Location of Repository

Patent Disclosure and R&D Competition in Pharmaceuticals.

By Laura Magazzini, Fabio Pammolli, Massimo Riccaboni and Maria Alessandra Rossi

Abstract

The prominent role played by patents within the pharmaceutical domain is unquestionable. In this paper we take an unusual perspective and focus on a relatively neglected implication of patents: the effect of patent-induced information disclosure (of both successes and failures) on the dynamics of R&D and market competition. The study builds upon the combination of two large datasets, linking the information about patents to firm level data on R&D projects and their outcome. Two case studies in the fields of anti-inflammatory compounds and cancer research complement our analysis. We show the important role played by patent disclosure in shaping firms technological trajectories through the possibility of reciprocal monitoring in a context of parallel research efforts, and suggest the importance of enhancing the diffusion of information concerning failures, not only to avoid wasteful duplication of innovative efforts, but also as a tool for the identification of promising research trajectories. This paper is the result of the "R&D competition" research project carried out jointly with Adrian Towse and Martina Garau of the Office of Health Economics, London, UK. A preliminary draft of the paper has been presented to the DRUID Summer Conference 2006 (Copenhagen), and to the 11th ISS Conference (Sophia-Antipolis).patent disclosure; innovation; r&d competition

OAI identifier:

Suggested articles

Preview

Citations

  1. (1990). A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations,
  2. (1994). A protein kinase involved in the regulation of inflammatory cytokine biosynthesis,
  3. (1985). Camptothecin induces protein-linked DNA breaks via mammalian DNA topoisomerase I,
  4. (1998). Can Patent Deter Innovation?
  5. (1999). Citation Frequency and the Value of Patented Inventions,
  6. (2005). Disclosure and investment as strategies in the patent race,
  7. (2007). Do Formal Intellectual Property Rights Hinder the Free Flow of Scientific Knowledge? An Empirical Test of the Anti-Commons Hypothesis,
  8. (1962). Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention,
  9. (2004). Empirical Evidence for Selective Reporting of Outcomes in Randomized Trials,
  10. (1996). Flows of Knowledge from Universities and Federal Labs: Modeling the Flow of Patent Citations Over Time and Across Institutional and Geographic Boundaries.
  11. (2004). How do I know what you know? Patent examiners and the generation of patent citations,
  12. (1998). How SMEs use the patent literature.
  13. (2001). Is There a Difference between Leads and Drugs? A Historical Perspective,
  14. (2001). Markets for Technology: The Economics of Innovation and Corporate Strategy,
  15. (2008). Moving Toward Transparency of Clinical Trials,
  16. (2000). On Courts Herding Cats: Contending with the Written Description Requirement (and Other Unruly Patent Disclosure Doctrines),
  17. (2001). Patent protection of computer programmes, Report submitted to the European Commission -Directorate-General Enterprise.
  18. (1986). Patents and Innovation: An Empirical Study,
  19. (2005). Patents and the Diffusion of Technical Information,
  20. (1985). Patents as Information Transfer Mechanisms: To Patent or (Maybe) Not to Patent,
  21. (2002). Patents, citations and innovations: a window on the knowledge economy,
  22. (2003). Patents, Invalidity, and the Strategic Transmission of Enabling Information,
  23. (1966). Plant Antitumor Agents. I. The Isolation and Structure of Camptothecin, a Novel Alkaloidal Leukemia and Tumor Inhibitor from Camptotheca acuminata1, 2,
  24. (2005). Productivity Counts–But the Definition Is Key.
  25. (2000). Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why US Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not). 22See Section 801.
  26. (2006). Public Health: Innovation and Intellectual Property Rights.
  27. (2007). Publication bias against negative results from clinical trials: three of the seven deadly sins,
  28. (1996). Scale, Scope, and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery,
  29. (1995). Science and Innovation: The US Pharmaceutical Industry in the 1980 s,
  30. (1995). Success rates for new drugs entering clinical testing in the United States,
  31. (2001). Technological change and network dynamics: lessons from the pharmaceutical industry,
  32. (1998). Technology and market structure: theory and history,
  33. (2003). The economic structure of intellectual property law,
  34. (1934). The Economic Theory Concerning Patents for Inventions,
  35. (2000). The Meaning of Patent Citations: Report on the NBER/Case-Western Reserve Survey of Patentees.
  36. (2001). The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools.
  37. (1950). The Patent Controversy in the Nineteenth Century,
  38. (1999). The Pharmaceutical Industry and the Revolution in Molecular Biology: Exploring the Interactions between Scientific, Institutional and Organizational Change,
  39. (1999). The Quality of Ideas: Measuring Innovation with Multiple Indicators.
  40. (1995). Universal Minimum Standards of Intellectual Property Protection under the
  41. (1997). University vs. Corporate Patents: A Window on the Basicness of Innovations,

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.