Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2607.20365

Licensing and Innovation Regimes in Pharmaceutical R&D

Abstract

We study how licensing affects the allocation of innovation in pharmaceutical R&D. We develop a model in which projects differ in both quality and innovation regime, distinguishing between incremental and novel innovations. Information precision is higher for incremental projects and lower for novel ones, generating different equilibrium dynamics in the market for technology. The model predicts that licensing sustains positive selection and competitive return equalization for incremental innovation, while novel projects may exhibit weaker screening consistent with lemons-type frictions. Using product-level data and Double Machine Learning methods, we test these predictions across success probabilities and monetary returns. We find that licensing increases success probability overall, but return equalization holds primarily for incremental projects. For novel innovation, licensing does not exhibit the same equilibrium adjustment, suggesting residual market imperfections. Instrumenting for licensing using exogenous pipeline shocks confirms this pattern causally: the competitive risk-return trade-off is preserved for incremental 'rushed' licenses, but it breaks down for novel ones. Our results reconcile evidence on both competitive efficiency and information frictions in markets for technologies, showing that market performance depends systematically on the type of innovation being transacted.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Michele Liberatore, Massimo Riccaboni. 2026-07-22. Licensing and Innovation Regimes in Pharmaceutical R&D. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.20365

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

The time interpretation of expected utility theory

Economic models often maximise expectation values of wealth or utility. In non-ergodic settings, these can differ from time-averages, so that maximising expected outcomes need not maximise -- and can systematically reduce -- long-run wealth or utility. Ergodicity economics highlights this problem and models individual agents as maximising wealth in the long run, known as growth optimality. Two instances where expected utility maximisation maps to growth optimality are known: linear utility does this for additive wealth dynamics; and logarithmic utility for multiplicative wealth dynamics. Here we show that the mapping holds more generally when the utility function coincides with the ergodicity transformation in the growth optimal model. This mapping offers a theoretical basis for choosing utility functions and suggests the testable hypothesis that wealth dynamics are predictive of risk preferences.

econ.GN

Monetary Regimes and Trade before the Classical Gold Standard: Evidence from the Latin Monetary Union

This paper reexamines the trade effects of the Latin Monetary Union (LMU), a 19th century agreement to standardize gold and silver coinage among several European countries. The LMU provides a useful setting for studying whether monetary arrangements fostered trade before the classical gold standard, when gold, silver, bimetallic, and paper regimes coexisted. Because some countries already shared other monetary standards, treating all non-member pairs as a single control group mixes pairs with and without alternative forms of monetary coordination. I classify pairs by standard and estimate the LMU effect relative to pairs without a common standard, bringing the comparison closer to those used in the literature on the gold standard and contemporary currency unions. The results suggest that the LMU increased trade between its members by approximately 30\% during its early years, when bimetallism was still credible. These effects subsequently faded, converging to zero by the end of the 1870s. More broadly, these findings also highlight the importance of accounting for the existing monetary regimes when estimating the trade effects of other international policies.

econ.GN

Access to Live AI Advice and Behavior Under Risk: An Incentivized Experiment

Generative AI has become an everyday advisor, and the systems people consult are live and interactive, not pre-scripted. We ask whether access to such a system changes behavior under risk. In an incentivized experiment (N = 158), participants made lottery choices with an optional decision aid presented as a conventional pre-written tool, a live one-shot AI, or a live interactive AI they could query, with information format held equivalent across conditions. Risk preferences are elicited via DOSE. We find no evidence that access to a live AI advisor changes risk aversion.

econ.GN