Journal of Economic Growth

, Volume 14, Issue 1, pp 55–78 | Cite as

Effects of blocking patents on R&D: a quantitative DGE analysis

  • Angus C. ChuEmail author


What are the effects of blocking patents on R&D and consumption? This paper develops a quality-ladder growth model with overlapping intellectual property rights and capital accumulation to quantitatively evaluate the effects of blocking patents. The analysis focuses on two policy variables (a) patent breadth that determines the amount of profits created by an invention and (b) the profit-sharing rule that determines the distribution of profits between current and former inventors along the quality ladder. The model is calibrated to aggregate data of the US economy. Under parameter values that match key features of the US economy and show equilibrium R&D underinvestment, I find that optimizing the profit-sharing rule of blocking patents would lead to a significant increase in R&D, consumption and welfare. Also, the paper derives and quantifies a dynamic distortionary effect of patent policy on capital accumulation.


Blocking patents Endogenous growth Patent breadth R&D 

JEL Classification

O31 O34 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Acemoglu D. (2009) Introduction to modern economic growth. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  2. Acemoglu, D., & Akcigit, U. (2008). State dependent intellectual property rights policy. NBER Working Paper No. 12775.Google Scholar
  3. Aghion P., Howitt P. (1992) A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica 60: 323–351. doi: 10.2307/2951599 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arnold L.G. (2006) The dynamics of the Jones R&D growth model. Review of Economic Dynamics 9: 143–152. doi: 10.1016/ CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Basu S. (1996) Procyclical productivity: Increasing returns or cyclical utilization?. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 111: 719–751. doi: 10.2307/2946670 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Basu S., Fernald J.G. (1997) Returns to scale in U.S. production: Estimates and implications. The Journal of Political Economy 105: 249–283. doi: 10.1086/262073 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Caballero R.J., Jaffe A.B. (2002) How high are the giants’ shoulders: An empirical assessment of knowledge spillovers and creative destruction in a model of economic growth. In: Jaffe A., Trajtenberg M. (eds) Patents, citations and innovations: A window on the knowledge economy. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 89–152Google Scholar
  8. Chu, A. C. (2009). Effects of patent length on R&D: A quantitative DGE analysis. Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica Working Paper.Google Scholar
  9. Comin D. (2004) R&D: A small contribution to productivity growth. Journal of Economic Growth 9: 391–421. doi: 10.1007/s10887-004-4541-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Futagami K., Iwaisako T. (2007) Dynamic analysis of patent policy in an endogenous growth model. Journal of Economic Theory 132: 306–334. doi: 10.1016/j.jet.2005.07.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gallini N.T. (2002) The economics of patents: Lessons from recent U.S. patent reform. Journal of Economic Perspectives 16: 131–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gilbert R., Shapiro C. (1990) Optimal patent length and breadth. The Rand Journal of Economics 21: 106–112. doi: 10.2307/2555497 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goh A.-T., Olivier J. (2002) Optimal patent protection in a two-sector economy. International Economic Review 43: 1191–1214. doi: 10.1111/1468-2354.t01-1-00053 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Green J.R., Scotchmer S. (1995) On the division of profit in sequential innovation. The Rand Journal of Economics 26: 20–33. doi: 10.2307/2556033 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grossman G.M., Helpman E. (1991) Quality ladders in the theory of growth. The Review of Economic Studies 58: 43–61. doi: 10.2307/2298044 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grossman G.M., Lai E. (2004) International protection of intellectual property. The American Economic Review 94: 1635–1653. doi: 10.1257/0002828043052312 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Guvenen F. (2006) Reconciling conflicting evidence on the elasticity of intertemporal substitution: A macroeconomic perspective. Journal of Monetary Economics 53: 1451–1472. doi: 10.1016/j.jmoneco.2005.06.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hall B.H., Jaffe A.B., Trajtenberg M. (2002) The NBER patent citation data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. In: Jaffe A., Trajtenberg M. (eds) Patents, citations and innovations: A window on the knowledge economy. The MIT Press, Cambridege, MA, pp 403–459Google Scholar
  19. Hopenhayn H., Llobet G., Mitchell M. (2006) Rewarding sequential innovators: Prizes, patents, and buyouts. The Journal of Political Economy 114: 1041–1068. doi: 10.1086/510562 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hunt, R. M. (1999). Nonobviousness and the incentive to innovate: An economic analysis of intellectual property reform. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Working Paper 99-3.Google Scholar
  21. Jaffe A.B. (2000) The U.S. patent system in transition: Policy innovation and the innovation process. Research Policy 29: 531–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jaffe A.B., 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, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  23. Jones C.I. (1995a) Time series tests of endogenous growth models. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 110: 495–525. doi: 10.2307/2118448 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jones C.I. (1995b) R&D-based models of economic growth. The Journal of Political Economy 103: 759–784. doi: 10.1086/262002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jones C.I. (1999) Growth: With or without scale effects. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings 89: 139–144Google Scholar
  26. Jones C.I., Williams J.C. (1998) Measuring the social return to R&D. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 113: 1119–1135. doi: 10.1162/003355398555856 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jones C.I., Williams J.C. (2000) Too much of a good thing? The economics of investment in R&D. Journal of Economic Growth 5: 65–85. doi: 10.1023/A:1009826304308 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Judd K.L. (1985) On the performance of patents. Econometrica 53: 567–586. doi: 10.2307/1911655 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Klemperer P. (1990) How broad should the scope of patent protection be?. The Rand Journal of Economics 21: 113–130. doi: 10.2307/2555498 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kwan Y.K., Lai E. (2003) Intellectual property rights protection and endogenous economic growth. Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control 27: 853–873. doi: 10.1016/S0165-1889(02)00018-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Laitner J. (1982) Monopoly and long-run capital accumulation. The Bell Journal of Economics 13: 143–157. doi: 10.2307/3003436 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Laitner J., Stolyarov D. (2004) Aggregate returns to scale and embodied technical change: Theory and measurement using stock market data. Journal of Monetary Economics 51: 191–233. doi: 10.1016/j.jmoneco.2003.07.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lanjouw J.O. (1998) Patent protection in the shadow of infringement: Simulation estimations of patent value. The Review of Economic Studies 65: 671–710. doi: 10.1111/1467-937X.00064 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Li C.-W. (2001) On the policy implications of endogenous technological progress. The Economic Journal 111: 164–179. doi: 10.1111/1468-0297.00626 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Nordhaus W. (1969) Invention, growth, and welfare: A theoretical treatment of technological change. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  36. O’Donoghue T. (1998) A patentability requirement for sequential innovation. The Rand Journal of Economics 29: 654–679. doi: 10.2307/2556088 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. O’Donoghue T., Scotchmer S., Thisse J.-F. (1998) Patent breadth, patent life, and the pace of technological progress. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy 7: 1–32. doi: 10.1162/105864098567317 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. O’Donoghue T., Zweimuller J. (2004) Patents in a model of endogenous growth. Journal of Economic Growth 9: 81–123. doi: 10.1023/B:JOEG.0000023017.42109.c2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Romer P.M. (1990) Endogenous technological change. The Journal of Political Economy 98: S71–S102. doi: 10.1086/261725 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Scotchmer S. (2004) Innovation and incentives. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  41. Segerstrom P.S. (1998) Endogenous growth without scale effects. The American Economic Review 88: 1290–1310Google Scholar
  42. Shapiro, C. (2001). Navigating the patent thicket: Cross licenses, patent pools, and standard setting. In A. Jaffe, J. Lerner, & S. Stern (Eds.), Innovation policy and the economy (Vol. 1, pp. 119–150). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  43. Steger, T. M. (2005). Non-scale models of R&D-based growth: The market solution. Topics in Macroeconomics, 5, article 3.Google Scholar
  44. Tandon P. (1982) Optimal patents with compulsory licensing. The Journal of Political Economy 90: 470–486. doi: 10.1086/261070 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Trimborn T., Koch K.-J., Steger T.M. (2008) Multi-dimensional transitional dynamics: A simple numerical procedure. Macroeconomic Dynamics 12: 301–319. doi: 10.1017/S1365100507070034 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Economics, Academia SinicaTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations