系統識別號 | U0002-2806201823262700 |
---|---|
DOI | 10.6846/TKU.2018.00920 |
論文名稱(中文) | 專利保護、外部性與所得分配 |
論文名稱(英文) | Patent Policy, Externalities and Income Inequality |
第三語言論文名稱 | |
校院名稱 | 淡江大學 |
系所名稱(中文) | 產業經濟學系碩士班 |
系所名稱(英文) | Department of Industrial Economics |
外國學位學校名稱 | |
外國學位學院名稱 | |
外國學位研究所名稱 | |
學年度 | 106 |
學期 | 2 |
出版年 | 107 |
研究生(中文) | 高衡權 |
研究生(英文) | Heng-Chuan Kao |
學號 | 605540128 |
學位類別 | 碩士 |
語言別 | 繁體中文 |
第二語言別 | |
口試日期 | 2018-06-15 |
論文頁數 | 33頁 |
口試委員 |
指導教授
-
洪小文
委員 - 黃俊傑 委員 - 李順發 委員 - 洪小文 |
關鍵字(中) |
專利政策 消費外部性 休閒外部性 經濟成長 所得不均 消費不均 |
關鍵字(英) |
Patent Policy Consumption Externality Leisure Externaliy Economic Growth Income Inequality Consumption Inequality |
第三語言關鍵字 | |
學科別分類 | |
中文摘要 |
本文依循Chu (2010)所架構的品質提升成長模型,建立一個以研發做為技術進步的內生成長模型,最終財部門為完全競爭市場生產單一且同質的產品,中間財部門為獨占性競爭生產異質的產品,在考慮中間財產業具有專利權的情況下,在下一代新商品出現之前,具有該產業的壟斷地位,研發部門之設定為完全競爭市場,並加入Aghion and Howitt (1992)所提及之創新所造成的外部性。根據Ljungqvist and Uhliq (2000)對於消費外部性的設定,考慮家計單位的效用會受到消費外部性與休閒外部性的影響,本文假定社會存在負的消費外部性,但可能存在正或負的休閒外部性。分別探討專利政策、消費外部性與休閒外部性對於經濟成長、消費不均度與所得不均度的影響。 本文發現當休閒的跨期替代彈性小於1時,得到以下結論 (1)當專利保護程度上升時,會造成經濟成長的增加,但也使得消費不均與所得不均提高。(2)消費外部性的提高,代表人們以消費作為社會地位表徵時,會造成經濟成長的增加,但也使得消費不均與所得不均提高。(3)休閒外部性的提高,代表人們以休閒作為社會地位表徵時,對於經濟成長、消費不均與所得不均的影響皆為不確定,過去文獻指出會受到休閒外部性與休閒的跨期替代彈性所影響。(4)消費外部性的提高,會使得專利保護對經濟成長的影響更為顯著。 |
英文摘要 |
This paper follows quality-ladder growth model constructed by Chu (2010). In the case of considering patant protection for the intermediate industry is a monopolistic leader, who holds a patent on the lastest invention and dominates the market until the next invention occurs. This paper assmes that society has negative consumption externality, but exists poistive or negative leisure externality. When intertemporal leisure elasticity of substitution is less than 1, there are some findings in this paper: (1) When the level of patent protection rises, it causes an increase in economic growth, but its effect on consumption inequality and income inequality is increasing. (2) The increase in consumption externality menas that when people use consumption as a representation of social status, it raise economic growth, but its effect on consumption inequality and income inequality is increasing. (3) The impact of leisure externality on economic growth, consumption inequality and income inequality depends on the size of leisure externality parameter and intertemporal leisure elasticity of substitution. (4) The increase in consumption externality will make the effect of patent protection more significant for economic growth. |
第三語言摘要 | |
論文目次 |
目錄 I 圖表目錄 II 第一章、緒論 1 1.1研究動機與目的 1 1.2 本文架構 8 第二章、模型架構 9 2.1 生產部門 9 2.1.1最終財部門 9 2.1.2 中間財部門 10 2.3 研發部門 11 2.3 家計部門 12 2.4 競爭均衡 15 2.5 所得分配 18 第三章、政策效果分析 21 第四章 結論 26 附錄 27 參考文獻 29 圖表目錄 圖表1每千人專利申請數 2 圖表2專利權保護指標 3 圖表3所得不均度1995與2014年比較 6 圖表4消費外部性與休閒外部性整理 14 |
參考文獻 |
洪小文(2010), “聚集經濟、消費外部性與經濟成長”, 經濟論文叢刊, 38, 387-412。 Adams, S. (2008), “Globalization and Income Inequality:Implications for Intellectual Property Rights,” Journal of Policy Modeling, 30, 725-735. Aghion, P., and P. Howitt (1992) “A Model of Growth Through Creative Destruction,” Econometrica 60(2), 323-351. Alesina, A., and D. Rodrik (1994), “Distributive Politics and Economic Growth,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(2), 465-490. Alesina, A., E. Glaeser., and B. Sacerdote (2006), “Work and Leisure in the United States and Europe:Why do different?,” In M. Gertler and K. Rogoff (eds), NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2005, 1-64. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press. Atkinson, A. B. (2000), “The Changing Distribution of Income:Evidence and Explanations,” German Economic Review, 1, 3-18. Atkinson, A. B. (2003), “Income Inequality in OECD Countries:Data and Explanations,” CESifo Economic Studies, 49, 479-513. Azariadis, C., B. L. Chen., C. H. Lu and Y. C. Wang (2013), “A Two-Sector Model of Endogenous Growth with Leisure Externalites.” Journal of Economic Theory, 148(2), 843-857. Barnett, R. C., J. Bhattacharya, and H. Bunzel (2000), “Choosing to Keep up with the Joneses and Income Inequality,” Economic Theory, 45, 469-496. Barro, R. J. (2000), “Inequality Growth in a Panel of Countries,” Journal of Economic Growth, 5, 5-32. Blundell, R., L. Pistaferri., and I. Peter (2008), “Consumption Inequality and Partial Insurance,” American Economic Review, 98, 1887-1921. Budria-Rodriguez, S., J. Diaz-Gimenez., V. Quadrini., and J.-V. Rior-Rull (2002), “Updated Facts on the U.S. Distributions of Earnings, Income and Wealth,” Federal Reserve Bank of Minneqpolis Quarterly Review, 26, 2-35. Campbell, J.Y. and J. N. Cochrane (1999), “By Force of Habit:A Consumption-Based Explanation of Aggregate Stock Behavior,” Journal of Political Economy, 107, 205-251. Chang, W. Y., Y. N. Hsieh., and C. C. Lai (2000), “Social Status, Inflation, and Endogenous Growth in a Cash-in-Advance economy,” European Journal of Political Economy, 16, 535-545. Chou, C. F., and G. Talmain (1996), “Redistribution and Growth:Pareto Improvemnets,” Journal of Economic Growth, 1, 505-523. Chu, A. C. (2010), Effects of Patent Policy on Income and Consumption Inequality in a R&D Grwoth Model,” Southern Economic Journal, 77, 336-350. Chu, A.C. (2009b), “Macroeconomic Effects of Intellectual Property rights:A Survey,” Academia Economic Papers, 37(3), 283-303. Cozzi, G., and S. Galli (2009), “Science-Based R&D in Schumpeterian Growth,” Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 56(4), 474-491. Dinopoulos, E., P. Segerstrom (2010), “Intellectual Property Rights, Multinational Firms and Economic Growth,” Journal of Development Economics, 92, 13-27. Dupor, B., and W. F. Liu (2003), “Jealousy and Equilibrium Over Consumption,” American Economic Review, 93, 423-428. Eicher, T., and C. García-Peńalosa (2008), “Endogenous Strength of intellectual Property Rights:Implications for Economic Development and Growth,” European Economic Review, 52, 237-258. Fisher, W. H., and F. X. Holf (2000), “Relative Consumption, Economic Growth, and Taxation,” Journal of Economics, 72, 241-262. Foellmi, R., and J. Zweimüller (2006), “Income Distribution and Demand-Induced Innovations,” Review of Economic Studies, 73, 941-960. Forbes, K. J. (2000), “A Reassessment of the Relationship between Inequality and Growth,” American Economic Review, 90, 869-887. Furukawa, Y. (2007), “The Protection of Intellectual Property Rights and Endogenous Growth:Is Stronger Always Better?,” Journal of Economic Dynamic of Control, 31, 3644-3670. Futagami, K., and T. Iwaisako (2007), “Dynamic Analysis of Patent Policy in an Endogenous Growth Model,” Journal of Economic Theory, 132, 306-334. Garcia-Penalosa, C., and S. J. Turnovsky (2006), Growth and Income inequality:A Canonical Model,” Economic Theory, 28, 25-49. Ginarte, J.C., and W.G.Park (1997), “Determinants of Patent Rights:A Cross-National Study,” Research Policy, 26, 283-301. Gómez, M. A. (2006), “Consumption and Leisure Externalities, Economic Growth and Equilibrium Effciency,” Scottish Journal of Economy, 55(2), 227-249. Grossman, G.M., and E. Helpman (1991), “Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth,” Review of Economic Studies, 58, 43-61. Hamermesh, D. S. (2002), “Timing, Togetherness and Time Windfalls,” Journal of Population Economics, 15, 601-623. Harbaugh, R. (1996), “Falling Behind the Joneses:Relative Consumption and the Growth-Saving Paradox,” Economics Letters, 53, 297-304. Horii, R., and T. Iwaisako (2007), “Economic Growth with Imperfect Protection of Intellectual Property Rights,” Journal of Economics, 90(1), 45-85. Iwaisako, T. and K. Futagami (2003), “Patent Policy in an Endogenous Growth Model,” Journal of Economics, 78(3), 239-258. Krueger, D., and F. Perri (2006), “Does Income Inequality Lead to Consumption Inequality?Evidence and Theory,” Review of Economic Studies, 73, 163-193. Kuznets, S. (1955), “Economic Growth and Income Inequality,” The American Economic Review, 45, 1-28. Kwan, Y., and E. Lai (2003), “Intellectual Property Rights Protection and Endogenous Economic Growth,” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 27, 853-873. Li, C. W. (1998), “Inequality and Growth:A Schumpeterian Perspective,” Unpublished paper, University of Glasgow. Li, C. W. (2001), “On the Policy Implications of Endogenous Technological Progress,” Economic Journal, C164-C179. Li, H., and H. F. Zou (1998), “Income Inequality is not Harmful for Growth:Theory and Evidence,” Review of Development Economics, 2(3), 318-334. Nakamura, L. (2003), “A Trillion Dollars a Year in Intangible Investment and the New Economy,” In Intangible Assets:Values, Measures, and Risks, edited by John, R. M. Hand and Baruch Lev. Oxford:Oxford University Press, pp19-47. Park, W.G. (2008), “International Patent Protection:1960¬-2005,” Research Policy, 37, 761-677. Perotti, R. (1996), “Growth, Income Distribution, and Democracy:What the data say,” Jorunal of Economic Growth, 1(2), 149-187. Persson, T., and G. Tabellini (1994), “Is inequality Harmful for Growth?,” American Economic Review, 84(3), 600-621. Reed, D., and M. Cancian (2001), “Sources of Inequality:Measuring the Contributions of Income Sources to Raising Family Income Inequality,” Review of Income and Wealth, 47, 321-333. Romer, P (1990), “Endogenous Technological Change,” Journal of Political Economy, 98, 71-102. Solt, F. (2016), “The Standardized World Income Inequality Database.” Social Science Quarterly, 97(5), 1267-1281. Tsoukis, C. (2007), “Keeping up with the Joneses, Growth, and Distribution,” Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 54(4), 575-600. Weder, M. (2004), “A Note on Conspicuous Leisure, Animal Spirits and Endogenous Cycles,” Portuguese Economic Journal, 3, 1-13. Zweimüller, J. (2000), “Schumpeterian Entrepreneurs Meet Engel’s Law:The Impact of Inequality on Innovation-Driven Growth,” Journal of Economic Growth, 5, 185-206. |
論文全文使用權限 |
如有問題,歡迎洽詢!
圖書館數位資訊組 (02)2621-5656 轉 2487 或 來信