Dynamic Effects of Patent Policy on Innovation and Inequality in a Schumpeterian Economy

Chu, Angus C. and Furukawa, Yuichi and Mallick, Sushanta and Peretto, Pietro and Wang, Xilin (2019): Dynamic Effects of Patent Policy on Innovation and Inequality in a Schumpeterian Economy.

Abstract

This study explores the dynamic effects of patent policy on innovation and income inequality in a Schumpeterian growth model with endogenous market structure and heterogeneous households. We find that strengthening patent protection has a positive effect on economic growth and a positive or an inverted-U effect on income inequality when the number of differentiated products is fixed in the short run. However, when the number of products adjusts endogenously, the effects of patent protection on growth and inequality become negative in the long run. We also calibrate the model to US data to perform a quantitative analysis and find that the long-run negative effect of patent policy on inequality is much larger than its short-run positive effect. This result is consistent with our empirical finding from a panel vector autoregression.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: patent policy; income inequality; innovation; endogenous market structure
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D3 - Distribution; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O4 - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity

References

Abrigo, M., and Love, I., 2016. Estimation of panel vector autoregression in Stata. The Stata Journal, 16, 778-804.

Acemoglu, D., 1998. Why do new technologies complement skills? Directed technical change and wage inequality. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 113, 1055-1089.

Acemoglu, D., 2002. Directed technical change. Review of Economic Studies, 69, 781-809.

Acemoglu, D., and Akcigit, U., 2012. Intellectual property rights policy, competition and innovation. Journal of the European Economic Association, 2012, 10, 1-42.

Adams, S., 2008. Globalization and income inequality: Implications for intellectual property rights. Journal of Policy Modeling, 30, 725-735.

Aghion, P., Akcigit, U., Bergeaud, A., Blundell, R., and Hemous, D., 2019. Innovation and top income inequality. Review of Economic Studies, 86, 1-45.

Aghion, P., and Howitt, P., 1992. A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60, 323-351.

Alessandri, P., and Mumtaz, H., 2019. Financial regimes and uncertainty shocks. Journal of Monetary Economics, 101, 31-46.

Ang, J., and Madsen, J., 2011. Can second-generation endogenous growth models explain the productivity trends and knowledge production in the Asian miracle economies?. Review of Economics and Statistics, 93, 1360-1373.

Bessen, J., and Meurer, M., 2008. Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk. Princeton University Press.

Boldrin, M., and Levine, D., 2008. Against Intellectual Monopoly. Cambridge University Press.

Chou, C.-F., and Talmain, G., 1996. Redistribution and growth: Pareto improvements. Journal of Economic Growth, 1, 505-523.

Chu, A., 2009. Effects of blocking patents on R&D: A quantitative DGE analysis. Journal of Economic Growth, 14, 55-78.

Chu, A., 2010. Effects of patent policy on income and consumption inequality in an R&D-based growth model. Southern Economic Journal, 77, 336-350.

Chu, A., 2011. The welfare cost of one-size-fits-all patent protection. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 35, 876-890.

Chu, A., and Cozzi, G., 2018. Effects of patents versus R&D subsidies on income inequality. Review of Economic Dynamics, 29, 68-84.

Chu, A., Furukawa, Y., and Ji, L., 2016. Patents, R&D subsidies and endogenous market structure in a Schumpeterian economy. Southern Economic Journal, 82, 809-825.

Cozzi, G., 2001. Inventing or spying? Implications for growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 6, 55-77.

Cozzi, G., and Galli, S., 2014. Sequential R&D and blocking patents in the dynamics of growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 19, 183-219.

Foellmi, R., and Zweimuller, J., 2006. Income distribution and demand-induced innovations. Review of Economic Studies, 73, 941-960.

Furukawa, Y., 2007. The protection of intellectual property rights and endogenous growth: Is stronger always better? Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 31, 3644-3670.

Futagami, K., and Iwaisako, T., 2007. Dynamic analysis of patent policy in an endogenous growth model. Journal of Economic Theory, 132, 306-334.

Gilbert, R., and Shapiro, C., 1990. Optimal patent length and breadth. RAND Journal of Economics, 21, 106-112.

Ginarte, J., and Park, W., 1997. Determinants of patent rights: A cross-national study. Research Policy, 26, 283-301.

Goh, A.-T., and Olivier, J., 2002. Optimal patent protection in a two-sector economy. International Economic Review, 43, 1191--1214.

Grossman, G., and Helpman, E., 1991. Quality ladders in the theory of growth. Review of Economic Studies, 58, 43-61.

Grossman, G., and Helpman, E., 2018. Growth, trade, and inequality. Econometrica, 86, 37-83.

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, 33, 733-74.

Horii, R., and Iwaisako, T., 2007. Economic growth with imperfect protection of intellectual property rights. Journal of Economics, 90, 45-85.

Howitt, P., 1999. Steady endogenous growth with population and R&D inputs growing. Journal of Political Economy, 107, 715-730.

Iacopetta, M., Minetti, R., and Peretto, P., 2019. Financial markets, industry dynamics and growth. Economic Journal, forthcoming.

Iwaisako, T., 2013. Welfare effects of patent protection and productive public services: Why do developing countries prefer weaker patent protection?. Economics Letters, 118, 478-481.

Iwaisako, T., and Futagami, K., 2013. Patent protection, capital accumulation, and economic growth. Economic Theory, 52, 631-668.

Jaffe, A., and Lerner, J., 2004. Innovation and Its Discontents: How Our Broken System Is Endangering Innovation and Progress, and What to Do About It. Princeton University Press.

Jones, C., and Kim, J., 2018. A Schumpeterian model of top income inequality. Journal of Political Economy, 126, 1785-1826.

Jones, C., and Williams, J., 2000. Too much of a good thing? The economics of investment in R&D. Journal of Economic Growth, 5, 65-85.

Kiedaisch, C., 2015. Intellectual property rights in a quality-ladder model with persistent leadership. European Economic Review, 80, 194-213.

Kiedaisch, C., 2018. Growth and welfare effects of intellectual property rights when consumers differ in income. University of Zurich, Department of Economics, Working Paper No. 221.

Klemperer, P., 1990. How broad should the scope of patent protection be? RAND Journal of Economics, 21, 113-130.

Laincz, C., and Peretto, P., 2006. Scale effects in endogenous growth theory: An error of aggregation not specification. Journal of Economic Growth, 11, 263-288.

Li, C.-W., 2001. On the policy implications of endogenous technological progress. Economic Journal, 111, C164-C179.

Madsen, J., 2008. Semi-endogenous versus Schumpeterian growth models: Testing the knowledge production function using international data. Journal of Economic Growth, 13, 1-26.

Madsen, J., 2010. The anatomy of growth in the OECD since 1870. Journal of Monetary Economics, 57, 753-767.

Madsen, J., 2017. Is inequality increasing in r-g? Piketty's principle of capitalist economics and the dynamics of inequality in Britain, 1210-2013. CAMA Working Papers 2017-63.

Nordhaus, W., 1969. Invention, Growth, and Welfare. The MIT Press.

Park, W., 2005. Do intellectual property rights stimulate R&D and productivity growth? Evidence from cross-national and manufacturing industries data. In J. Putnam (ed.), Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation in the Knowledge-Based Economy, 9.1-9.51, Calgary: University of Calgary Press.

Park, W., 2008. Intellectual property rights and international innovation. In K. Maskus (ed.), Frontiers of Economics and Globalization, vol. 2, 289-327, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.

Peretto, P., 1998. Technological change and population growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 3, 283-311.

Peretto, P., 1999. Cost reduction, entry, and the interdependence of market structure and economic growth. Journal of Monetary Economics, 43, 173-195.

Peretto, P., 2007. Corporate taxes, growth and welfare in a Schumpeterian economy. Journal of Economic Theory, 137, 353-382.

Peretto, P., 2011. The growth and welfare effects of deficit-financed dividend tax cuts. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, 43, 835-869.

Peretto, P., and Connolly, M., 2007. The Manhattan metaphor. Journal of Economic Growth, 12, 329-350.

Piketty, T., 2014. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Harvard University Press.

Romer, P., 1990. Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98, S71-S102.

Scotchmer, S., 2004. Innovation and Incentives. The MIT Press.

Segerstrom, P., Anant, T., and Dinopoulos, E., 1990. A Schumpeterian model of the product life cycle. American Economic Review, 80, 1077-91.

Smulders, S. and van de Klundert T., 1995. Imperfect competition, concentration and growth with firm-specific R&D. European Economic Review, 39, 139-160.

Spinesi, L. 2011. Probabilistic heterogeneous patent protection and innovation incentives. B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy (Contributions), 11, Article 45.

Uhlig, H., 2005 What are the effects of monetary policy on output? Results from an agnostic identification procedure. Journal of Monetary Economics, 52, 381-419.

Yang, Y., 2018. On the optimality of IPR protection with blocking patents. Review of Economic Dynamics, 27, 205-230.

Yang, Y., 2019. Welfare effects of patent protection in a growth model with R&D and capital accumulation. Macroeconomic Dynamics, forthcoming.

Zweimuller, J., 2000. Schumpeterian entrepreneurs meet Engel's law: The impact of inequality on innovation-driven growth. Journal of Economic Growth, 5, 185-206.