[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fce/doctra/1319.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Patents RD subsidies and endogenous market structure in a Schumpeterian economy

Author

Listed:
  • Angus C.Chu

    (University of Liverpool United Kingdom)

  • Yuichi Furukawa

    (Chukyo University Japan)

  • Lei Ji

    (Shanghai University of finance and economics China)

Abstract
This study explores the different implications of patent breadth and RD subsidies on economic growth and endogenous market structure in a Schumpeterian growth model. We fend that when the number of firms is fixed in the short run, patent breadth and R&D subsidies serve to increase economic growth as in previous studies. However, when the number of firms adjusts endogenously in the long run, RD subsidies increase economic growth but decrease the number of firms,whereas patent breadth expands the number of firms but reduces economic growth. Therefore, RD subsidy is perhaps a more suitable policy instrument than patent breadth for the purpose of stimulating long-run economic growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Angus C.Chu & Yuichi Furukawa & Lei Ji, 2013. "Patents RD subsidies and endogenous market structure in a Schumpeterian economy," Documents de Travail de l'OFCE 2013-19, Observatoire Francais des Conjonctures Economiques (OFCE).
    • Handle: RePEc:fce:doctra:1319
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ofce.sciences-po.fr/pdf/dtravail/WP2013-19.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philippe Aghion & Nick Bloom & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt, 2005. "Competition and Innovation: an Inverted-U Relationship," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 120(2), pages 701-728.
    2. Chu, Angus C. & Furukawa, Yuichi, 2011. "On the optimal mix of patent instruments," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 1964-1975.
    3. Furukawa, Yuichi, 2007. "The protection of intellectual property rights and endogenous growth: Is stronger always better?," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(11), pages 3644-3670, November.
    4. Chu, Angus C. & Pan, Shiyuan, 2013. "The Escape-Infringement Effect Of Blocking Patents On Innovation And Economic Growth," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(4), pages 955-969, June.
    5. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    6. Ryo Horii & Tatsuro Iwaisako, 2007. "Economic Growth with Imperfect Protection of Intellectual Property Rights," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 90(1), pages 45-85, January.
    7. Peretto, Pietro F., 2015. "From Smith to Schumpeter: A theory of take-off and convergence to sustained growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 1-26.
    8. Reenu, 2008. "Role of Economic Reform in the Growth of Indian Economy," Journal of Commerce and Trade, Society for Advanced Management Studies, vol. 3(1), pages 19-22, April.
    9. James B. Ang & Jakob B. Madsen, 2011. "Can Second-Generation Endogenous Growth Models Explain the Productivity Trends and Knowledge Production in the Asian Miracle Economies?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1360-1373, November.
    10. Jones, Charles I & Williams, John C, 2000. "Too Much of a Good Thing? The Economics of Investment in R&D," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 65-85, March.
    11. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1991. "Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(1), pages 43-61.
    12. Boldrin,Michele & Levine,David K., 2010. "Against Intellectual Monopoly," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521127264, September.
    13. Chu, Angus C., 2011. "The welfare cost of one-size-fits-all patent protection," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(6), pages 876-890, June.
    14. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    15. Peretto, Pietro F, 1998. "Technological Change and Population Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 283-311, December.
    16. Philippe Aghion & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt & Susanne Prantl, 2009. "The Effects of Entry on Incumbent Innovation and Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(1), pages 20-32, February.
    17. Daron Acemoglu & Ufuk Akcigit, 2012. "Intellectual Property Rights Policy, Competition And Innovation," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 1-42, February.
    18. Chu, Angus C. & Pan, Shiyuan & Sun, Minjuan, 2012. "When does elastic labor supply cause an inverted-U effect of patents on innovation?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 211-213.
    19. Hwan C. Lin, 2002. "Shall the Northern Optimal R&D Subsidy Rate Inversely Respond to Southern Intellectual Property Protection?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 69(2), pages 381-397, October.
    20. Zeng, Jinli & Zhang, Jie, 2007. "Subsidies in an R&D growth model with elastic labor," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 861-886, March.
    21. Guido Cozzi & Silvia Galli, 2014. "Sequential R&D and blocking patents in the dynamics of growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 183-219, June.
    22. Ted O'Donoghue & Josef Zweimueller, 2004. "Patents in a Model of Endogenous Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 81-123, March.
    23. Richard Gilbert & Carl Shapiro, 1990. "Optimal Patent Length and Breadth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 106-112, Spring.
    24. Segerstrom, Paul S, 2000. "The Long-Run Growth Effects of R&D Subsidies," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 277-305, September.
    25. Giammario Impullitti, 2010. "International Competition And U.S. R&D Subsidies: A Quantitative Welfare Analysis," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 51(4), pages 1127-1158, November.
    26. Jakob Madsen & James Ang & Rajabrata Banerjee, 2010. "Four centuries of British economic growth: the roles of technology and population," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 263-290, December.
    27. Peretto, Pietro F., 2007. "Corporate taxes, growth and welfare in a Schumpeterian economy," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 353-382, November.
    28. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Galli, Silvia, 2012. "Does intellectual monopoly stimulate or stifle innovation?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 727-746.
    29. Futagami, Koichi & Iwaisako, Tatsuro, 2007. "Dynamic analysis of patent policy in an endogenous growth model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 306-334, January.
    30. Angus Chu, 2009. "Effects of blocking patents on R&D: a quantitative DGE analysis," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 55-78, March.
    31. Jakob Madsen, 2008. "Semi-endogenous versus Schumpeterian growth models: testing the knowledge production function using international data," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 1-26, March.
    32. Giammario Impullitti, 2007. "International Schumpeterian Competition and Optimal R&D subsidies," Economics Working Papers ECO2007/55, European University Institute.
    33. Alwyn Young, 1998. "Growth without Scale Effects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 41-63, February.
    34. Ai-Ting Goh & Jacques Olivier, 2002. "Optimal Patent Protection in a Two-Sector Economy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 43(4), pages 1191-1214, November.
    35. Pietro F. Peretto, 2011. "The Growth and Welfare Effects of Deficit-Financed Dividend Tax Cuts," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(5), pages 835-869, August.
    36. Christopher Laincz & Pietro Peretto, 2006. "Scale effects in endogenous growth theory: an error of aggregation not specification," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 263-288, September.
    37. Peretto, Pietro F, 1996. "Sunk Costs, Market Structure, and Growth," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(4), pages 895-923, November.
    38. Segerstrom, Paul S, 1998. "Endogenous Growth without Scale Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1290-1310, December.
    39. Furukawa, Yuichi, 2010. "Intellectual property protection and innovation: an inverted-U relationship," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 99-101, November.
    40. Tatsuro Iwaisako & Koichi Futagami, 2013. "Patent protection, capital accumulation, and economic growth," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(2), pages 631-668, March.
    41. Tatsuro Iwaisako & Koichi Futagami, 2003. "Patent Policy in an Endogenous Growth Model," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 78(3), pages 239-258, March.
    42. Peretto, Pietro F., 1999. "Cost reduction, entry, and the interdependence of market structure and economic growth," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 173-195, February.
    43. Joonkyung Ha & Peter Howitt, 2007. "Accounting for Trends in Productivity and R&D: A Schumpeterian Critique of Semi-Endogenous Growth Theory," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(4), pages 733-774, June.
    44. Federico Etro, 2012. "Endogenous Market Structures and Welfare," Working Papers 2012_12, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    45. James Bessen & Michael J. Meurer, 2008. "Introduction to Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk," Introductory Chapters, in: Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk, Princeton University Press.
    46. Segerstrom, Paul S & Anant, T C A & Dinopoulos, Elias, 1990. "A Schumpeterian Model of the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(5), pages 1077-1091, December.
    47. Paul J. J. Welfens, 2008. "ICT – productivity and economic growth in Europe," Springer Books, in: Paul J. J. Welfens & Ellen Walther-Klaus (ed.), Digital Excellence, pages 13-39, Springer.
    48. Peter Howitt, 1999. "Steady Endogenous Growth with Population and R & D Inputs Growing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(4), pages 715-730, August.
    49. Federico Etro, 2009. "Endogenous Market Structures and the Macroeconomy," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-87427-0, December.
    50. Cozzi, Guido & Spinesi, Luca, 2006. "Intellectual Appropriability, Product Differentiation, And Growth," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 39-55, February.
    51. Pietro Peretto & Michelle Connolly, 2007. "The Manhattan Metaphor," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 329-350, December.
    52. Hall, Bronwyn & Van Reenen, John, 2000. "How effective are fiscal incentives for R&D? A review of the evidence," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 449-469, April.
    53. Zeng, Jinli & Zhang, Jie & Fung, Michael Ka-Yiu, 2014. "Patent Length And Price Regulation In An R&D Growth Model With Monopolistic Competition," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 1-22, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dinopoulos, Elias & Grieben, Wolf-Heimo & Şener, Fuat, 2023. "A Policy Conundrum: Schumpeterian Growth or Job Creation?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    2. Tabata, Ken, 2024. "Redistributive policy and R&D-based growth," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    3. Nguyen, Canh Phuc & Doytch, Nadia, 2022. "The impact of ICT patents on economic growth: An international evidence," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5).
    4. He, Qichun, 2018. "Inflation and Fertility in a Schumpeterian Growth Model: Theory and Evidence," MPRA Paper 85074, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Chen, Ping-ho & Chu, Angus C. & Chu, Hsun & Lai, Ching-chong, 2017. "Short-run and long-run effects of capital taxation on innovation and economic growth," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 207-221.
    6. Obrimah, Oghenovo A., 2024. "Measuring Innovativeness: A ranking of the ordinal utility from consumption is more robust than either of ‘outcomes of commercialization’ or patent counts," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 603-616.
    7. Chu, Angus C. & Kou, Zonglai & Wang, Xilin, 2019. "Effects of Patents on the Industrial Revolution," MPRA Paper 91819, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Furukawa, Yuichi & Liao, Chih-Hsing, 2023. "Should the government subsidize innovation or automation?," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(4), pages 1059-1088, June.
    9. Angus C. Chu & Yuichi Furukawa & Sushanta Mallick & Pietro Peretto & Xilin Wang, 2021. "Dynamic effects of patent policy on innovation and inequality in a Schumpeterian economy," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(4), pages 1429-1465, June.
    10. Chen, Ping-ho & Chu, Hsun & Lai, Ching-Chong, 2015. "Do R&D subsidies necessarily stimulate economic growth?," MPRA Paper 66061, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Michael Klein & Fuat Sener, 2023. "Product Innovation, Diffusion and Endogenous Growth," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 48, pages 178-201, April.
    12. Rudra Narayan Kushwaha & Taniya Ghosh, 2023. "The Effects of population growth on patents and economic growth dynamics," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2023-05, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    13. O'Shaughnessy, Eric, 2022. "How policy has shaped the emerging solar photovoltaic installation industry," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    14. Angus C. Chu, 2022. "Patent policy and economic growth: A survey," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 90(2), pages 237-254, March.
    15. Julius Tan Gonzales, 2023. "Implications of AI innovation on economic growth: a panel data study," Journal of Economic Structures, Springer;Pan-Pacific Association of Input-Output Studies (PAPAIOS), vol. 12(1), pages 1-37, December.
    16. Chu, Angus C. & Wang, Xilin, 2022. "Effects Of R&D Subsidies In A Hybrid Model Of Endogenous Growth And Semi-Endogenous Growth," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 813-832, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chu, Angus C. & Furukawa, Yuichi, 2012. "Patents versus R&D subsidies in a Schumpeterian growth model with endogenous market structure," MPRA Paper 40469, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Angus C. Chu & Yuichi Furukawa & Sushanta Mallick & Pietro Peretto & Xilin Wang, 2021. "Dynamic effects of patent policy on innovation and inequality in a Schumpeterian economy," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(4), pages 1429-1465, June.
    3. Angus C. Chu, 2022. "Patent policy and economic growth: A survey," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 90(2), pages 237-254, March.
    4. Angus Chu & Guido Cozzi & Chih-Hsing Liao, 2013. "Endogenous fertility and human capital in a Schumpeterian growth model," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 181-202, January.
    5. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Galli, Silvia, 2012. "Does intellectual monopoly stimulate or stifle innovation?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 727-746.
    6. Angus Chu & Guido Cozzi, 2018. "Effects of Patents versus R&D subsidies on Income Inequality," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 29, pages 68-84, July.
    7. Yibai Yang, 2018. "On the Optimality of IPR Protection with Blocking Patents," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 27, pages 205-230, January.
    8. Angus C. Chu, 2024. "Macroeconomic effects of intellectual property rights: an updated survey," Chapters, in: Walter G. Park (ed.), Handbook of Innovation and Intellectual Property Rights, chapter 2, pages 13-26, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Guido Cozzi & Silvia Galli, 2014. "Sequential R&D and blocking patents in the dynamics of growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 183-219, June.
    10. Guido Cozzi & Silvia Galli, 2009. "Upstream Innovation Protection: Common Law Evolution and the Dynamics of Wage Inequality," Working Papers 2009_20, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    11. Chu, Angus C. & Wang, Xilin, 2022. "Effects Of R&D Subsidies In A Hybrid Model Of Endogenous Growth And Semi-Endogenous Growth," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 813-832, April.
    12. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2014. "The Lindahl Equilibrium in Schumpeterian Growth Models: Knowledge Diffusion, Social Value of Innovations and Optimal R&D Incentives," CESifo Working Paper Series 4678, CESifo.
    13. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," TSE Working Papers 14-469, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    14. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," IDEI Working Papers 821, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    15. Hu, Mei-Ying & Lu, You-Xun & Lai, Ching-chong, 2023. "Patent term extensions and commercialization lags in the pharmaceutical industry: A growth-theoretic analysis," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    16. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Lai, Ching-Chong & Liao, Chih-Hsing, 2015. "Inflation, R&D and growth in an open economy," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 360-374.
    17. Chu, Angus C. & Furukawa, Yuichi & Wang, Xilin, 2022. "Rent-seeking government and endogenous takeoff in a Schumpeterian economy," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    18. Chu, Angus C. & Furukawa, Yuichi, 2011. "On the optimal mix of patent instruments," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 1964-1975.
    19. Furukawa, Yuichi, 2013. "The struggle to survive in the R&D sector: Implications for innovation and growth," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 26-29.
    20. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2016. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 101-142, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    economic growth; endogenous market structure; patents rd subsidies;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fce:doctra:1319. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Francesco Saraceno (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ofcspfr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.