Cornell Law School professor Oskar Liivak has written in a paper for a conference at Stanford University that Arrow's "paper has been one of the foundational theoretical pillars of the incentive based theory of patents as Arrow’s work is thought to rule out a strictly market-based solution." A fundamental tenet of the paradox is that the customer, i.e.the potential purchaser of the information describing a technology (or other information having some value, such as facts), wants to know the technology and what it does in sufficient detail as to understand its capabilities or have information about the facts or products to decide whether or not to buy it.The recent death of Kenneth Arrow (who was born on 23 August 1921) represents both the loss of one of the transcendent minds in the history of economics, and the closing of a golden age of economic theory.
“The role of experience in increasing has not gone unobserved,” he wrote, “though the relation has yet to be absorbed into the main corpus of economic theory.” More than forty years after Arrow’s article, the learning curve insight has still not been fully integrated into mainstream economic analysis. in social science at the City College of New York and his M.
It has implications for the value of technology and innovations as well as their development by more than one firm and for the need for and limitations of patent protection.
Arrow's information paradox theory was set out in a 1962 paper.
A problem is that sellers lie, they may be mistaken, one or both sides overlook side consequences for usage in a given context, or some unknown unknown affects the actual outcome.
Discussions of the value of patent rights have taken Arrow's information paradox into account in their evaluations.