(Friday, 22nd May 2015)
Download the presentation - 3.16 MB
Patent analysis has played an important role in scholarly research on innovation over the last few decades. In this workshop, we examine one important patent indicator that is often overlooked: the consistency of patent examination outcomes across different offices. Given that patents act as an incentive to invest in innovation, and underpin trade in intermediate innovation outputs, the consistency of patent examination outcomes should influence the overall efficiency of the global innovation system. One particular area considered in this workshop is whether there is a systematic relationship between inventor nationality and patent examination outcome. The ‘national treatment principle’ – the notion that foreigners should receive the same treatment as locals – is enshrined in numerous international treaties including TRIPs, so it is somewhat surprising that its enforcement isn’t more widely analysed.
Bibliographical references :
Webster, E., Palangkaraya, A. and Jensen, P.H. (2014). “Patent examination outcomes and the national treatment principle”, RAND Journal of Economics 45(2), 449-69.
Palangkaraya, A., Webster, E. and Jensen, P.H. (2011). “Misclassification between patent offices: Evidence from a matched sample of patent applications”, Review of Economics and Statistics 93(3), 1063–75.
Lemley, M.A. (2001). “Rational ignorance at the patent office”, Northwestern University Law Review 95, 1495.