[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gbl/wpaper/2015-01.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Intellectual property rights hinder sequential innovation: experimental evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Brueggemann, J.
  • Crosetto, P.
  • Meub, L.
  • Bizer, K.
Abstract
In this paper we contribute to the discussion on whether intellectual property rights foster or hinder innovation by means of a laboratory experiment. We introduce a novel Scrabble-like creativity task that captures most essentialities of a sequential innovation process. We use this task to investigate the effects of intellectual property allowing subjects to assign license fees to their innovations. We find intellectual property to have an adverse effect on welfare as innovations become less frequent and less sophisticated. Communication among innovators is not able to prevent this detrimental effect. Introducing intellectual property results in more basic innovations and subjects fail to exploit the most valuable sequential innovation paths. Subjects act more self-reliant and non-optimally in order to avoid paying license fees. Our results suggest that granting intellectual property rights hinders innovations, especially for sectors characterized by a strong sequentiality in innovation processes.

Suggested Citation

  • Brueggemann, J. & Crosetto, P. & Meub, L. & Bizer, K., 2015. "Intellectual property rights hinder sequential innovation: experimental evidence," Working Papers 2015-01, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    • Handle: RePEc:gbl:wpaper:2015-01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://gael.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/sites/default/files/Mediatheque/doc-recherche/WP/A2015/gael2015-01.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. 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.
    3. Jerry R. Green & Suzanne Scotchmer, 1995. "On the Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(1), pages 20-33, Spring.
    4. Giovanni Dosi & Luigi Marengo & Corrado Pasquali, 2010. "How Much Should Society Fuel the Greed of Innovators? On the Relations between Appropriability, Opportunities and Rates of Innovation," Chapters, in: Riccardo Viale & Henry Etzkowitz (ed.), The Capitalization of Knowledge, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Joy Buchanan & Bart Wilson, 2014. "An experiment on protecting intellectual property," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(4), pages 691-716, December.
    6. Nancy Gallini & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2002. "Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2, pages 51-78, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Florian Ederer & Gustavo Manso, 2013. "Is Pay for Performance Detrimental to Innovation?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(7), pages 1496-1513, July.
    8. Boldrin, Michele & Levine, David K., 2008. "Perfectly competitive innovation," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 435-453, April.
    9. Bronwyn H. Hall & Dietmar Harhoff, 2012. "Recent Research on the Economics of Patents," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 4(1), pages 541-565, July.
    10. Oprea, Ryan & Charness, Gary & Friedman, Daniel, 2014. "Continuous time and communication in a public-goods experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 212-223.
    11. Heidi L. Williams, 2013. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from the Human Genome," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(1), pages 1-27.
    12. Bochet, Olivier & Page, Talbot & Putterman, Louis, 2006. "Communication and punishment in voluntary contribution experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 11-26, May.
    13. Urs Fischbacher & Simon Gachter, 2010. "Social Preferences, Beliefs, and the Dynamics of Free Riding in Public Goods Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 541-556, March.
    14. Sørensen, Flemming & Mattsson, Jan & Sundbo, Jon, 2010. "Experimental methods in innovation research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 313-322, April.
    15. Ernst, Holger, 2001. "Patent applications and subsequent changes of performance: evidence from time-series cross-section analyses on the firm level," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 143-157, January.
    16. Rachel T. A. Croson, 2007. "Theories Of Commitment, Altruism And Reciprocity: Evidence From Linear Public Goods Games," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(2), pages 199-216, April.
    17. Aamir Rafique Hashmi, 2013. "Competition and Innovation: The Inverted-U Relationship Revisited," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(5), pages 1653-1668, December.
    18. Katharina Eckartz & Oliver Kirchkamp & Daniel Schunk, 2012. "How do Incentives affect Creativity?," Jena Economics Research Papers 2012-068, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    19. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Market Value and Patent Citations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 36(1), pages 16-38, Spring.
    20. GianCarlo Moschini & Oleg Yerokhin, 2008. "Patents, Research Exemption, and the Incentive for Sequential Innovation," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(2), pages 379-412, June.
    21. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    22. Adam B. Jaffe & Josh Lerner & Scott Stern, 2002. "Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number jaff02-1.
    23. Michele Boldrin & David K. Levine, 2013. "The Case against Patents," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 3-22, Winter.
    24. Robert M. Hunt, 2004. "Patentability, Industry Structure, and Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 401-425, September.
    25. Oliver Kirchkamp & J. Philipp Reiß, 2011. "Out‐Of‐Equilibrium Bids in First‐Price Auctions: Wrong Expectations or Wrong Bids," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 121(557), pages 1361-1397, December.
    26. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    27. Fershtman, Chaim & Markovich, Sarit, 2010. "Patents, imitation and licensing in an asymmetric dynamic R&D race," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 113-126, March.
    28. Uwe Cantner & Werner Güth & Andreas Nicklisch & Torsten Weiland, 2009. "Competition In Product Design: An Experiment Exploring Innovation Behavior," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(4), pages 724-752, November.
    29. Greiner, Ben, 2004. "An Online Recruitment System for Economic Experiments," MPRA Paper 13513, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    30. Paolo CROSETTO, 2010. "To patent or not to patent: a pilot experiment on incentives to copyright in a sequential innovation setting," Departmental Working Papers 2010-05, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    31. Josh Lerner, 2009. "The Empirical Impact of Intellectual Property Rights on Innovation: Puzzles and Clues," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(2), pages 343-348, May.
    32. Olivier Toubia, 2006. "Idea Generation, Creativity, and Incentives," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 411-425, September.
    33. Elinor Ostrom, 2000. "Collective Action and the Evolution of Social Norms," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 137-158, Summer.
    34. Mathias Erlei & Anne-Kathrin Dimmig, 2012. "Quasi-Rational R&D Behavior in an Environment with Fundamental Uncertainty," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0008, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    35. Scherer, F M, 1972. "Nordhaus' Theory of Optimal Patent Life: A Geometric Reinterpretation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(3), pages 422-427, June.
    36. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2009. "Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 611-635, December.
    37. Jaffe, Adam B., 2000. "The U.S. patent system in transition: policy innovation and the innovation process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4-5), pages 531-557, April.
    38. James Bessen & Michael J. Meurer, 2008. "Do Patents Perform Like Property?," Working Papers 0801, Research on Innovation.
    39. Julia Brüggemann & Paolo Crosetto & Lukas Meub & Kilian Bizer, 2016. "Intellectual property rights hinder sequential innovation: experimental evidence," Post-Print hal-01997135, HAL.
    40. Yi Qian, 2007. "Do National Patent Laws Stimulate Domestic Innovation in a Global Patenting Environment? A Cross-Country Analysis of Pharmaceutical Patent Protection, 1978-2002," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(3), pages 436-453, August.
    41. Lakhani, Karim R. & von Hippel, Eric, 2003. "How open source software works: "free" user-to-user assistance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 923-943, June.
    42. Suzanne Scotchmer, 1991. "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 29-41, Winter.
    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. Benslimane, Ismaël & Crosetto, Paolo & Magni-Berton, Raul & Varaine, Simon, 2023. "Intellectual property reform in the laboratory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 204-221.
    2. Lirios Alos-Simo & Antonio J. Verdu-Jover & Jose M. Gomez-Gras, 2020. "Knowledge Transfer in Sustainable Contexts: A Comparative Analysis of Periods of Financial Recession and Expansion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-24, June.
    3. Giuseppe Attanasi & Massimo Egidi & Elena Manzoni, 2023. "Target-the-Two: a lab-in-the-field experiment on routinization," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 33(1), pages 1-33, January.
    4. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2022. "Effect of Intellectual Property Rights Protection on Services Export Diversification," EconStor Preprints 248717, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    5. Pengyuan Xu & Meiqing Zhang & Min Gui, 2020. "How R&D Financial Subsidies, Regional R&D Input, and Intellectual Property Protection Affect the Sustainable Patent Output of SMEs: Evidence from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-18, February.
    6. Brüggemann Julia & Proeger Till, 2017. "The Effectiveness of Public Subsidies for Private Innovations. An Experimental Approach," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 17(4), pages 1-21, October.
    7. Julia Brüggemann & Kilian Bizer, 2016. "Laboratory experiments in innovation research: a methodological overview and a review of the current literature," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Brüggemann, Julia & Proeger, Till, 2017. "The effectiveness of public subsidies for private innovations: An experimental approach," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 266, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics, revised 2017.
    9. Jinglei Huang & Danxia Xie & Zhihao Xu, 2024. "Sequential innovation and contribution distribution: measurement from game live-streaming industry," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-10, December.
    10. Zhang, Dongyang & Guo, Rui & He, Xiaodan, 2022. "How does the exclusive license stimulate firm’s subsequent innovation? The role of innovation financial input," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    11. Brueggemann, Julia & Meub, Lukas, 2015. "Experimental evidence on the effects of innovation contests," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 251, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    12. Viglioni, Marco Túlio Dinali & Calegario, Cristina Lelis Leal & Aveline, Carlos Eduardo Stefaniak & Ferreira, Manuel Portugal & Borini, Felipe Mendes & Bruhn, Nádia Campos Pereira, 2023. "Effects of intellectual property rights on innovation and economic activity: A non-linear perspective from Latin America," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 359-371.
    13. Ostermaier, Andreas & Uhl, Matthias, 2020. "Performance evaluation and creativity: Balancing originality and usefulness," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    14. Meschnig, Annika & Dubiel, Anna, 2023. "From formation to performance outcomes: A review and agenda for licensing research," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    15. Yu Zhang & Xianming Wu & Hao Zhang & Chan Lyu, 2018. "Cross-Border M&A and the Acquirers’ Innovation Performance: An Empirical Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-25, May.
    16. Gustavo Canavire-Bacarreza & Luis Castro Peñarrieta, 2021. "Can licensing induce productivity? Exploring the IPR effect," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 549-586, August.
    17. Mittone, Luigi & Morreale, Azzurra & Vu, Thi-Thanh-Tam, 2022. "What drives innovative behavior?- An experimental analysis on risk attitudes, creativity and performance," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    18. Brüggemann, Julia & Meub, Lukas, 2017. "Experimental evidence on the effects of innovation contests," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 72-83.
    19. lv, Kangjuan & Pan, Minjie & Huang, Li & Song, Daqiang & Qian, Xinlei, 2023. "Can intellectual property rights protection reduce air pollution? A quasi-natural experiment from China," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 210-222.
    20. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2024. "Effects of intellectual property rights protection on services export diversification in developing countries," KDI Journal of Economic Policy, Korea Development Institute (KDI), vol. 46(1), pages 53-89.

    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. Gamba, Simona, 2017. "The Effect of Intellectual Property Rights on Domestic Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Sector," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 15-27.
    2. Benslimane, Ismaël & Crosetto, Paolo & Magni-Berton, Raul & Varaine, Simon, 2023. "Intellectual property reform in the laboratory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 204-221.
    3. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 315-380, Elsevier.
    4. Nancy Gallini, 2017. "Do patents work? Thickets, trolls and antibiotic resistance," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(4), pages 893-926, November.
    5. Griffith, Rachel & Lee, Sokbae & Straathof, Bas, 2017. "Recombinant innovation and the boundaries of the firm," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 34-56.
    6. Brueggemann, Julia & Meub, Lukas, 2015. "Experimental evidence on the effects of innovation contests," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 251, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    7. Pedro Bento, 2013. "Patent Protection as a Tax on Competition and Innovation," Working Papers 13-13, Department of Economics, West Virginia University.
    8. Brüggemann, Julia & Meub, Lukas, 2017. "Experimental evidence on the effects of innovation contests," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 72-83.
    9. Joel Blit & Mauricio Zelaya, 2015. "Do Firms Respond to Stronger Patent Protection by Doing More R&D?," Working Papers 1501, University of Waterloo, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2015.
    10. Encaoua, David & Guellec, Dominique & Martinez, Catalina, 2006. "Patent systems for encouraging innovation: Lessons from economic analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1423-1440, November.
    11. Elizabeth Webster & Paul H. Jensen, 2011. "Do Patents Matter for Commercialization?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(2), pages 431-453.
    12. Sefa Awaworyi Churchill & Hoang M. Luong & Mehmet Ugur, 2022. "Does intellectual property protection deliver economic benefits? A multi‐outcome meta‐regression analysis of the evidence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 1477-1509, December.
    13. Yang, Xuebing, 2013. "Horizontal inventive step and international protection of intellectual property," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 338-355.
    14. Boudreau, Kevin J. & Lakhani, Karim R., 2015. "“Open” disclosure of innovations, incentives and follow-on reuse: Theory on processes of cumulative innovation and a field experiment in computational biology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 4-19.
    15. Bernhard Ganglmair & Imke Reimers, 2019. "Visibility of Technology and Cumulative Innovation: Evidence from Trade Secrets Laws," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2019_119v1, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    16. Olga Slivko & Bernd Theilen, 2014. "Innovation or imitation? The effect of spillovers and competitive pressure on firms’ R&D strategy choice," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 112(3), pages 253-282, July.
    17. Heidi L. Williams, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from Health Care Markets," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 53-87.
    18. Anja, Breitwieser & Neil, Foster, 2012. "Intellectual property rights, innovation and technology transfer: a survey," MPRA Paper 36094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Alberto Galasso & Mark Schankerman, 2015. "Patent Rights, Innovation and Firm Exit," NBER Working Papers 21769, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Bento Pedro, 2021. "Quantifying the Effects of Patent Protection on Innovation, Imitation, Growth, and Aggregate Productivity," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 21(1), pages 1-35, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    INNOVATION; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY; LABORATORY EXPERIMENT; REAL EFFORT TASK; CREATIVITY;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D89 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Other
    • K39 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Other

    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:gbl:wpaper:2015-01. 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: Adrien Hervouet (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inragfr.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.