|Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
A toolkit of policies to promote innovation
https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-10-5-31
Abstract
Economic theory suggests that market economies are likely to underprovide innovation because of the public good nature of knowledge. Empirical evidence from the United States and other advanced economies supports this idea. We summarize the pros and cons of different policy instruments for promoting innovation and provide a basic “toolkit” describing which policies are most effective according to our reading of the evidence. In the short run, R&D tax credits and direct public funding seem the most productive, but in the longer run, increasing the supply of human capital (for example, relaxing immigration rules or expanding university STEM admissions) is likely more effective.
About the Authors
Nicholas Bloom
Stanford University (Stanford, CA); National Bureau of Economic Research (Cambridge, MA)
United States
United States
John Van Reenen
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (Cambridge, MA); National Bureau of Economic Research (Cambridge, MA)
United States
United States
Heidi Williams
Stanford University (Stanford, CA); National Bureau of Economic Research (Cambridge, MA)
United States
United States
References
1. Abrams D., Akcigit U., Grennan J. (2018). Patent value and citations: Creative destruction or strategic disruption? Institute for Law and Economics Research Paper, No. 13-23. University of Pennsylvania.
2. Acemoglu D., Aghion Ph., Bursztyn L., Hemous D. (2012). The environment and directed technical change. American Economic Review, Vol. 102, No. 1, pp. 131—166. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.102.1.131
3. Aghion Ph., Bergeaud A., Lequien M., Melitz M. J. (2018). The impact of exports on innovation: Theory and evidence. NBER Working Paper, No. 24600. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24600
4. Aghion Ph., Bloom N., Blundell R., Griffith R., Howitt P. (2005). Competition and innovation: An inverted-U relationship? Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 120, No. 2, pp. 701—728. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/120.2.701
5. Aghion Ph., Dechezleprêtre A., Hémous D., Martin R., Van Reenen J. (2016). Carbon taxes, path dependency, and directed technical change: Evidence from the auto industry. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 124, No. 1, pp. 1—51. https://doi.org/10.3386/w18596
6. Akcigit U., Baslandze S., Stantcheva S. (2016). Taxation and the international mobility of inventors. American Economic Review, Vol. 106, No. 10, pp. 2930—2981. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20150237
7. Akcigit U., Grigsby J., Nicholas T., Stantcheva S. (2018). Taxation and innovation in the 20th century. NBER Working Paper, No. 24982. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24982
8. Andrews M. (2019). How do institutions of higher education affect local invention? Evidence from the establishment of U.S. Colleges. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3072565
9. Arrow K. (1962). Economic welfare and allocation of resources for invention. In: The rate and direction of inventive activity: Economic and social factors. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 609—626.
10. Atkeson A., Burstein A. [Forthcoming]. Aggregate implications of innovation policy. Journal of Political Economy.
11. Atkin D., Khandelwal A. K., Osman A. (2017). Exporting and firm performance: Evidence from a randomized experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 132, No. 2, pp. 551—615. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjx002
12. Autor D., Dorn D., Hanson G. H., Pisano G., Shu P. (2016). Foreign competition and domestic innovation: Evidence from U.S. patents. NBER Working Paper, No. 22879. https://doi.org/10.3386/w22879
13. Azoulay P., Fuchs E., Goldstein A. P., Kearney M. (2019). Funding breakthrough research: Promises and challenges of the ‘ARPA Model.’ In: J. Lerner, S. Stern (eds.). Innovation policy and the economy, Vol. 19. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 69—96.
14. Azoulay P., Graff Zivin J. S., Li D., Sampat B. N. (2019). Public R&D investments and private-sector patenting: Evidence from NIH funding rules. Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 86, No. 1, pp. 117—152. https://doi.org/10.3386/w20889
15. Becker B. (2015). Public R&D policies and private R&D investment: A survey of the empirical evidence. Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 29, No. 5, pp. 917—942.
16. Belenzon S., Schankerman M. (2013). Spreading the word: Geography, policy, and knowledge spillovers. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 95, No. 3, pp. 884—903. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00334
17. Bell A., Chetty R., Jaravel X., Petkova N., Van Reenen J. (2019). Who becomes an inventor in America? The importance of exposure to innovation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 134, No. 2, pp. 647—713. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjy028
18. Bernstein S., Diamond R., McQuade T. J., Pousada B. (2018). The contribution of highskilled immigrants to innovation in the United States. Stanford Graduate School of Business Working Paper, No. 3748.
19. Bianchi N., Giorcelli M. (2018). Reconstruction aid, public infrastructure, and economic development. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3153139
20. Bloom N., Draca M., Van Reenen J. (2016). Trade induced technical change? The impact of Chinese imports on innovation, IT and productivity. Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 83, No. 1, pp. 87—117. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdv039
21. Bloom N., Griffith R. (2001). The internationalisation of UK R&D. Fiscal Studies, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 337—355. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5890.2001.tb00045.x
22. Bloom N., Romer P., Terry S. J., Van Reenen J. (2019). Trapped factors and China’s impact on global growth. Unpublished manuscript, http://people.bu.edu/stephent/files/TF_MAIN_DOC.pdf
23. Bloom N., Schankerman M., Van Reenen J. (2013). Identifying technology spillovers and product market rivalry. Econometrica, Vol. 81, No. 4, pp. 1347—1393. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA9466
24. Bloom N., Griffith R., Van Reenen J. (2002). Do R&D tax credits work? Evidence from a panel of countries 1979—1997. Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 85, No. 1, pp. 1—31. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2727(01)00086-X
25. Blundell R., Griffith R., Van Reenen J. (1999). Market share, market value and innovation: Evidence from British manufacturing firms. Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 66, No. 3, pp. 529—554. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-937X.00097
26. Boldrin M., Levine D. K. (2013). The case against patents. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 3—22. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.27.1.3
27. Bøler E. A., Moxnes A., Ulltveit-Moe K. H. (2015). R&D, international sourcing, and the joint impact on firm performance. American Economic Review, Vol. 105, No. 12, pp. 3704—3739. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20121530
28. Borjas G. J., Doran K. B. (2012). The collapse of the Soviet Union and the productivity of American mathematicians. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 127, No. 3, pp. 1143—1203. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjs015
29. Chen Z., Liu Z., Suárez-Serrato J. C., Xu D. Y. (2019). Notching R&D investment with corporate income tax cuts in China. NBER Working Paper, No. 24749. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24749
30. Choi J. (2019). How much do tax rates matter for the location of intellectual property. Unpublished manuscript.
31. Cohen L., Gurun U., Kominers S. D. (2016). Shielded innovation. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2758841
32. Comin D., Hobijn B. (2010). An exploration of technology diffusion. American Economic Review, Vol. 100, No. 5, pp. 2031—2059. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.5.2031
33. Criscuolo C., Martin R., Overman H. G., Van Reenen J. (2019). Some causal effects of an industrial policy. American Economic Review, Vol. 109, No. 1, pp. 48—85. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20160034
34. Dechezleprêtre A., Einiö E., Martin R., Nguyen K.-T., Van Reenen J. (2016). Do fiscal incentives increase innovation? An RD design for R&D. Centre for Economic Performance Discussion Paper, No. 1413.
35. Diamond J. (1997). Guns, germs, and steel. New York: W. W. Norton.
36. Doran K., Gelber A., Isen A. (2014). The effects of high-skilled immigration policy on firms: Evidence from H-1B visa lotteries. NBER Working Paper, No. 20668. https://doi.org/10.3386/w20668
37. Doran K., Yoon C. (2018). Immigration and invention: Evidence from the quota acts. Unpublished manuscript, https://www3.nd.edu/~kdoran/Doran_Quotas.pdf
38. Feng J., Jaravel X. [Forthcoming]. Crafting intellectual property rights: Implications for patent assertion entities, litigation, and innovation. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics.
39. Fieler A. C., Harrison A. (2018). Escaping import competition and downstream tariffs. NBER Working Paper, No. 24527. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24527
40. Gaessler F., Hall B. H., Harhoff D. (2018). Should there be lower taxes on patent income? Institute for Fiscal Studies Working Paper, No. W18/19.
41. Goldberg P. K., Khandelwal A. K., Pavcnik N., Topalova P. (2010). Imported intermediate inputs and domestic product growth: Evidence from India. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 125, No. 4, pp. 1727—1767. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2010.125.4.1727
42. Goolsbee A. (1998). Does government R&D policy mainly benefit scientists and engineers? American Economic Review, Vol. 88, No. 2, pp. 298—302.
43. Griffith R., Lee S., Van Reenen J. (2011). Is distance dying at last? Falling home bias in fixed-effects models of patent citations. Quantitative Economics, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 211—249. https://doi.org/10.3982/qe59
44. Griffith R., Miller H., O’Connell M. (2014). Ownership of intellectual property and corporate taxation. Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 112, No. 1, pp. 12—23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2014.01.009
45. Griliches Z. (1958). Research costs and social returns: Hybrid corn and related innovations. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 66, No. 5, pp. 419—431. https://doi.org/10.1086/258077
46. Griliches Z. (1992). The search for R&D spillovers. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Vol. 94, Supplement, pp. S29—S47. https://doi.org/10.2307/3440244
47. Grossman G. M., Helpman E. (1991). Innovation and growth in the global economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48. Gruber J., Johnson S. (2019). Jump-starting America: How breakthrough science can revive economic growth and the American dream. New York: Public Affairs Books.
49. Guenther G. (2017). Patent boxes: A primer. Congressional Research Service Report, No. 7-5700.
50. Haber S., Levine R. (2014). The myth of the wicked patent troll. Wall Street Journal, June 29.
51. Hall B. H., Lerner J. (2010). The financing of R&D and innovation. In: B. H. Hall, N. Rosenberg (eds.). Handbook of the economics of innovation, Vol. 1. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 609—639.
52. Hausman N. (2018). University innovation and local economic growth. Unpublished manuscript, https://drive.google.com/file/d/1dfYTyG2zzVvfbRBJQ7arOLt7d_7M29Fv/view
53. Helmers Ch., Overman H. G. (2016). My precious! The location and diffusion of scientific research: Evidence from the synchrotron diamond light source. Economic Journal, Vol. 127, No. 604, pp. 2006—2040. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecoj.12387
54. Howell S. T. (2017). Financing innovation: Evidence from R&D grants. American Economic Review, Vol. 107, No. 4, pp. 1136—1164. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20150808
55. Hunt J., Gauthier-Loiselle M. (2010). How much does immigration boost innovation? American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 31—56. https://doi.org/10.1257/mac.2.2.31
56. Hvide H. K., Jones B. F. (2018). University innovation and the professor’s privilege. American Economic Review, Vol. 108, No. 7, pp. 1860—1898. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20160284
57. Jacob B. A., Lefgren L. (2011). The impact of research grant funding on scientific productivity. Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 95, No. 9—10, pp. 1168—1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2011.05.005
58. Jaffe A. B. (1986). Technological opportunity and spillovers of R&D: Evidence from firms’ patents, profits, and market value. American Economic Review, Vol. 76, No. 5, pp. 984—1001.
59. Jaffe A. B. (1989). Real effects of academic research. American Economic Review, Vol. 79, No. 5, pp. 957—970.
60. Jaffe A. B., Lerner J. (2001). Reinventing public R&D: Patent policy and the commercialization of national laboratory technologies. RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 32, No. 1, pp. 167—198. https://doi.org/10.2307/2696403
61. Jaffe A. B., Trajtenberg M., Henderson R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 108, No. 3, pp. 577—598. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118401
62. Janeway W. H. (2012). Doing capitalism in the innovation economy: Markets, speculation and the state. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
63. Jones Ch. I. (2015). The facts of economic growth. In: J. B. Taylor, H. Uhlig (eds.). Handbook of macroeconomics, Vol. 2A. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 3—69.
64. Keller W. (2004). International technology diffusion. Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 42, No. 3, pp. 752—782. https://doi.org/10.1257/0022051042177685
65. Kerr W. R., Lincoln W. F. (2010). The supply side of innovation: H-1B visa reforms and U.S. ethnic invention. Journal of Labor Economics, Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 473—508. https://doi.org/10.1086/651934
66. Lach S., Schankerman M. (2008). Incentives and invention in universities. RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 403—433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0741-6261.2008.00020.x
67. Lemley M. A., Simcoe T. (2018). How essential are standard-essential patents? Stanford Public Law Working Paper. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3128420
68. Lerner J. (2009). The boulevard of broken dreams: Why public efforts to boost entrepreneurship and venture capital have failed—and what to do about it. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
69. Lucking B. (2019). Do R&D tax credits create jobs? Unpublished manuscript, http://stanford.edu/~blucking/jmp.pdf
70. Lucking B., Bloom N., Van Reenen J. (2018). Have R&D spillovers changed? NBER Working Paper, No. 24622. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24622
71. Madaleno M., Nathan M., Overman H., Waights S. (2018). Incubators, accelerators and regional economic development. Centre for Economic Performance Discussion Paper, No. 1575.
72. Mazzucato M. (2013). The entrepreneurial state: Debunking public vs. private sector myths. London: Anthem Press.
73. Moretti E., Steinwender C., Van Reenen J., Warren P. (2015). The intellectual spoils of war? Defense R&D, productivity and international technology spillovers. Unpublished manuscript.
74. Moretti E., Wilson D. J. (2017). The effect of state taxes on the geographical location of top earners: Evidence from star scientists. American Economic Review, Vol. 107, No. 7, pp. 1858—1903. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20150508
75. Moser P., San S. (2019). Immigration, science, and invention: Evidence from the 1920s quota acts. Unpublished manuscript.
76. Moser P., Voena A., Waldinger F. (2014). German Jewish émigrés and US invention. American Economic Review, Vol. 104, No. 10, pp. 3222—3255. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.10.3222
77. National Science Board. (2018). Science and engineering indicators 2018. Alexandria, VA: National Science Board.
78. OECD (2018). OECD review of national R&D tax incentives and estimates of R&D tax subsidy rates, 2017. Paris: OECD.
79. Romer P. M. (2001). Should the government subsidize supply or demand in the market for scientists and engineers? Innovation Policy and the Economy, Vol. 1, pp. 221—252.
80. Sampat B., Williams H. L. (2019). How do patents affect follow-on innovation? Evidence from the human genome. American Economic Review, Vol. 109, No. 1, pp. 203—236. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20151398
81. Schumpeter J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper and Brothers.
82. Shambaugh J., Nunn R., Portman B. (2017). Eleven facts about innovation and patents. Hamilton Project Report, Brookings Institution.
83. Shu P., Steinwender C. (2019). The impact of trade liberalization on firm productivity and innovation. Innovation Policy and the Economy, Vol. 19, pp. 39—68. https://doi.org/10.1086/699932
84. Toivanen O., Väänänen L. (2016). Education and invention. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 98, No. 2, pp. 382—396. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00520
85. Trajtenberg M. (1990). A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. RAND Journal of Economics, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 172—187. https://doi.org/10.2307/2555502
86. Valero A., Van Reenen J. (2019). The economic impact of universities: Evidence from across the globe. Economics of Education Review, Vol. 68, No. 1, pp. 53—67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.09.001
87. Williams H. L. (2013). Intellectual property rights and innovation: Evidence from the human genome. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 121, No. 1, pp. 1—27. https://doi.org/10.1086/669706
88. Williams H. L. (2017). How do patents affect research investments? Annual Review of Economics, Vol. 9, pp. 441—469. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-110216-100959
89. Wilson D. J. (2009). Beggar thy neighbor? The in-state, out-of-state, and aggregate effects of R&D tax credits. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 91, No. 2, pp. 431—436. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest.91.2.431
90. Xu R., Gong K. (2017). Does import competition induce R&D reallocation? Evidence from the U.S. IMF Working Paper, No. 17/253.
Review
For citations:
Bloom N., Van Reenen J., Williams H. A toolkit of policies to promote innovation. Voprosy Ekonomiki. 2019;(10):5-31. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-10-5-31
Views:
1930
Email this article 
