Abstract
Patents have proven to be an exceptionally effective mechanism for motivating innovation. A patent gives a firm the right to apply to the courts to enforce exclusive rights to the patented invention for a fixed period of time. The particular strength of the system is that patents offer a reward correlated with the value that consumers obtain from the product. Firms make decisions to invest in innovation based on their own information about the probability of success and the costs of research, as well as the expected value of the patent. The problem addressed in this paper relates to situations where for some reason the value of the patent reward is relatively low compared to the social value created by the innovation: that is, where the appropriability of social value is low. In these cases, firms will fail to invest in innovation even though its value to society is high.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Abramowicz M. Perfecting patent prizes. Vanderbilt Law Review. 2003;56(1):114–236.
Cohen W, Nelson R, Walsh J. Protecting their intellectual assets: appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not). NBER WP. 2000;7552.
Eisenberg R. Lecture: Patents, Product Exclusivity, and Information Dissemination: How Law Directs Biopharmaceutical Research and Development. Fordham Law Review. 2003-4;72:477.
Flynn S, Hollis A, Palmedo M. An Economic Justification for Open Access to Essential Medicine Patents in Developing Countries. J Law Med Ethics. 2009;37(2):184–208.
Garnier JP. Rebuilding the R&D Engine in Big Pharma. Harvard Bus Rev. 2008;86(5):68–76.
Hollis A, Pogge T. The Health Impact Fund: Making New Medicines Accessible for All. Incentives for Global Health. 2008. New York.
Hollis A. Incentive Mechanisms for Innovation. University of Calgary: IAPR Technical Paper TP-07005; 2007.
Lichtenberg F, Philipson T. The dual effects of intellectual property regulations: within-and betweenpatent competition in the U.S. pharmaceuticals industry. J Law Econ. 2002;XLV:643–672.
Love J, Hubbard T. The Big Idea: Prizes to Stimulate R&D for New Medicines. Chic Kent Law Rev. 2007;82(3):1519–1554.
Moran M, Guzman J, Ropars AL, Illmer A. The role of Product Development Partnerships in research and development for neglected diseases. Int Health. 2010;2:114–122.
Mossialos E, et al. 2010 Policies and incentives for promoting innovation in antibiotic research. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
Syed T. Should a Prize System for Pharmaceuticals Require Patent Protection for Eligibility? Incentives for Global Health. Discussion Paper #2; 2009.
Viscusi WK, Aldy J. The Value of a Statistical Life: A Critical Review of Market Estimates Throughout the World. J Risk Uncertain. 2003;27(1):5–76.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Healthcare Ibérica SL.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hollis, A. (2011). When patents are not enough: Supplementary incentives for pharmaceutical innovation. In: Incentives for Research, Development, and Innovation in Pharmaceuticals. Economía de la Salud y Gestión Sanitaria. Springer Healthcare, Madrid. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-84-938062-7-9_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-84-938062-7-9_4
Publisher Name: Springer Healthcare, Madrid
Print ISBN: 978-84-938062-1-7
Online ISBN: 978-84-938062-7-9
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)