RandD spillovers, patents and the incentives to innovate in Japan and the United States

Research Policy

Volumn 31, Issue 8-9, 2002, Pages 1349-1367

  Cohen, Wesley M ^a   Goto, Akira ^b   Nagata, Akiya ^a   Nelson, Richard R ^c   Walsh, John P ^b,d  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO   (Japan)

^c Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

Appropriability; Innovation; Patents; RandD; Spillovers

Indexed keywords

EID: 31244438330     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00068-9     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Agresti, A., Agresti, B., 1979. Statistical Methods for the Social Sciences. Dellen, San Francisco, CA.
2. Allison, J.R., Tiller, E.H., 2001. Statistical Analysis of Internet Business Method Patents, Draft report to the National Academies' STEP Board, October 7.
3. Aoki, R., Spiegel, Y., 1998. Public Disclosure of Patent Applications, RandD, and Welfare, Working Paper No. 30-98. Tel Aviv University.
4. Arundel, A., 2001. The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation. Research Policy 30, 611-624.
5. Bowker Press, 1994. Directory of American Research and Technology. Bowker Press, New York.
6. Cohen, W.M., Levinthal, D.A., 1989. Innovation and learning: the two faces of RandD-implications for the analysis of RandD investment. Economic Journal 99, 569-596.
7. Cohen, W.M., Nelson, R.R., Walsh, J.P., 2000. Protecting their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why US Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not), NBER Working Paper no. 7552.
8. Cohen, W.M., Nelson, R.R., Walsh, J.P., 2001. RandD Spillovers, Patents and the Incentives to Innovate in Japan and the United States. Carnegie Mellon University, Mimeo.
9. Cohen, W.M., Walsh, J.P., 2000. RandD Spillovers, Appropriability and RandD Intensity: A Survey-Based Approach. Report to the Economic Assessment Office, NIST Advanced Technology Program.
10. Dillman, D.A., 1978. Mail and Telephone Surveys: The Total Design Method. Wiley, New York.
11. Granstrand, O., 2000. The Economics and Management of Intellectual Property. Edward Elgar, London.
12. Griliches, Z., 1992. The search for RandD spillovers. Scandinavian Journal of Economics 94 (Suppl. 3), 529-547.
13. Hall, B., Ziedonis, R.M., 2001. The patent paradox revisited: an empirical study of patenting in the US semiconductor industry, 1979-1995. Rand Journal of Economics 32, 101-128.
14. Helfgott, S., 1990. Cultural differences between the US and Japanese patent systems. Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society 72, 231-238.
15. Heller, M.A., Eisenberg, R.S., 1998. Can patents deter innovation? Science 280 (May 1), 671-698.
16. Hounshell, D.A., Smith, J.K., 1988. Science and Corporate Strategy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
17. Hylton, K., 1993. Asymmetric information and the selection of disputes for litigation. Journal of Legal Studies 22, 187-210.
18. Kash, D.E., Kingston, W, 2000. Patents in a World of Complex Technologies. George Mason University, Mimeo.
19. Kusunoki, K., Nonaka, I., Nagata, A., 1998. Organizational capabilities in product development of Japanese firms. Organization Science 9, 699-718.
20. Levin, R.C., Klevorick, A.K., Nelson R.R., Winter, S.O., 1987. Appropriating the Returns from Industrial RandD, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, pp. 783-820.
21. Levin, R.C., Reiss, P.C., 1984. Tests of a schumpeterian model of RandD and market structure. In: Griliches, Z. (Ed.), RandD Patents and Productivity. University of Chicago Press for the NBER, Chicago.
22. Mansfield, E., 1986. Patents and innovation: an empirical study. Management Science 32, 173-181.
23. Mazzoleni, R., Nelson, R.R., 1998. The benefits and costs of strong patent protection. Research Policy 27, 273-284.
24. National Science Foundation, 2000. National Patterns of RandD Resources: 2000. Data Update,//www.nsf.gov/sbe/srs/nsf01309.
25. NISTEP (National Institute of Science and Technology Policy), 1997. Technological opportunities and appropriating the returns from innovation-comparison of survey results from Japan and the US, Report no. 48. Tokyo.
26. Okada, Y., 1997. Patent system and RandD in Japan. In: Goto, A., Odagiri, H. (Eds.), Innovation in Japan. Clarendon Press, Oxford.
27. Ordover, J., 1991. A patent system for both diffusion and exclusion. Journal of Economic Perspectives 5 (1), 43-60.
28. Quillen, C.D., Webster, O.H., 2001. Continuing patent applications and performance of the US Patent Office. Federal Circuit Bar Journal 11 (1), 1-21.
29. Sakakibara, M., Branstetter, L., 2001. Do stronger patents induce more innovation? Evidence from the 1988 Japanese Patent Law Reforms. Rand Journal of Economics 32, 77-100.
30. Scherer, F.M., et al., 1959. Patents and the Corporation, 2nd Edition. Boston, privately published.
31. Scotchmer, S., Green, J., 1990. Novelty and disclosure in patent law. Rand Journal of Economics 21, 131-146.
32. Spence, A.M., 1984. Cost reduction, competition, and industry performance. Econometrica 52, 101-121.
33. Taylor, C.T., Silberston, Z.A., 1973. The Economic Impact of the Patent System: A study of the British Experience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
34. US G.A.O., 1997. Intellectual Property: Comparison of Patent Examination Statistics for Fiscal Years 1994 and 1995, GAO/RCED-97-58. General Accounting Office, Washington, DC.
35. Westney, E., 1992. Country patterns in RandD organization: the United States and Japan. In: Kogut, B. (Ed.), Country Compe-titiveness. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 36-53.
36. Westney, E., 1994. The evolution of Japan's industrial research and development. In: Aoki, M., Dore, R. (Eds.), The Japanese Firm. Oxford University Press, New York.