Patent law requires the full, clear, and concise disclosure of an invention in exchange for a temporary monopoly. We investigate the impact of patent scope and disclosure on inventors' follow-on innovation behavior using utility patents filed and granted in the United States Patent and Trademark Office. To analyze this relationship, we exploit the quasi-random assignment of patent applications to examiners as a source of variation in detecting inconsistencies between patent scope and disclosure and its change during patent examination. We find that particularly overclaiming and a lack of clarity in writing are detrimental to follow-on innovation. This indicates that an imbalance between patent scope and disclosure leads to negative welfare effects due to a loss in subsequent innovation. 

Does better information provision affect the benefits of government-funded research? I analyze this question by exploiting the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 as a source of variation in the accessibility of information about project characteristics. My results imply an elevated degree of innovation building on publicly funded inventions after the act was enacted. Further analyzing the role of information availability implies that the effect can be attributed to a decrease in search costs, a reduction in asymmetric information, and the signal of prospective business opportunities. Thereby, spillovers lead to follow-on innovation from other entities that operate in different regions and distinct technology fields. Taken together, these results imply that fostering the availability of information positively affects the social benefits of government-funded research.

How does technology transfer of government inventions affect follow-on innovation? Being aware of the importance of technology development and commercialization, the United States enacted a group of policies in the 1980s that aimed at promoting the commercializing of government-funded research by licensing. It, however, remains questionable whether patenting and licensing are appropriate tools to spur welfare-improving follow-on innovation. We exploit technology-related information from the NASA Technology Transfer Program that fosters the licensing of NASA technologies by third parties and combine it with United States patent data. We find that exclusive licensing agreements are accompanied by increased levels of subsequent technological developments. These follow-on innovations stem from different entities and locations where distinct technologies are invented, which indicates considerable spillover effects. Consequently, our results imply that commercialization by licensing government inventions is an important policy tool to increase the benefits for society.

Patent law requires the full, clear, and concise disclosure of an invention in exchange for the protection of the intellectual property. This paper presents a theoretical analysis of the strategic motives to limit knowledge disclosure in patents and how this affects follow-on innovation. Using USPTO patent examination data we use Office actions associated with insufficient disclosure to investigate whether and how the modification of a patent specification in the course of examination impacts follow-on innovation. We find that inventors “game the system” using strategic non-disclosure as a means to reduce follow-on innovation.

How does enforcing intellectual property rights affect subsequent innovation? Although one of the main functions of the patent system is to foster innovation, the actual impact of patent rights on innovation is still under debate. I analyze this relationship by exploiting patent infringement litigation cases filed by patent holders in the United States. The results imply that patent litigation leads to considerable spillovers. I show that subsequent innovations increase during the litigation period but that the relative effect size decreases in the years following the closure of the case. My findings indicate that signals about the value of the patent and a reduction of information asymmetries are drivers of spillovers to third parties. 

We investigate the relationship between management incentives and collusion. This is particularly important as the manager acts on behalf of the owner and determines the firm strategy. Compensation schemes, intended to overcome the principle-agent problem between shareholders and managers, generally determine their managerial actions. While this is beneficial by aligning managers’ interests with those of the firm’s shareholders, the means to achieve this goal could be detrimental from a social welfare perspective. Our empirical analysis is based on a combination of firm, manager, and cartel data to identify managers' remuneration schemes and cartels within the United States. We show that a higher degree of managers' long-term incentives indeed facilitates and stabilizes collusion. Further analyzing the remuneration schemes of various management positions, we find that the impact is particularly pronounced for non-CEOs and CFOs. Additional results imply that firms run by managers with a higher share of equity compensation or more equity-based risk-taking incentives are more likely to behave anti-competitive.

We exploit the implementation of a new workplace technology as a source of variation in employee outcomes. Utilizing detailed worker-level data for Germany, we show that the strongest impacts of new technologies arise in the first year of its implementation for overtime, training and perceived productivity. These effects diminish after the introduction period. Finally, we show that changes in worker outcomes depend on the nature of the technology as well as occupational choices. Thus, we find that technologies are particularly affecting workers if their introduction is related to increases in workload and mental stress. In addition, workers in high-paying occupations are affected in all of the worker outcomes examined. Among employees in low- and mid-paying occupations, in contrast, there are only particularly strong impacts on overtime and training. The impact on worker outcomes therefore primarily occurs when the new technology shapes the work environment of the exposed worker.