© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/07/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Public Goods and Tax Policy
Advertisements

PRIVATE GOODS AND PUBLIC GOODS
The assumption of maximizing behavior lies at the heart of economic analysis. Firms are assumed to maximize economic profit. Economic profit is the difference.
Nash Equilibrium: Illustrations
Class 4 – Some applications of revenue equivalence
Game Theory in Wireless and Communication Networks: Theory, Models, and Applications Lecture 6 Auction Theory Zhu Han, Dusit Niyato, Walid Saad, Tamer.
Pablo Serra Universidad de Chile Forward Contracts, Auctions and Efficiency in Electricity Markets.
1 Entrepreneurship and Incentives James Mirrlees Chinese University of Hong Kong At National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan 11 December 2007.
© Suzanne Scotchmer 2007 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial.
Incentives and the Innovative Environment Suzanne Scotchmer ESNIE, Cargèse, May 2007 references: Chs 2, 8 Innovation and Incentives (MIT Press, 2005)
Yang Cai Sep 24, An overview of today’s class Prior-Independent Auctions & Bulow-Klemperer Theorem General Mechanism Design Problems Vickrey-Clarke-Groves.
© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/14/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed R&D: How much, by whom?
© Suzanne Scotchmer 2007 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial.
Big Science and Big Funding Some big projects: Super collider in Texas, $7b Space Station, $100bDRUGS?! $0.8b Gravity Probe X, Some reorganizations we.
© Suzanne Scotchmer 2007 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial.
© Suzanne Scotchmer 10/14/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial.
© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/14/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial.
© Suzanne Scotchmer 2010 from Innovation and Incentives MIT Press 2004 Review: The (Public Goods) Nature of Knowledge & Information Goods Longitude Example:
© Suzanne Scotchmer 2007 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial.
An Economic Perspective on Capital Allocation George Zanjani Federal Reserve Bank of New York The views expressed in this presentation are those of the.
© Suzanne Scotchmer 2004 from Innovation and Incentives Intellectual Property in the International Arena: E ntanglement of incentives and politics.
Consumers, Producers, and the Efficiency of Markets Outline:  Positive economics: Allocation of scarce resources using forces of demand and supply  Normative.
Figure 8.2 How a Competitive Firm Maximizes Profit
The Production Decision of a Monopoly Firm Alternative market structures: perfect competition monopolistic competition oligopoly monopoly.
1 An Introduction to IP Law and Economics Stephen M. Maurer Goldman School of Public Policy IT and Public Policy – Sept. 30, 2004.
© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/14/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial.
Chapter 8. Monopoly How? Firm behavior Monopoly vs. Competition Price Discrimination Policy How? Firm behavior Monopoly vs. Competition Price Discrimination.
This Week’s Topics  Review Class Concepts -Auctions, continued -Repeated Games -Bertrand Trap & Anti-Trust -Auctions.
John R. Swinton, Ph.D. Center for Economic Education Georgia College & State University.
© 2005 Worth Publishers Slide 20-1 CHAPTER 20 Public Goods and Common Resources PowerPoint® Slides by Can Erbil and Gustavo Indart © 2005 Worth Publishers,
Mini Lesson 1  Resources  All the things people can use to make goods (products) ▪ Goods include: food, clothing, houses, furniture, cars, computers,
© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/02/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial.
Introduction to Game Theory
B284 ENTREPRENEURSHIP Unit 2 Notes. Entrepreneurship Today  Knowledge of economics contributes to an understanding of how entrepreneurs and customers.
McTaggart, Findlay, Parkin: Microeconomics © 2007 Pearson Education Australia Chapter 5: Efficiency and Equity.
©2003, Zoran Despotovic, EPFL-I&C, Laboratoire de systèmes d'informations répartis Double Auctioning in a P2P environment (an attempt) Zoran Despotovic.
Yang Cai Sep 8, An overview of the class Broad View: Mechanism Design and Auctions First Price Auction Second Price/Vickrey Auction Case Study:
1 Economics of Innovation Innovation and market structure: Introduction Manuel Trajtenberg.
Are Monopolies Desirable?
Chapter 15 Government’s Role in Economic Efficiency ECONOMICS: Principles and Applications, 4e HALL & LIEBERMAN, © 2008 Thomson South-Western.
Auction Seminar Optimal Mechanism Presentation by: Alon Resler Supervised by: Amos Fiat.
The Market System Chapter 4. Market systems characteristics Private individuals own most land and firms Private individuals own most land and firms The.
13 Intellectual Property 1 Aaron Schiff ECON Reading: Cabral p , Deak p
Unit IV: Market Failures and the Role of the Government 1.
+ The Free Enterprise System Chapter #5. + Chapter Objectives Explain the characteristics of a free enterprise system Distinguish between price and non-price.
© Suzanne Scotchmer 2007 from Innovation and Incentives Licensing Some Terms: Exclusive Exclusive licensing versus exclusive dealing Royalties versus Fixed.
Cap and Trade: The Technology Adoption Problem May 4, 2009 Economic Games and Mechanisms to Address Climate Change Suzanne Scotchmer University of California.
Chapter Firms in Competitive Markets 13. What is a Competitive Market? The meaning of competition Competitive market – Market with many buyers and sellers.
An R&D Model of growth Xavier Sala-i-Martin Columbia University.
© Suzanne Scotchmer 2007 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial.
© Suzanne Scotchmer Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial.
Chapter 7 How Firms Make Decisions: Profit Maximization ECONOMICS: Principles and Applications, 4e HALL & LIEBERMAN, © 2008 Thomson South-Western.
Auction Theory in Practice: The U.K. Carbon Dioxide Auction E. Maskin Harvard University.
Market Failures and the Role of the Government
The Free Enterprise Chapter Analyze the Free Enterprise.
Markets, Maximizers and Efficiency
© 2015 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part, except for use as permitted in a license.
MICROECONOMICS Chapter 5 Efficiency and Equity
Auctions serve the dual purpose of eliciting preferences and allocating resources between competing uses. A less fundamental but more practical reason.
© Suzanne Scotchmer 2007 from Innovation and Incentives MIT Press 2004 The (Public Goods) Nature of Knowledge & Information Goods Longitude Example: What.
Public Goods and Common Resources Chapter 17. A way to classify goods that predicts whether a good is a private good—a good that can be efficiently provided.
Unit 6: Market Failures and the Role of the Government 1 Copyright ACDC Leadership 2015.
© Suzanne Scotchmer 2007 from Innovation and Incentives MIT Press 2004 The (Public Goods) Nature of Knowledge & Information Goods Longitude Example: What.
Price Discrimination 1. Defined: Sellers engage in price discrimination when they charge different prices to different consumers for the same good, because.
I. A Simple Model. Players: Sellers, I and E, and a consumer Period 1: Seller I and the buyer can make an exclusive contract. Period 2: Seller E decides.
CCT490: Week 4 1. Software and Culture 2. Economics of Innovation This presentation is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License, v To.
Free Enterprise.
What are the roles of government in our free enterprise economy?
Market Economy 6 Traits.
Presentation transcript:

© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/07/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 The (Public Goods) Nature of Knowledge & Information Goods Longitude Example: What is the lesson? What do these have in common: Knowledge that “DNA is a double helix” software digital music Public Goods: Nonrivalness: High cost to create; zero cost to distribute or use. What is the efficiency conclusion? Nonexcludability: If the good is nonexcludable, IP will not work!!

© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/07/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed p Clocks Demand curve Marginal cost Private Goods: The competitive market is efficient price = marginal cost: Why is that efficient? What if a template must be developed?

© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/07/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Information Goods: the market doesn’t work (What is the price with free entry?) (What is the price with intellectual property?) (Isn’t public funding better? Why or why not?) mv p m dv software users vv Idea (v,c)

© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/07/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 What does IP do? 1.IP creates (as a legal matter) excludability. –Does this “solve” the public goods problem? –What about nonrivalness? 2.IP provides at least a weak efficiency test as to whether the value of investment exceeds cost 3.IP does a bad job of delegation –It does not privilege the more efficient firms –It does not regulate entry and duplication 4.IP leads to deadweight loss 5.IP concentrates costs among the users

© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/07/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Intellectual Property: Compared to what? Public Sponsorship? 1840’s, photography: A patent buy-out. 1960’s and 1970’s Super Sonic Transport Public support for private enterprise. 1700’s and 1800’s Lyons’ weavers Prizes in a guild Napoleon: Food preservation Invention for the public good NIH, NSF: Researcher-initiated projects NASA: Targeted government objectives

© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/07/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Prizes Targeted versus blue-sky research Lyons (blue-sky) Napoleon’s food-preservation (targeted) Simple model: Invest in a blue-sky “idea” (v,c)? Why not make the price depend on cost? Why doesn’t the prize-giver get ripped off? Needs to make the price depend on value Why doesn’t the inventor get ripped off? The role of IP as a background for prizes: Photography Hyatt and celluoid

© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/07/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Simple Prizes and Scarce Ideas A single inventors has an idea. He must decide whether to invest in it, and we want him to make the “right” decision. An idea is a pair (v,c) where c is the cost of making the idea an innovation and v is per-period profit. (See the market diagram above.) Investment is efficient if (1/r) v > c. In the diagram, what is the defect of patents? If we were going to use prizes instead, what value of prize should we set? (How does the optimal prize relate to v? to c? How does this depend on what is observable? Verifiable?)

© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/07/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Prizes: Can the prize be linked to value? How should the value of the prize be chosen? How was the prize chosen in the case of longitude? canning? The Lyonnaise silk weavers? Would it be better to link the prize to cost? What problems to patents and prize have in common?

© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/07/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Targeted objectives: What if there is more than one idea? Contestants 1,2 have ideas (v 1,c 1 ), (v 2,c 2 ): Need to aggregate information and choose the best idea: Invest in idea-1 if (v 1 /r-c 1 ) > (v 2 /r-c 2 ) (Not necessarily the lower-cost idea.) c 2 v 2 /r c 1 v 1 /r How do we choose the best idea? Depends on what we can observe. What if we can observe both value and cost? What if we can observe (verify) value, but not cost?

© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/07/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Vickrey Auction Reminder: Vickrey (2nd-price) auction to auction an item. Valuations v 1,v 2,... (Notice that v means something different.) Want to make sure that the agent with the highest valuation gets the object. How does a second-price auction do this? Application to “ideas”: Assume that v 1,v 2 are observable, but not cost. Rules: Agents report s 1,s 2 where s 1 = (v 1 /r)-c 1 (surplus) Firm 1 wins if s 1 >s 2 (otherwise firm 2 wins) Firm 1 then pays the auctioneer s 2 (the other guy’s surplus) Firm 1 is paid v 1 when it delivers the innovation. Prove: Neither firm wants to lie about its surplus s 1 or s 2 The winner makes nonnegative profit.

© Suzanne Scotchmer 09/07/2004 Contents May Be Used Pursuant to Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial Common Deed 1.0 Contests: Choosing among Ideas Fairly easy if value is observable (Vickrey auction) Really hard if both value and cost are unobservable or unverifiable. Why won’t an auction work? What would you auction? Prototype Contest: firms develop prototypes; sponsor chooses What is the problem if prototypes are solicited without any commitment as to the price that will be paid? Suppose that the government can make contingent contracts before investing -- contingent on choosing the prototype. Does it solve the problem of (1) ensuring the best idea? (2) at cheapest cost?