Aggregate returns to scale and embodied technical change: theory and measurement using stock market data

Laitner, John; Stolyarov, Dmitriy

doi:10.1016/j.jmoneco.2003.07.001

Cited by 54 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…10 The annual depreciation rate δ on physical capital and the household's discount rate ρ are set to conventional values of 8% and 4% respectively. For the markup µ , Laitner and Stolyarov (2004) estimate that the markup is about 1.1 (i.e. a 10% markup) in the US; on the other hand, Basu (1996) and Basu and Fernald (1997) (33) shows that holding other variables constant, an increase in λ must be offset by a decrease in ν to hold the level of R&D constant.…”

Section: Backloading Discount Factormentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The DGE model serves the useful purpose in providing a structural interpretation on ν as the backloading discount factor, which captures the effects of blocking patents caused by overlapping intellectual property rights. (32) shows that holding the level of patent breadth (i.e. η ) constant, increasing the profit share of a more recent inventor (e.g.…”

Section: Blocking Patentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Chu

2009

J Econ Growth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 reducing the extent of blocking patents by changing the profit-sharing rule 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.

show abstract

Section: Backloading Discount Factormentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Blocking Patentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Chu

2009

J Econ Growth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We fix the level of increasing returns to be 1.09. We choose this number for the benchmark experiment because it is the lower bound of the recent value estimated by Laitner and Stolyarov (2004), and is the upper bound estimated by Basu and Fernald (1994). Other values will be examined shortly.…”

Section: Constant Returns Without Capitalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Increasing Returns and the Design of Interest Rate Rules

Xiao

2007

Macroecon. Dynam.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We introduce increasing returns to scale into an otherwise standard New Keynesian model with capital, and study the determinacy and E-stability of Taylor-type interest rate rules. With very mild increasing returns supported by empirical research, the conventional wisdom regarding the design of interest rate rules can be overturned. In particular, the "Taylor principle" no longer guarantees either determinacy or E-stability of the rational expectations equilibrium.

show abstract

“…Equation (42) implies that ( + g)a t =w t is increasing in but decreasing (increasing) in s if z is su¢ ciently small (large). Then, recall from (41) that I is increasing in ( + g)a t =w t .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of patents versus R&D subsidies on income inequality

Chu

Cozzi

2018

Review of Economic Dynamics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores the e¤ects of patent protection and R&D subsidies on economic growth and income inequality using a Schumpeterian growth model with heterogeneous households. We …nd that although strengthening patent protection and raising R&D subsidies have the same macroeconomic e¤ect of stimulating economic growth, they have drastically di¤erent microeconomic implications on income inequality. Speci…cally, strengthening patent protection increases income inequality whereas raising R&D subsidies decreases (increases) it if the quality step size is su¢ ciently small (large). An empirically realistic quality step size is smaller than the threshold, implying a negative e¤ect of R&D subsidies on income inequality. We also calibrate the model to provide a quantitative analysis and …nd that strengthening patent protection causes a moderate increase in income inequality and a negligible increase in consumption inequality whereas raising R&D subsidies causes a relatively large decrease in both income inequality and consumption inequality.JEL classi…cation: D30, O30, O40

show abstract

Aggregate returns to scale and embodied technical change: theory and measurement using stock market data

Cited by 54 publications

References 28 publications

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

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

Increasing Returns and the Design of Interest Rate Rules

Effects of patents versus R&D subsidies on income inequality

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About