Skip to content
BY 4.0 license Open Access Published by De Gruyter Open Access September 14, 2012

Perspectives on the Knowledge-Based Society. An Introduction to the Special Issue

Katharine Rockett EMAIL logo
From the journal Economics

Abstract

Knowledge exchange, innovation policy, and international trade flows are key aspects of the knowledge-based economy. In her introduction to the special issue on The Knowledge-Based Society: Transition, Geography, and Competition Policy the author briefly reviews these aspects. She begins with spillovers, emphasising the effects that drive the variety of results in this literature, and their role in a model of research joint venture formation among asymmetric partners. She then moves on to the linkages between universities and industry, underlining the diversity of these linkages and their goals. She discusses the interaction among innovative skills, minimum quality standards, and patent protection, noting how these generate welfare outcomes that vary with industry innovative skill levels. Finally, the author examines threshold effects in the relation between innovation and exports.

JEL Classification: F12; L1; L2; L5; O3; R12

References

Aghion, P., M. Dewatripont, and J. Stein (2008). Academic Freedom, Private Sector Focus and the Process of Innovation. Rand Journal of Economics 39(3): 617–635. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2547438910.1111/j.1756-2171.2008.00031.xSearch in Google Scholar

Amir, R., I. Evstigneev, and J. Wooders (2003). Noncooperative versus Cooperative R&D with Endogenous Spillover Rates. Games and Economic Behavior 42(2): 183–207. http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v42y2003i2p183-207.html10.1016/S0899-8256(02)00541-9Search in Google Scholar

Ang, J.S., and C. Wu (2011). The Role of Technological Synergy in Mergers and Acquisitions. available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=202480510.2139/ssrn.2024805Search in Google Scholar

Anton, J., and D. Yao (2002). The Sale of Ideas: Strategic Disclosure, Property Rights and Contracting. Review of Economic Studies 69(3): 513–531. http://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/restud/v69y2002i3p513-31.html10.1111/1467-937X.t01-1-00020Search in Google Scholar

Arrow, K. (1962). Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention. in R. R. Nelson (Ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity. Princeton: Princeton University Press. http://ideas.repec.org/h/nbr/nberch/2144.html10.1515/9781400879762-024Search in Google Scholar

Arundel, A., and A. Geuna (2004). Proximity and the Use of Public Science by Innovative European Firms. Economics of Innovation and New Technology 13(6): 559–580. http://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/ecinnt/v13y2004i6p559-580.html10.1080/1043859092000234311Search in Google Scholar

Bessen, J., and E. Maskin (2009). Sequential Innovation, Patents and Imitation. Rand Journal of Economics 40(4): 611–635. http://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/randje/v40y2009i4p611-635.html10.1111/j.1756-2171.2009.00081.xSearch in Google Scholar

Buehler, B., and F. Schuett (2012). Certification and Minimum Quality Standards Under Imperfect Competition. Mimeo. Tilberg University. http://www2.dse.unibo.it/dsa/seminari/709/schuett.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

Buenstorf, G., and M. Geissler (2009). Not Invented Here: Technology Licensing, Knowledge Transfer and Innovation Based on Public Research. Papers on Economics and Evolution, 0920, Max Planck Institute of Economics. http://ideas.repec.org/p/esi/evopap/2009-20.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

Carranza, J. (2010). Product Innovation and Adoption in Market Equilibrium: The Case of Digital Cameras. International Journal of Industrial Organization 28(6): 604–618. http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/indorg/v28y2010i6p604-618.html10.1016/j.ijindorg.2010.02.003Search in Google Scholar

Cassiman, B. and R. Veugelers (2006). In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R&D and External Knowledge Acquisition. Management Science 52(1): 68–82. http://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v52y2006i1p68-82.html10.1287/mnsc.1050.0470Search in Google Scholar

Cassiman, B., R. Veugelers, and P. Zuniga (2008). In Search of Performance Effects of (In)direct Industry Science Links. Industry and Corporate Change 17(4): 611–646. http://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v17y2008i4p611-646.html10.1093/icc/dtn023Search in Google Scholar

Cassiman, B., R. Veugelers, and P. Zuniga (2010). Diversity of Science Linkages: A Survey of Innovation Performance Effects and Some Evidence from Flemish Firms. Economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, Vol. 4, 2010-33. http://dx.doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2010-3310.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2010-33Search in Google Scholar

Cassiman, B., and G. Valentini (2009). Strategic Organization of R&D: The Choice of Basicness and Openness. Strategic Organization 7(1): 43–73. http://ideas.repec.org/p/ner/leuven/urnhdl123456789-256308.html10.1177/1476127008100129Search in Google Scholar

Clark, D.J., and J. Yngve Sand (2010). Endogenous Technology Sharing in R&D Intensive Industries. Economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, Vol. 4, 2010-1. http://dx.doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2010-110.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2010-1Search in Google Scholar

Cohen, W., and D. Levinthal (1989). Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D. The Economic Journal 99(397): 569–596. http://ideas.repec.org/a/ecj/econjl/v99y1989i397p569-96.html10.2307/2233763Search in Google Scholar

Cohen, W., R. Nelson, and J. Walsh (2000). Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not). National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 7552. http://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/7552.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

d’Aspremont, C., and A. Jacqumin (1988). Cooperative and Noncooeprative R&D in Duopoly with Spillovers. American Economic Review 78(5): 1133–1137. http://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v78y1988i5p1133-37.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

De Bondt, R. (1997). Spillovers and Innovative Activities. International Journal of Industrial Organization 15(1): 1–28. http://ideas.repec.org/p/ner/leuven/urnhdl123456789-101206.html10.1016/S0167-7187(96)01023-5Search in Google Scholar

Eaton, J., and S. Kortum (2002). Technology, Geography and Trade. Econometrica 70(5): 1741–1779. http://ideas.repec.org/a/ecm/emetrp/v70y2002i5p1741-1779.html10.1111/1468-0262.00352Search in Google Scholar

Estrada, S., J. Heijs, and M. Buesa (2006). Innovacion y Comercio Internacional: Una Relacion no Lineal. Informacion Comercial Espanola 830, Los Intangibles de la Internacionalizacion Empresarial. May–June. http://libra.msra.cn/Publication/5537067/innovaci-n-y-comerciointernacional-una-relaci-n-no-linealSearch in Google Scholar

Fabrizio, K. (2009). Absorptive Capacity and the Search for Innovation. Research Policy 38(2): 255–267. http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v38y2009i2p255-267.html10.1016/j.respol.2008.10.023Search in Google Scholar

Fershtman, C., and N. Gandal (2011). Direct and Indirect Knowledge Spillovers: The “Social Network” of Open Source Projects. RAND Journal of Economics 42(1): 70–91. http://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/randje/v42y2011i1p70-91.html10.1111/j.1756-2171.2010.00126.xSearch in Google Scholar

Fleming, L, and O. Sorensen (2004). Science as a Map in Technological Search. Strategic Management Journal 25(8–9): 909–928. http://www.people.hbs.edu/lfleming/SMJ2004.pdf10.1002/smj.384Search in Google Scholar

Freeman, R. and J. Van Reenen (2009) What If Congress Doubled R&D Spending in the Physical Sciences? In: J. Lerner and S. Stern, Innovation Policy and the Economy, Vol. 9. NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Massachusetts. http://ideas.repec.org/h/nbr/nberch/8182.html10.1086/592419Search in Google Scholar

Gambardella, A. (1992). Competitive Advantages from in-House Scientific Research: The U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry in the 1980s. Research Policy 21(5): 391–407. http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v21y1992i5p391-407.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

Gill, D. (2008). Strategic Disclosure of Intermediate Research Results. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 17(3): 733–758. http://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jemstr/v17y2008i3p733-758.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

Gil-Molto, J-M., N. Geogantzis, and Vicente Orts (2005). Cooperative R&D with Endogenous Technology Differentiation. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 14(2): 461–476. http://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jemstr/v14y2005i2p461-476.html10.1111/j.1530-9134.2005.00048.xSearch in Google Scholar

Glachant, M., and Meniere, Y. (2008). Technology Diffusion with Learning Spillovers: Patent versus Free Access. Post-Print hal-00508795, HAL. http://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00508795.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

Goyal, Sanjeev, J. Moraga-Gonzales, and A. Konovalov (2008). Hybrid R&D. Journal of the European Economic Association 6(6): 1309–1338. http://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/jeurec/v6y2008i6p1309-1338.html10.1162/JEEA.2008.6.6.1309Search in Google Scholar

Gugler, K., and R. Siebert (2007). Market Power Versus Efficiency Effects of Mergers and research Joint Ventures: Evidence from the Semiconductor Industry. The Review of Economics and Statistics 89(4): 645–659. http://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/restat/v89y2007i4p645-659.html10.1162/rest.89.4.645Search in Google Scholar

Hall, Bronwyn H., A. Link, and J.T. Scott (2003). Universities as Research Partners. Review of Economics and Statistics 85(2): 485–491. http://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/restat/v85y2003i2p485-491.html10.1162/rest.2003.85.2.485Search in Google Scholar

Harhoff, D., J. Henkel, and E. von Hippel (2003). Profiting from Voluntary Information Spillovers: How Users Benefit by Freely Revealing their Innovations. Research Policy 32(10): 1753–1769. http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v32y2003i10p1753-1769.html10.1016/S0048-7333(03)00061-1Search in Google Scholar

Heller, M., and R. Eisenberg (1998). Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research. Science 280(5364): 698–701. http://www.sciencemag.org/content/280/5364/698.full10.1126/science.280.5364.698Search in Google Scholar

Henderson, R., and I. Cockburn (1996). Scale, Scope and Spillovers: The Determinants of Research Productivity in Drug Discovery. Rand Journal of Economics 27(1): 32–59. http://ideas.repec.org/a/rje/randje/v27y1996ispringp32-59.html10.2307/2555791Search in Google Scholar

Hicks, D., T. Breitzman, D. Olivastro, and K. Hamilton (2001). The Changing Composition of Innovative Activity in the US – A Portrait Based on Patent Analysis. Research Policy 30(4): 681–703. http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v30y2001i4p681-703.html10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00147-5Search in Google Scholar

Horowitz, A.W., and E.L.-C. Lai (1996). Patent Length and the Rate of Innovation. International Economic Review 37(4): 785–801. http://ideas.repec.org/a/ier/iecrev/v37y1996i4p785-801.html10.2307/2527311Search in Google Scholar

Katz, M., and Shapiro, C. (1986) “Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities”. Journal of Political Economy 94(4), 822–841. http://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jpolec/v94y1986i4p822-41.html10.1086/261409Search in Google Scholar

Jost, Peter-J.,and C. van der Velden (2006). Mergers in Patent Contest Models with Synergies and Spillovers. Schmalenbach Business Review 58(2): 157–179. http://ideas.repec.org/a/sbr/abstra/v58y2006i2p157-179.html10.1007/BF03396728Search in Google Scholar

Kamien, M.I., and I. Zang (2000). Meet Me Halfway: Research Joint Ventures and Absorptive Capacity. International Journal of Industrial Organization 18(7): 995–1012. http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/indorg/v18y2000i7p995-1012.html10.1016/S0167-7187(00)00054-0Search in Google Scholar

Keller, W. (2004). International Technology Diffusion. Journal of Economic Literature 42(3): 752–782. http://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/jeclit/v42y2004i3p752-782.html10.1257/0022051042177685Search in Google Scholar

Leland, H.E. (1979). Quacks, Lemons and Licensing: A Theory of Minimum Quality Standards. The Journal of Political Economy 87(6): 1328–1346. http://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jpolec/v87y1979i6p1328-46.html10.1086/260838Search in Google Scholar

Lerner, J., and J. Tirole (2002). Some Simple Economics of Open Source. Journal of Industrial Economics 50(2): 197–234. http://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/7600.html10.1111/1467-6451.00174Search in Google Scholar

Lerner, J., and J. Tirole (2004). Efficient Patent Pools. American Economic Review 94(3): 691–711. http://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v94y2004i3p691-711.html10.1257/0002828041464641Search in Google Scholar

Lerner, J., M. Strojwas, and J. Tirole (2007). The Design of Patent Pools: The Determinants of Licensing Rules. Rand Journal of Economics 38(4): 905–930. http://ideas.repec.org/p/ner/toulou/http--neeo.univ-tlse1.fr-184-.html10.1111/j.0741-6261.2007.00103.xSearch in Google Scholar

Lichtman, D., S. Baker, and K. Kraus (2000). Strategic Disclosure in the Patent System. University of Chicago Law and Economics Olin Working Paper 107. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=24341410.2139/ssrn.243414Search in Google Scholar

Mansfield, E. (1991). Academic Research and Industrial Innovation. Research Policy 20(1): 1–12. http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v20y1991i1p1-12.html10.1016/0048-7333(91)90080-ASearch in Google Scholar

Márquez-Ramos, L., and I. Martínez-Zarzoso (2010). The Effect of Technological Innovation on International Trade. A Nonlinear Approach. Economics: The Open- Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, Vol. 4, 2010-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2010-1110.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2010-11Search in Google Scholar

Mazzeo, M. (2002). Product Choice and Oligopoly Market Structure. The Rand Journal of Economics 33(2): 221–242. http://ideas.repec.org/a/rje/randje/v33y2002isummerp221-242.html10.2307/3087431Search in Google Scholar

Messinis, G., and A. Ahmed (2010). Cognitive Skills, Innovation and Technology Diffusion. Centre for Strategic Economic Studies Working Paper 48. http://www.econbiz.de/literatur-und-faktensuche/detailed-view/doc/cognitiveskills- innovation-and-technology-diffusion-messinis-george/10009010378/Search in Google Scholar

Millou, C. (2009) Endogenous Protection of R&D Investments. Canadian Journal of Economics 42: 184–205. http://ideas.repec.org/a/cje/issued/v42y2009i1p184-205.html10.1111/j.1540-5982.2008.01504.xSearch in Google Scholar

Monjon, S. and P. Waelbroek (2003). Assessing Spillovers from Universities to Firms: Evidence from French Firm-Level Data. International Journal of Industrial Organization 21(9): 1255–1270. http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/indorg/v21y2003i9p1255-1270.html10.1016/S0167-7187(03)00082-1Search in Google Scholar

Mussa, M., and S. Rosen (1978). Monopoly and Product Quality. Journal of Economic Theory 18(2): 301–317. http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jetheo/v18y1978i2p301-317.html10.1016/0022-0531(78)90085-6Search in Google Scholar

Napel, S., and G. Oldehaver (2011). A Dynamic Perspective on Minimum Quality Standards under Cournot Competition. Journal of Regulatory Economics 39(1): 29–49. http://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/regeco/v39y2011i1p29-49.html10.1007/s11149-010-9140-1Search in Google Scholar

O’Donoghue, T., S. Scotchmer, and J-F. Thisse (1998). Patent Breadth, Patent Life, and the Pace of Technological Progress. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy 7(1): 1–32. http://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jemstr/v7y1998i1p1-32.html10.1162/105864098567317Search in Google Scholar

Parvan, S.-V. (2007). Community Innovations Statistics: Weak Link Between Innovative Enterprises and public Research Institutes/Universities. Statistics in Focus 81: 1–8. http://en.youscribe.com/catalogue/reports-and-theses/knowledge/formalsciences/community-innovation-statistics-1105980Search in Google Scholar

Poyago-Theotoky, J. (1999). A Note on Endogenous Spillovers in a Non-tournament R&D Duopoly. Review of Industrial Organization 15: 253–262. http://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/revind/v15y1999i3p253-262.html10.1023/A:1007732218120Search in Google Scholar

Prokop,J., P. Regibeau, and K. Rockett (2010). Minimum Quality Standards and Novelty Requirements in a One-Shot Development Race. Economics: The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal, Vol. 4, 2010-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2010-1510.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2010-15Search in Google Scholar

Roller, L.-H., M. Tombak, and R. Siebert (2007). Why Firms Form (or Don’t Form) RJVs. Economic Journal 117(522): 1122–1144.Search in Google Scholar

Ronnen, U. (1991). Minimum Quality Standards, Fixed Costs and Competition. The Rand Journal of Economics 22(4): 490–504. http://ideas.repec.org/a/rje/randje/v22y1991iwinterp490-504.html10.2307/2600984Search in Google Scholar

Shapiro, C. (1983). Premiums for High Quality Products as Returns to Reputations. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 98(4): 659–679. http://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/qjecon/v98y1983i4p659-79.html10.2307/1881782Search in Google Scholar

Smith, P. (2002) Patent Rights and Trade: Analysis of Biological Products, Medicinals and Botanicals, and Pharmaceuticals. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 84(2): 495–512. http://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v84y2002i2p495-512.html10.1111/1467-8276.00313Search in Google Scholar

Sobrero, M., and E.B. Roberts (2001). The Trade-off Between Efficiency and Learning in Interorganizational Relationships for Product Development. Management Science 47(4): 493–511. http://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v47y2001i4p493-511.html10.1287/mnsc.47.4.493.9828Search in Google Scholar

Squicciarini, M. (2009). Science Parks, Knowledge Spillovers, and Firms’ Innovative Performance. Evidence from Finland. Economics Discussion Papers, No 2009-32, Kiel Institute for the World Economy. http://www.economics-ejournal.org/economics/discussionpapers/2009-32Search in Google Scholar

Stern, S. (2004). Do Scientists Pay to be Scientists? Management Science 50(6): 835–853. http://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v50y2004i6p835-853.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

Suzumura, K. (1992). Cooperative and Noncooperative R&D in an Oligopoly with Spillovers. American Economic Review 82(5): 1307–1320. http://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v82y1992i5p1307-20.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

Vivekanandan, V. (2008) Transplanting the Bayh-Dole Act: Issues at Stake. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights 13(5): 480–485. http://nopr.niscair.res.in/handle/123456789/2036Search in Google Scholar

Weithaus, L. (2005). Absorptive Capacity and Connectedness: Why Competing Firms also Adopt Identical R&D Approaches. International Journal of Industrial Organization 23(5): 467–481. http://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/indorg/v23y2005i5-6p467-481.html10.1016/j.ijindorg.2005.03.002Search in Google Scholar

Zucker, L., M. Darby, and M. Brewer (1998). Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of US Biotechnology Enterprises. American Economic Review 88(1): 290–306. http://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v88y1998i1p290-306.htmlSearch in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2012-09-14
Published in Print: 2012-12-01

© 2012 Katharine Rockett, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Downloaded on 27.1.2023 from https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2012-35/html
Scroll Up Arrow