Patentability, R&D direction, and cumulative innovation

Chen, Yongmin and Pan, Shiyuan and Zhang, Tianle (2016): Patentability, R&D direction, and cumulative innovation.

Abstract

We present a model of cumulative innovation where firms can conduct R&D in both a safe and a risky direction. Innovations in the risky direction produce quality improvements with higher expected sizes and variances. As patentability standards rise, an innovation in the risky direction is less likely to receive a patent that replaces the current technology, which decreases the static incentive for new entrants to conduct risky R&D, but increases their dynamic incentive because of the longer duration---and hence higher reward---for incumbency. These, together with a strategic substitution and a market structure effect, result in an inverted-U shape in the risky direction but a U shape in the safe direction for the relationship between R&D intensity and patentability standards. There exists a patentability standard that induces the efficient innovation direction, whereas R&D is biased towards (against) the risky direction under lower (higher) standards. The optimal patentability standard may distort the R&D direction to increase the industry innovation rate that is socially deficient.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: cumulative innovation, patentability standards, R&D intensity, R&D direction, rate of innovation, innovation direction
• Subjects: L - Industrial Organization > L1 - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights

References

Acemoglu, D. (2002). Directed Technical Change., Review of Economic Studies, 69,781-809.

Acemoglu, D. (2011). Diversity and Technological Progressin "The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity Revisited", edited by Scott Stern and Josh Lerner, 319-356. University of Chicago Press.

Acemoglu, D. and U. Akcigit. (2012). Intellectual Property Rights Policy, Competition and Innovation, Journal of the European Economic Association, 10, 1-42.

Aghion, P., N. Bloom, R. Blundell, R. Gri¢ th and P. Howitt. (2005). Competition and Innovation: An Inverted-U Relationship, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120, 701-728.

Aghion, P., D. Dewatripont and J. Stein. (2008). Academic Freedom, Private-Sector Focus, and the Process of Innovation, RAND Journal of Economics, 39, 617-635.

Amano, T., (2016), Ratcheting, Competition, and the Diffusion of Technological Change: The Case of Televisions under an Energy E¢ ciency Program, Working paper.

Anderson, Axel, and Lus Cabral. (2007). Go for Broke or Play it Safe? Dynamic Competition with Choice of Variance, Rand Journal of Economics, 38, 593-609.

Bessen, J. and E. Maskin. (2009). Sequential Innovation, Patents, and Imitation, RAND Journal of Economics, 31, 611-635.

Bhattacharya, S. and D. Mookherjee. (1986). Portfolio Choice in Research and Development, RAND Journal of Economics, 17, 594-605.

Birkinshaw, J. and M. Lingblad. (2001). Making Sense of Internal Competition: Designs for Organizational Redundancy in Response to Environmental Uncertainty, London Business School Working Paper.30

Bryan, K. and J. Lemus. (2016). The Direction of Innovation, Working paper.

Cabral, L. (1994). Bias in Market R&D Portfolios, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 12, 533-547.

Chen, Y., S. Pan and T. Zhang. (2014). (When) Do Stronger Patents Stimulate Continual Innovation?, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 98, 115-124.

Chen, Y. and T. Puttitanun. (2005). Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation in Developing Countries, Journal of Development Economics, 78, 474-493.

Chiang, A. and K. Wainwright (2005). Fundamental Methods of Mathematical Economics. McGraw-Hill.

Choi, J. and H. Gerlach. (2014). Selection Biases in Complementary R&D Projects, Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 23, 899-924.

Dasgupta, P. and E. Maskin. (1987). The Simple Economics of Research Portfolio, Economic Journal, 97, 581-595.

Furman, Jeffrey and Scott Stern. (2011). Climbing atop the Shoulders of Giants: The Impact of Institutions on Cumulative Research, American Economic Review, 101, 1933-1963.

Galasso, Alberto and Mark Schankerman. (2013). Patents and Cumulative Innovation: Causal Evidence from the Courts, Working Paper.

Hopenhayn, H. and F. Squintani. (2016). The Direction of Innovation, Working paper.

Horowitz, A. and E. Lai. (1996). Patent Length and the Rate of Innovation, International Economic Review, 37, 785-801.

Hunt, Robert M., (2004). Patentability, Industry Structure, and Innovation, Journal of Industrial Economics, 52, 401-425. 31

Jaffe, A., (2000). The U.S. Patent System in Transition: Policy Innovation and the Innovation Process, Research Policy, 29, 531-557.

Klette, T. and D. de Meza. (1986). Is the Market Biased against Risky R&D?, Rand Journal of Economics, 17, 133-139.

Kwon, I. (2010). R&D Portfolio and Market Structure, Economic Journal, 120, 313-323.

Lee, T. and L. Wilde. (1980). Market and Structure and Innovation: A Rewformulation, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 94, 429-436.

Loury, G., (1979). Market Sturcture and Innovation, Quarterly Journal of Economics,93, 395-410.

Murray, F. and S. Stern. (2007). Do Formal Intellectual Property Rights Hinder the Free Flow of Scientic Knowledge? An Empirical Test of the Anti-commons Hypothesis, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 63, 648-687.

ODonoghue, Ted. (1998). A Patentability Requirement for Sequential Innovation, RAND Journal of Economics, 29, 654-679.

ODonoghue, Ted, Suzanne Scotchmer, and Jacques-Francois Thisse. (1998). Patent Breadth, Patent Life, and the Pace of Technological Progress, Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 7, 1-32.

Sampat, Bhaven and H. Williams. (2014). How Do Patents A⁄ect Follow-on Innovation? Evidence from the Human Genome, Working Paper.

Segal, I. and M. Whinston. (2007). Antitrust in Innovative Industries, American Economic Review, 97, 1703-1730.

Williams, Heidi. (2013). Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from the Human Genome, Journal of Political Economy, 121, 1-27.