Cozzi, Guido and Galli, Silvia (2011): Upstream innovation protection: common law evolution and the dynamics of wage inequality.
Download (268kB) | Preview
The incentives to conduct basic or applied research play a central role for economic growth, and this question has not been explored in much detail so far. How does increasing early innovation appropriability affect basic research, applied research, education, and wage inequality? In the US, what does the common law system imply on the macroeconomic responses to institutional change? This paper analyzes the macroeconomic effects of patent protection by incorporating a two-stage cumulative innovation structure into a quality-ladder growth model with skill acquisition. We consider three issues (a) the over-protection vs. the under-protection of intellectual property rights; (b) the evolution of jurisprudence shaping the bargaining power of the upstream innovators; and (c) the implications of strengthening patent protection on wage inequality and growth. We show analytically and numerically how the jurisprudential changes in intellectual property rights witnessed in the US after 1980 can be related to the well-known changes in wage inequality and in education attainments. Basic research patents may have grown disproportionately due increasing jurisdictional protection, eventually compromising applied innovation, education, and growth. By simulations, we show that the dynamic general equilibrium interations may mislead the econometric assessment of the temporary vs persistent effects IPR policy.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||Upstream innovation protection: common law evolution and the dynamics of wage inequality|
|Keywords:||Basic and Applied R&D; Two-Stage Sequential Innovation; Skill Premium; Inequality and Education; Common Law.|
|Subjects:||K - Law and Economics > K4 - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior > K40 - General
O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O34 - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O31 - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
|Depositing User:||Guido Cozzi|
|Date Deposited:||29. Jun 2011 12:35|
|Last Modified:||13. Feb 2013 18:03|
Acemoglu D. (1998). "Why Do New Technologies Complement Skills? Directed Technical Change and Wage Inequality," Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 113, 4, pp. 1055-8.
Acemoglu D. (2002a), "Technical Change, Inequality, and the Labor Market", Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 7-72.
Acemoglu D. (2002b), "Directed Technical Change", The Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 69, No. 4, pp. 781-809.
Aghion, P. and Howitt, P. (1992), "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction", Econometrica 60 (2), p. 323-351.
Aghion, P. and Howitt, P. (1996), "Research and Development in the Growth Process", Journal of Economic Growth, vol.1, p. 13-25.
Autor, D., A. Krueger and L. Katz. (1998). "Computing Inequality: Have Computers Changed the Labor Market?" Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113:4, pp. 1169-213.
Aoki, R. and Nagaoka, S. (2007), "Economic Analysis of Patent Law Exemption for Research on a Patented Innovation", Institute of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi University, working paper.
Berman, E., J. Bound, and Z. Griliches, (1994), "Changes in the Demand for Skilled Labor within U.S. Manufacturing: Evidence from theAnnual Survey of Manufacturers", The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 109, No. 2, pp. 367-397.
Boucekkine, R., de la Croix, D., Licandro, O. (2002), "Vintage Human Capital, Demographic Trends, and Endogenous Growth ", Journal of Economic Theory, v. 104, iss. 2, pp. 340-375.
Boucekkine, R., de la Croix, D. and Peeters, D. ; (2007) "Early Literacy Achievements, Population Density, and the Transition to Modern Growth", Journal of the European Economic Association, v. 5, iss. 1, pp. 183-226.
Carlino, Chatterjee, and Hunt, R. M., (2001), "Knowledge Spillovers and the New Economy of Cities", FED of Philadelphia, w.p. 01-14.
Chu, A., (2008)."Special Interest Politics and Intellectual Property Rights: An Economic Analysis Of Strengthening Patent Protection In The Pharmaceutical Industry," Economics and Politics, vol. 20(2), pp. 185-215.
Chu, A., (2009)."Effects of blocking patents on R&D: a quantitative DGE analysis," Journal of Economic Growth, vol. 14(1), pp. 55-78.
Chu, A., (2010). "Effects of Patent Policy on Income and Consumption Inequality in a R&D Growth Model," Southern Economic Journal, vol. 77(2), pp. 336-350.
Chu, A., (2010), "The welfare cost of one-size-fits-all patent protection," MPRA Paper 21401, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Jun 2010.
Cozzi, G., (2001), "Inventing or Spying? Implications for Growth"; Journal of Economic Growth, v. 6, iss. 1, pp. 55-77.
Cozzi, G. and Spinesi, L. (2006). "Intellectual appropriability, product differentiation, and growth", Macroeconomic Dynamics, vol. 10(1), pp. 39-55.
Cozzi, G. and Galli, S., (2008), "Privatizing Knowledge: Did the U.S. Get It Right?", Department of Economics Discussion Paper 2008-1, University of Glasgow.
Cozzi, G. and G. Impullitti, (2010), "Government Spending Composition, Technical Change, and Wage Inequality", Journal of the European Economic Association, Journal of European Economic Association, vol. 8, (December) , pp. 1325-1358.
Dinopoulos, E. and Thompson, P.S., (1998), "Schumpeterian Growth Without Scale Effects", Journal of Economic Growth, 3, pp. 313-335.
Dinopoulos, E. and Segerstom, P.S., (1999), "A Schumpeterian Model of Protection and Relative Wages", American Economic Review, pp. 450-472.
Dinopoulos, E. and Thompson, P. S., (1999), "Scale Effects in Neo-Schumpeterian Models of Economic Growth", Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 9(2), pp. 157-186.
Eicher, T. and C. García-Peñalosa, (2008). "Endogenous strength of intellectual property rights: Implications for economic development and growth," European Economic Review, vol. 52(2), pp. 237-258.
Fon, V. and F. Parisi, (2006). "Judicial Precedents in Civil Law Systems: A dynamic analysis", International Review of Law and Economics 26, 519--535.
Furukawa, Y., (2007)."The protection of intellectual property rights and endogenous growth: Is stronger always better?," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, vol. 31(11), pp. 3644-3670.
Gallini, N., (2002), "The Economics of Patents: Lessons from Recent U.S. Patent Reform", Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2, pp. 131-154.
Galor, O. and O. Moav, (2000), "Ability-Biased Technological Transition, Wage Inequality, And Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 115(2), pp. 469-497.
Gennaioli, N. and A. Shleifer, (2007a). "The Evolution of Common Law," Journal of Political Economy, vol. 115, pp. 43-68.
Gennaioli, N. and A. Shleifer, (2007b). "Overruling and the Instability of Law," Journal of Comparative Economics, vol. 35(2), p. 309-328.
Gould, E. D., Moav, O., and B. A. Weinberg, (2001), " Precautionary Demand for Education, Inequality, and Technological Progress," Journal of Economic Growth, vol. 6(4), pp. 285-315.
Green, J. and Scotchmer, S. (1995)."On the Division of Profit in Sequential Innovations", The Rand Journal of Economics 26, pp. 20-33.
Grossman, G.M. and Helpman, E. (1991), "Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth", Review of Economic Studies 58, pp. 43-61.
Grossman, G.M. and Shapiro, C. (1987), "Dynamic R&D Competition", The Economic Journal 97, pp. 372-387.
Ha, J. and Howitt, P. (2007), "Accounting for Trends in Productivity and R&D: A Schumpeterian Critique of Semi-endogenous Growth Theory"; Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, v. 39, iss. 4, pp. 733-74.
Hall, H. B. (2009), "Business and Financial Method Patents: Innovation and Policy", Scottish Journal of Political Economy, forthcoming.
Howitt, P. (1999), "Steady Endogenous Growth with Population and R&D Inputs Growing", Journal of Political Economy, vol.107, n. 4, pp.715-30.
Hunt, R. M. (2001), "You Can Patent That? Are Patents on Computer Programs and Business Methods Good for the New Economy?" Fed. of Philadelphia Business Review, 1.
Jaffe, A. B. and Lerner, J. (2006) "Innovation and Its Discontents," Capitalism and Society, Vol. 1 : Iss. 3, Article 3, Available at: http://www.bepress.com/cas/vol1/iss3/art3.
Jones, C. and J. Williams (1998), "Measuring the Social Return to R&D", Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 113, pp. 1119-1135.
Jones, C. and J. Williams (2000), "Too Much of a Good Thing? The Economics of Investment in R&D", Journal of Economic Growth, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 65-85.
Jones, C., (2005), "Growth in a World of Ideas", in Handbook of Economic Growth, P. Aghion and S. Durlauf, ed.s, North-Holland, Amsterdam.
Kiley, M. (1999). "The Supply of Skilled Labour and Skill-Biased Technological Progress," The Economic Journal, vol. 109(458), p. 708-24.
Madsen, J. B., (2008), "Semi-endogenous versus Schumpeterian growth models: testing the knowledge production function using international data", Journal of Economic Growth, 3.1, pp. 1-26.
Martins, J. Scarpetta, S. and D. Pilat, (1996),. "Markup Pricing, Market Structure and the Business Cycle", OECD Economic Studies 27, 71-105.
Mueller, J.M. (2001) "No 'Dilettante Affair'": Rethinking the Experimental Use Exception to Patent Infringement for Biomedical Research Tools", 76 Wash. L. Rev. 1, 22-27.
Mueller, J. M. (2004), "The Evanescent Experimental Use Exemption from United States Patent Infringement Liability: Implications for University and Nonprofit Research and Development", Baylor Law Review, 56, p.917.
National Research Council (2003). "Patents in the Knowledge-Based Economy", edited by W. M. Cohen and S. A. Merrill, Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in the Knowledge-Based Economy, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
Niblett, A., R. Posner and A. Shleifer, (2008). "The Evolution of a Legal Rule," NBER Working Papers 13856.
O'Donoghue, T. and Zweimüller, J. (2004),"Patents in a Model of Endogenous Growth", Journal of Economic Growth, vol.9(1), pp.81-123.
Peretto, P., (1998), "Technological Change and Population Growth", Journal of Economic Growth, 3, pp. 283-311.
Peretto, P., (1999), "Cost Reduction, Entry, and the Interdependence of Market Structure and Economic Growth", Journal of Monetary Economics,v. 43, iss. 1, pp. 173-95.
Roeger, W. (1995). "Can Imperfect Competition Explain the Difference between Primal and Dual Productivity Measures? Estimates for US Manufacturing", Journal of Political Economy 103, 2, 316-330.
Romer, P.M. (1990), "Endogenous Technological Change", Journal of Political Economy, vol.98, pp.S71-S102. Scotchmer, S. (2004), Innovation and Incentives, MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma.
Sener, F. (2001). "Schumpeterian unemployment, trade and wages," Journal of International Economics, vol. 54(1), p. 119-148.
Smulders, S. and van de Klundert, T., (1995) "Imperfect competition, concentration and growth with firm-specific R & D," European Economic Review, vol. 39(1), pages 139-160, January.
Young, A. (1998), "Growth without Scale Effects", Journal of Political Economy, 106, 41--63.
Wälde, K. (2005),"Endogenous Growth Cycles," International Economic Review, vol. 46(3), pp. 867-894.
Walde, K. and U. Woitek, (2004), "R&D expenditure in G7 countries and the implications for endogenous fluctuations and growth," Economics Letters, pp. 91-97.