[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/6304.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Patent Buy-Outs: A Mechanism for Encouraging Innovation

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Kremer
Abstract
In 1839, the French government purchased the patent on the Daguerreotype process and" placed it in the public domain. This paper examines a mechanism under which governments" would use an auction to estimate the private value of patents and then offer to buy out patents at" this private value, times a fixed markup. The markup would correspond to the estimated typical" ratio of the social and private values of inventions -- perhaps two. Most patents purchased would" be placed in the public domain, but in order to induce bidders to reveal their valuations patents would be sold to the highest bidder. Such patent buy-outs could eliminate monopoly" price distortions and incentives for wasteful reverse engineering, while raising private incentives" for original research closer to their social value. However, patent buy-outs are potentially" vulnerable to collusion. Patent buy-outs may be particularly appropriate for pharmaceuticals."

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Kremer, 1997. "Patent Buy-Outs: A Mechanism for Encouraging Innovation," NBER Working Papers 6304, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:6304
    Note: PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w6304.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Milgrom, Paul & Weber, Robert J., 1982. "The value of information in a sealed-bid auction," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 105-114, June.
    2. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    3. Hendricks, Kenneth & Porter, Robert H, 1988. "An Empirical Study of an Auction with Asymmetric Information," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(5), pages 865-883, December.
    4. 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.
    5. Mansfield, Edwin & Schwartz, Mark & Wagner, Samuel, 1981. "Imitation Costs and Patents: An Empirical Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(364), pages 907-918, December.
    6. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 1992. "R&D Investment and International Productivity Differences," NBER Working Papers 4161, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Paul M. Romer, 1993. "Implementing a National Technology Strategy with Self-Organizing Industry Investment Boards," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 24(2 Microec), pages 345-399.
    8. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    9. Bernstein, Jeffrey I. & Nadiri, M. Ishaq, 1988. "Interindustry R&D, Rates of Return and Production in High-Tech Industries," Working Papers 88-04, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    10. Bernstein, Jeffrey I & Nadiri, M Ishaq, 1988. "Interindustry R&D Spillovers, Rates of Return, and Production in High-Tech Industries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(2), pages 429-434, May.
    11. Spence, Michael, 1984. "Cost Reduction, Competition, and Industry Performance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(1), pages 101-121, January.
    12. Bernstein, Jeffrey I. & Nadiri, M. Ishaq, 1990. "Product Demand, Cost Of Production, Spillovers And The Social Rate Or Return To R&D," Working Papers 90-53, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    13. Taylor, Curtis R, 1995. "Digging for Golden Carrots: An Analysis of Research Tournaments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 872-890, September.
    14. Mark Johnston & Richard Zeckhauser, 1991. "The Australian Pharmaceutical Subsidy Gambit: Transmuting Deadweight Loss and Oligopoly Rents to Consumer Surplus," NBER Working Papers 3783, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Hendricks, Kenneth & Porter, Robert H & Wilson, Charles A, 1994. "Auctions for Oil and Gas Leases with an Informed Bidder and a Random Reservation Price," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1415-1444, November.
    16. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    17. Jones, Charles I, 1995. "R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 759-784, August.
    18. Wright, Brian Davern, 1983. "The Economics of Invention Incentives: Patents, Prizes, and Research Contracts," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 73(4), pages 691-707, September.
    19. Groves, Theodore, 1973. "Incentives in Teams," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 41(4), pages 617-631, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kremer, Michael R., 1998. "Patent Buyouts: A Mechanism for Encouraging Innovation," Scholarly Articles 3693705, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    2. G Cameron, 1996. "Innovation and Economic Growth," CEP Discussion Papers dp0277, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    3. Samaniego, Roberto M., 2013. "Knowledge spillovers and intellectual property rights," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 50-63.
    4. L. Rachel Ngai & Roberto M. Samaniego, 2006. "An R&D-Based Model of Multi-Sector Growth," CEP Discussion Papers dp0762, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    5. Jalles, João Tovar, 2010. "How to measure innovation? New evidence of the technology-growth linkage," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 81-96, June.
    6. Bernstein, Jeffrey I. & Nadiri, M. Ishaq, 1990. "Product Demand, Cost Of Production, Spillovers And The Social Rate Or Return To R&D," Working Papers 90-53, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    7. Michael Kremer, 2001. "Creating Markets for New Vaccines - Part I: Rationale," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1, pages 35-72, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Raquel Ortega-Argilés, 2013. "R&D, knowledge, economic growth and the transatlantic productivity gap," Chapters, in: Frank Giarratani & Geoffrey J.D. Hewings & Philip McCann (ed.), Handbook of Industry Studies and Economic Geography, chapter 11, pages 271-302, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Capolupo, Rosa, 2009. "The New Growth Theories and Their Empirics after Twenty Years," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 3, pages 1-72.
    10. Lin, Hwan C., 2016. "The switch from patents to state-dependent prizes for technological innovation," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 193-223.
    11. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Measuring the Returns to R&D," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1033-1082, Elsevier.
    12. Lin, Hwan C., 2012. "Switching from Patents to an Intertemporal Bounty in a Non-Scale Growth Model: Transitional Dynamics and Welfare Evaluation," MPRA Paper 49782, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 12 Sep 2013.
    13. Jie Cai & Nan Li, 2019. "Growth Through Inter-sectoral Knowledge Linkages," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(5), pages 1827-1866.
    14. Kwan, Yum K. & Lai, Edwin L. -C., 2003. "Intellectual property rights protection and endogenous economic growth," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 853-873, March.
    15. M. Ishaq Nadiri, 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 4423, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Krzysztof Cichy, 2009. "Human Capital and Technological Progress as the Determinants of Economic Growth," NBP Working Papers 60, Narodowy Bank Polski.
    17. Bruno Cassiman & Reinhilde Veugelers, 1998. "R&D cooperation and spillovers: Some empirical evidence," Economics Working Papers 328, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    18. Richard M. H. Suen, 2013. "Research Policy and U.S. Economic Growth," Working papers 2013-18, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    19. repec:pra:mprapa:52608 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Kuwahara, Shiro, 2019. "Multiplicity and stagnation under the Romer model with increasing returns of R&D," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 86-97.
    21. Brian Lucking & Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen, 2018. "Have R&D Spillovers Changed?," NBER Working Papers 24622, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General

    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:nbr:nberwo:6304. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.