economics, 30 (2): 181–196.
133. Scotchmer, Suzanne, and Green, Jerry. 1990. Novelty and disclosure in patent law. RAND Journal of Economics, 21 (1): 131–146.
134. Steven Shavell and Tanguy van Ypersele. Rewards versus intellectual property rights. Working Paper 6956, NBER, February 1999.
135. Shell, Karl. Inventive activity, industrial organisation and economic growth. Models of Economic Growth, 77–100.
136. Sirilli, Giorgio, and Evangelista, Rinaldo. 1998. Technological innovation in services and manufacturing: Results from Italian surveys. Research Policy, 27 (9): 881–899.
137. Stoneman, Paul L., and David, Paul A., 1996. Adoption subsidies vs. information provision as instruments of technology policy. The Economic Journal, 96 (10): 142–150.
138. Taylor, Curtis R., 1995. Digging for golden carrots: An analysis of research tournaments. The American Economic Review, 85 (4): 872–889.
139. Trajtenberg, Manuel. 1990. A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. RAND Journal of Economics, 21 (1): 172–187.
140. Dijk, Theon van. 1996. Patent height and competition in product improvements. Journal of Industrial Economics, 44 (2): 151–167.
141. Eric Von Hippel. The impact of ‘sticky information’ on innovation and problem solving. Working Paper 3147–90-BPS, MIT Sloan School of Management, 1991.
142. Wildasin, David. 1984. The q theory of investment with many capital goods. The American Economic Review, 74 (1): 203–210.