As Mohnen (1996: 40) has indicated, research and development (R&D) externalities is a twosided theoretical issue. Its 'dark' side concerns the under-investment problem caused by nonappropriability of R&D benefits. On the 'bright' side, R&D spillovers are a source of productivity gains. Both aspects have been invoked to justify public support for R&D investment directly and indirectly. To establish whether public support can be justified due to productivity gains from spillovers, we meta-analyse 983 productivity estimates for spillovers and 501 estimates for own-R&D from 60 empirical studies. Our findings indicate that the average spillover effect is: (i) positive but heterogenous and smaller than what is reported in most narrative reviews; (ii) usually smaller than that of own-R&D capital; (iii) too small to be practically significant when evidence with adequate statistical power is considered. Controlling for observable sources of heterogeneity and best-practice research, the meta-effect is insignificant in the full sample but significant and large among OECD firms/industries/countries. We discuss the implications of these findings for future research and public support for R&D investment.

No abstract

Both theoretical and empirical work reports contingent and conflicting findings on how intellectual property (IP) protection affects related outcomes such as innovation, technology diffusion, productivity, or growth. To establish where the balance of the evidence lies, we conduct a multi-outcome meta-regression analysis to synthesize findings form 91 primary studies that report 1626 effect-size estimates for one or more outcomes. Controlling for unobserved heterogeneity and selection bias only, we find that the effect on innovation, technology diffusion, productivity, and economic growth is statistically or practically insignificant. The effect remains insignificant when we control for observed sources of heterogeneity and estimate meta-effects based on different scenarios for "best-practice" research. Our work contributes to the existing research effort by extending the application of the multi-outcome meta-regression analysis into evidence synthesis in economics. It also provides verifiable/replicable evidence indicating that the sanguine claims about the economic benefits of IP protection voiced in some legal studies and the advocacy literature are misleading.

No abstract

No abstract