|
on Intellectual Property Rights |
| By: | Tina Wolf (Friedrich Schiller University Jena, DFG RTG 1411 The Economics of Innovative Change) |
| Abstract: | There already exists broad literature investigating small and innovative firms in many respects. However, there have been few attempts to assess this group of firms' propensity to patent or its patenting activities. This paper intends to fill that gap. By applying a new approach to account for young and innovative companies' patents, this paper avoids an undercounting of small firm patenting, which has been a feature of most of the earlier studies. A data set is used that comprises information on R&D, capital stock, state promotion etc for 534 Thuringian firms in their first three business years. The results of the zero-inflated negative binomial regression analysis suggest that patenting is an activity of science-oriented, cooperative young firms that are conducting R&D even before the firm has been launched. |
| Keywords: | entrepreneurship, technological innovation, patenting, firm performance, research and development |
| JEL: | L25 L26 Q55 |
| Date: | 2013–05–27 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:jrp:jrpwrp:2013-023&r=ipr |
| By: | Thomas Bolli (KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich, Switzerland); Martin Wörter (KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich, Switzerland) |
| Abstract: | This paper analyzes the impact of technological diversity on innovation inputs and success using Swiss firm-level panel data. While we do not find any impact of diversity on R&D intensity, we confirm a positive impact of diversity on patent applications as suggested by the literature. However, since patent applications reflect an intermediate innovation input rather than output, we extend the analysis to the share of sales generated by new products. We find a significant negative effect of diversity on the sales share of new products. Hence, technologically more specialized firms have a lower propensity to patent and greater shares of new products. We find neither a direct nor indirect effect of diversity on the sales share generated by improved products. These results suggest that specialization pays-off through more drastic innovations that yield greater market success through a passing monopoly status. |
| Keywords: | patent applications, innovative sales share, new products, improved products, technological diversity |
| JEL: | O3 |
| Date: | 2013–06 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:kof:wpskof:13-336&r=ipr |
| By: | Cassi, Lorenzo; Plunket, Anne |
| Abstract: | This paper investigates how network relations, proximity and their interplay affect collaboration and their inventive performance. Using patent citations as a proxy for patent quality, we investigate how the network and proximity characteristics of co-inventors enable them to access different sources of knowledge, in different geographical and organizational contexts, and finally affect the quality of inventive collaboration. Our findings enable to address the proximity paradox, which states that proximity facilitates collaboration and knowledge sharing, but it does not necessarily increase innovative performance, too much proximity may even harm innovation (Boschma and Frenken, 2009; Broekel and Boschma, 2011). |
| Keywords: | Social networks, geographical proximity, technological proximity, co-patenting, network formation. |
| JEL: | D85 L65 O31 O33 R11 |
| Date: | 2013–01–15 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:47388&r=ipr |
| By: | Ben Westmore |
| Abstract: | This paper uses panel regression techniques to assess the policy determinants of private sector innovative activity – proxied by R&D expenditure and the number of new patents – across 19 OECD countries. The relationship between innovation indicators and multifactor productivity (MFP) growth is also examined with a particular focus on the role of public policies in influencing the returns to new knowledge. The results establish an empirical link between R&D and patenting, as well as between these measures of innovation intensity and MFP growth. Innovation-specific policies such as R&D tax incentives, direct government support and patent rights are found to be successful in encouraging the innovative activities associated with higher productivity growth. However, direct empirical evidence of the positive effects of these policies on productivity is less forthcoming. A pervasive theme from the analysis is the importance of coupling policies aimed at encouraging innovation or technological adoption with well designed framework policies that allow knowledge spillovers to proliferate. In particular, the settings of framework policies relating to product market regulation, openness to trade and debtor protection in bankruptcy provisions are found to be important for the diffusion of new technologies.<P>R&D, brevets et croissance : le rôle des politiques publiques<BR>Ce document utilise des techniques de régression en panel pour évaluer les déterminants politiques de l'activité d'innovation du secteur privé – représentée par les dépenses de R & D et le nombre de brevet - à travers 19 pays de l'OCDE. La relation entre les indicateurs de l'innovation et la croissance de la productivité multifactorielle (PMF) est également analysée avec une attention particulière sur le rôle des politiques publiques pour influencer les rendements de nouvelles connaissances. Les résultats établissent un lien empirique entre la R & D et les brevets, ainsi qu'entre ces mesures de l'intensité de l'innovation et la croissance de la PMF. Des politiques spécifiques d'innovation telles que des incitations fiscales pour la R & D, le soutien direct de l'État et les droits de brevet sont avérées efficaces pour encourager les activités innovantes associées à une plus forte croissance de la productivité. Toutefois, les preuves empiriques directes des effets positifs de ces politiques sur la productivité sont plus rares. Un thème récurrent de l'analyse est l'importance du couplage des politiques visant à encourager l'innovation ou l'adoption technologique avec des politiques-cadres bien conçues qui permettent une plus large diffusion des connaissances. En particulier, les paramètres des politiques-cadres relatives à la réglementation des marchés de produits, l'ouverture au commerce et à la protection du débiteur dans les dispositions de la faillite sont jugés importants pour la diffusion des nouvelles technologies. |
| Keywords: | productivity growth, innovation, public policy, intangible assets, politiques publiques, croissance de la productivité multifactorielle (PMF), innovations, immobilisations incorporelles |
| JEL: | L20 O30 O40 |
| Date: | 2013–05–22 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:ecoaaa:1047-en&r=ipr |
| By: | Luis Aguiar (European Commission – JRC - IPTS); Bertin Martens (European Commission – JRC - IPTS) |
| Abstract: | The goal of this paper is to analyze the behaviour of digital music consumers on the Internet. Using clickstream data on a panel of more than 16,000 European consumers, we estimate the effects of illegal downloading and legal streaming on the legal purchases of digital music. Our results suggest that Internet users do not view illegal downloading as a substitute to legal digital music. Although positive and significant, our estimated elasticities are essentially zero: a 10% increase in clicks on illegal downloading websites leads to a 0.2% increase in clicks on legal purchases websites. Online music streaming services are found to have a somewhat larger (but still small) effect on the purchases of digital sound recordings, suggesting complementarities between these two modes of music consumption. According to our results, a 10% increase in clicks on legal streaming websites lead to up to a 0.7% increase in clicks on legal digital purchases websites. We find important cross country difference in these effects. |
| Keywords: | Digital Music, Copyright, Downloading, Streaming, Piracy on the internet |
| JEL: | K42 L82 L86 Z1 |
| Date: | 2013–02 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ipt:decwpa:2013-04&r=ipr |
| By: | Dan Andrews; Chiara Criscuolo |
| Abstract: | Investment in knowledge-based capital (KBC) – assets that lack physical embodiment, such as computerised information, innovative property and economic competencies – has been rising significantly. This has implications for innovation and productivity growth and requires new thinking on policy. The returns to investing in KBC differ significantly across countries and are partly shaped by structural policies, which influence the ability of economies to reallocate scarce resources to firms that invest in KBC. Well-functioning product, labour and venture capital markets and bankruptcy laws that do not overly penalise failure can raise the expected returns to investing in KBC by improving the efficiency of resource allocation. While structural reforms offer the most cost-effective approach to raising investment in KBC, there is a role for innovation policies to raise private investment in KBC towards the socially optimal level(s). Indeed, R&D tax incentives and, as a finding that contrasts with previous research, direct support measures can be effective, but design features are crucial in order to minimise the fiscal cost and unintended consequences of such policies. Welldefined intellectual property rights (IPR) are also important to provide firms with the incentive to innovate and to promote knowledge diffusion via the public disclosure of ideas. However, such IPR regimes need to be coupled with pro-competition policies to ensure maximum effect while the rising costs of the patent system in emerging KBC sectors may have altered the trade-off inherent to IPR between the incentives to innovate and the broad diffusion of knowledge.<P>Actifs intellectuels, innovation et mobilité des ressources<BR>L'investissement dans le capital intellectuel – c'est-à-dire dans des actifs incorporels tels que les données informatisées, le capital d'innovation et les compétences économiques, ne cesse de progresser. Ces développements ont des implications pour l'innovation et l'accroissement de la productivité et exigent de repenser l'action des pouvoirs publics. Le rendement de l'investissement dans le capital intellectuel diffère sensiblement d'un pays à l'autre et est en partie formé par les politiques structurelles qui influent sur la capacité des économies à réaffecter les ressources limitées dans les entreprises qui investissent dans le capital intellectuel. Le bon fonctionnement des marchés des biens et services, du travail et de capital risque, ainsi qu’une législation sur le règlement des faillites ne pénalisant pas excessivement l'échec, peuvent augmenter les rendements attendus des investissements dans le capital intellectuel en améliorant l'efficacité de l'allocation des ressources. Si les réformes structurelles constituent l'approche la plus rentable pour accroitre les investissements dans le capital intellectuel, les politiques d'innovation peuvent jouer un rôle dans l’augmentation de l’investissement privé dans le capital intellectuel à un niveau plus optimal pour la collectivité. En effet, les incitations fiscales en faveur de la R-D ainsi que les mesures de soutien direct, peuvent être des dispositifs efficaces ; cependant, leur élaboration et mise en oeuvre est cruciale afin de minimiser le coût fiscal et les conséquences non souhaitées de ces politiques. Des droits de propriété intellectuelle (DPI) bien définis sont également essentiels pour inciter les entreprises à innover et à promouvoir la diffusion des connaissances par la divulgation publique des idées. Toutefois, les régimes des droits de propriété intellectuelle doivent être associés à des politiques stimulant la concurrence pour en assurer un effet maximal, dans un contexte où les coûts croissants du système de brevets dans les domaines émergents du capital intellectuel ont affecté l’équilibre entre les incitations à innover et une diffusion plus large du savoir, inhérent aux DPI. |
| Keywords: | growth, reallocation, innovation, intangible assets, croissance, innovation, immobilisations incorporelles, réaffectation |
| JEL: | L20 O30 O40 |
| Date: | 2013–05–24 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:ecoaaa:1046-en&r=ipr |
| By: | Dan Andrews; Chiara Criscuolo |
| Abstract: | Investment in knowledge-based capital (KBC) – assets that have no physical embodiment, such as computerised information, innovative property and economic competencies – has been rising significantly. This has implications for innovation and productivity growth and requires new thinking on policy. The returns to investing in KBC differ significantly across countries and are partly shaped by structural policies, which influence the ability of national economies to reallocate scarce resources to firms that invest in KBC. In this regard, well-functioning product, labour and venture capital markets and bankruptcy laws that do not overly penalise failure can raise the expected returns to investing in KBC by improving the efficiency of resource allocation. While structural reforms offer the most cost-effective approach to raising investment in KBC, there is a role for innovation policies to raise private investment in KBC towards socially optimal levels. Indeed, R&D tax incentives and, as a finding that contrasts with previous research, direct support measures can be effective, but design features are crucial in order to minimise the fiscal cost and unintended consequences of such policies. Well-defined intellectual property rights (IPR) are also important to provide firms with the incentive to innovate and to promote knowledge diffusion via the public disclosure of ideas. However, such IPR regimes need to be coupled with pro-competition policies to ensure maximum effect while the rising costs of the patent system in emerging KBC sectors may have altered the trade-off inherent to IPR between the incentives to innovate and the broad diffusion of knowledge.<P>Actifs intellectuels, innovation et mobilité des ressources<BR>L'investissement dans le capital intellectuel – c'est-à-dire dans des actifs incorporels tels que les données informatisées, le capital d'innovation et les compétences économiques, ne cesse de progresser. Ces développements ont des implications pour l'innovation et l'accroissement de la productivité et exigent de repenser l'action des pouvoirs publics. Le rendement de l'investissement dans le capital intellectuel diffère sensiblement d'un pays à l'autre et est en partie formé par les politiques structurelles qui influent sur la capacité des économies à réaffecter les ressources limitées dans les entreprises qui investissent dans le capital intellectuel. Le bon fonctionnement des marchés des biens et services, du travail et de capital risque, ainsi qu’une législation sur le règlement des faillites ne pénalisant pas excessivement l'échec, peuvent augmenter les rendements attendus des investissements dans le capital intellectuel en améliorant l'efficacité de l'allocation des ressources. Si les réformes structurelles constituent l'approche la plus rentable pour accroitre les investissements dans le capital intellectuel, les politiques d'innovation peuvent jouer un rôle dans l’augmentation de l’investissement privé dans le capital intellectuel à un niveau plus optimal pour la collectivité. En effet, les incitations fiscales en faveur de la R-D ainsi que les mesures de soutien direct, peuvent être des dispositifs efficaces ; cependant, leur élaboration et mise en oeuvre est cruciale afin de minimiser le coût fiscal et les conséquences non souhaitées de ces politiques. Des droits de propriété intellectuelle (DPI) bien définis sont également essentiels pour inciter les entreprises à innover et à promouvoir la diffusion des connaissances par la divulgation publique des idées. Toutefois, les régimes des droits de propriété intellectuelle doivent être associés à des politiques stimulant la concurrence pour en assurer un effet maximal, dans un contexte où les coûts croissants du système de brevets dans les domaines émergents du capital intellectuel ont affecté l’équilibre entre les incitations à innover et une diffusion plus large du savoir, inhérent aux DPI. |
| Keywords: | growth, reallocation, innovation, intangible assets |
| JEL: | L20 O30 O40 |
| Date: | 2013–05–28 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:oec:ecoaab:4-en&r=ipr |
| By: | Iris Wanzenböck (Austrian Institute of Technology (AIT) Vienna); Thomas Scherngell (Austrian Institute of Technology (AIT) Vienna); Thomas Brenner (Philipps-Universität Marburg) |
| Abstract: | This paper investigates the embeddedness of European regions in different types of inter-regional knowledge networks, namely project based R and D collaborations within the EU Framework Programmes (FPs), co-patent networks and co-publication networks. Embeddedness refers to the network positioning of regions captured in terms of social network analytic (SNA) centrality measures. The objective is to estimate how region-internal and region-external factors influence network embeddedness in the distinct network types, in order to identify differences in their driving factors at the regional level. In our modelling approach, we apply advanced spatial econometric techniques by means of a mixed effects panel version of the Spatial Durbin Model (SDM), and introduce a set of variables accounting for a capacity-specific, a relational as well as a spatial dimension in regional knowledge production activities. The results reveal conspicuous differences between the knowledge networks. Internal capacity- and technology-related aspects but also spatial spillover impacts from surrounding regions prove to be particularly important for centrality in the co-patent network. We also find significant - region-internal and region-external - impacts of general economic conditions on a region’s centrality in the FP network. However, we cannot observe substantial spill-over effects of region-external factors on centrality in the co-publication network. Thus, the distinctive knowledge creation foci in each network seem to find expression in the network structure as well as its regional determinants. |
| Keywords: | knowledge networks, network embeddedness, network centrality, regional knowledge production, panel Spatial Durbin model. |
| JEL: | L14 N74 O33 R15 |
| Date: | 2013–05–29 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pum:wpaper:2013-07&r=ipr |