Hideki Konishi’s research while affiliated with Seikei University and other places

This paper presents an alternative solution, called “face-to-face” competition, to the hold-up problem of relation-specific investments in the world of incomplete contracts. By inherent multiplicity of equilibria and incentive-compatible equilibrium selection, a tournament among multiple agents is endogenously created in the structure of face-to-face competition to strengthen their investment incentive. This approach also explains, by the reason other than bargaining power and insurance, why typical auto-assemblers in Japan do not vertically integrate a single parts supplier but transact with two potentially competitive suppliers in their developments of new models.J. Japan. Int. Econ.,September 1996,10(3), pp. 199–232. Faculty of Economics, Seikei University; Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo; and Faculty of Economics, Hosei University.

This paper provides a survey on studies that analyze the macroeconomic effects of intellectual property rights (IPR). The first part of this paper introduces different patent policy instruments and reviews their effects on R&D and economic growth. This part also discusses the distortionary effects and distributional consequences of IPR protection as well as empirical evidence on the effects of patent rights. Then, the second part considers the international aspects of IPR protection. In summary, this paper draws the following conclusions from the literature. Firstly, different patent policy instruments have different effects on R&D and growth. Secondly, there is empirical evidence supporting a positive relationship between IPR protection and innovation, but the evidence is stronger for developed countries than for developing countries. Thirdly, the optimal level of IPR protection should tradeoff the social benefits of enhanced innovation against the social costs of multiple distortions and income inequality. Finally, in an open economy, achieving the globally optimal level of protection requires an international coordination (rather than the harmonization) of IPR protection.