知识产权保护制度促进服务业内部结构升级吗?

从知识产权保护制度视角出发阐释服务业内部结构升级的复杂非线性演化理论机制,进而运用基于"距离指数"和"铁路密度"构建的工具变量实证研究知识产权保护对服务业内部结构升级的影响,结果表明:加强知识产权保护通过促进知识密集型服务业的增长推动了我国服务业的内部结构升级;知识产权保护制度对服务业结构升级的影响存在明显的地区分化,加强知识产权保护拉大了中西部地区与东部地区服务业结构升级的地区差距;知识产权保护对服务业结构升级的影响呈现先扬后抑的"倒U"型特征,我国当前的知识产权保护实际强度低于理论上的"最适强度",加强知识产权保护有助于我国服务业内部结构的进一步升级。上述研究结论在基于多种知识产权保护指标和多种回归方法的检验中均表现得十分稳健。     

知识产权保护与经济增长研究述评

TRIPS协议后知识产权保护日益成为影响经济发展的重要制度要素。相关文献通过技术创新和技术扩散两种传导机制,研究知识产权保护的不同经济效应。在国际知识产权保护下,"南方国家"加强知识产权保护对经济增长和整个社会福利有何影响;考虑知识产权保护内生性,如何进行适度知识产权保护成为知识产权经济研究的热点和趋势。     

知识产权保护和经济增长：基于省际面板数据的研究

本文利用省际面板数据研究了知识产权保护和经济增长之间的关系,发现知识产权保护在一定程度上可以促进经济增长,但这种关系和经济发展程度是正相关的。一般说来,经济越发达,知识产权保护对经济增长的影响越显著;经济越欠发达,知识产权保护对经济增长的影响作用就越不显著。本文最后给出了选择合适知识产权保护战略的建议。     

知识产权保护能促进经济增长吗？--基于中国省级面板数据的实证分析

在Ginarte-Park方法的基础上,考虑到处于司法转型期的发展中国家的执法力度和立法强度,建立知识产权保护强度指标体系,将中国30个省、自治区、直辖市知识产权保护水平量化。接着运用面板数据分析方法,以人均实际GDP对数为被解释变量,以知识产权保护强度为解释变量,通过实证分析验证了我国加强知识产权保护与经济增长的关系,证明了中国的知识产权保护水平与经济增长之间的显著正相关关系。然后对东中西部地区分别进行实证分析,绘制了异常经济增长与知识产权保护强度的散点图,来作为稳健性检验的一部分。并通过对变量的相关系数矩阵图的分析,初步探讨了知识产权保护促进经济增长的具体路径。结果表明,在控制了时间效应后,知识产权保护强度能够解释省份个体效应的37.4%。     

知识产权保护、自主研发与外商直接投资——基于中国1980—2004年的经验证据

知识产权保护是激励一个国家自主研发的重要制度安排,也是影响跨国公司对外直接投资利益的重要因素.对中国1980—2004年时间序列数据协整检验进行分析,显示我国的知识产权保护水平、自主研发和FDI增长之间存在长期均衡关系,格兰杰检验结果表明,我国知识产权保护虽然不是FDI增长的直接原因,但是,加强知识产权保护能激励自主研发,而研发能力的提升吸引更多FDI的流入.     

专业化与“隐形冠军”企业出口绩效： 制度环境的调节作用

专业化和国际化是"隐形冠军"企业获取竞争优势并促进企业发展的重要战略.基于资源依赖理论,以2010—2018年中国上市公司"隐形冠军"企业为样本,实证检验了"隐形冠军"专业化程度对其出口绩效的影响,由制度基础观出发,分别考察了知识产权保护和经济政策不确定指数对两者关系的调节作用.研究发现:提高我国"隐形冠军"企业专业化程度的有助于提升其出口绩效;知识产权保护调节作用随着知识产权保护程度的不同会发生变化,在知识产权保护程度低的中西部地区,提高知识产权保护水平会提升"隐形冠军"企业专业化程度对其出口绩效的促进作用.在知识产权保护程度高的东部地区,提高知识产权保护水平会降低"隐形冠军"企业专业化程度对其出口绩效的促进作用;同时,经济政策不确定性越大,"隐形冠军"企业专业化程度对其出口绩效的促进作用越小,在此基础上提出提升我国"隐形冠军"企业出口绩效的对策建议.     

知识产权制度对经济增长的影响

在经济和技术全球化的大环境下,知识产权领域已经成为国内外研究的热点。尤其是发展中国家的知识产权制度,成为一国能否摆脱短期技术困境、促进经济长期增长的关键因素。有效的知识产权制度是促进新知识、新技术研发的重要保障,客观、全面、深入的研究知识产权制度对经济增长的影响,对于经济的长远发展具有重大的意义。     

我国知识产权保护对外商直接投资的影响研究

在知识经济时代,知识产权保护制度的建立是一个国家经济发展的内在需要,也是经济全球化的必然结果.TRIPS协议的达成意味着广大发展中国家要提高本国的知识产权保护水平.本文以我国作为实证研究对象,通过对知识产权保护水平算法的修正,计算出我国加入执法力度的实际知识产权保护水平;然后运用协整方法分析我国知识产权保护水平与外商直接投资总量之间的长期关系,并进行Granger因果检验;最后通过建立一个多元对数线性回归模型,研究我国知识产权保护水平的变化对外商直接投资行业的影响.并对我国知识产权保护提出相关政策建议.     

知识产权保护政府补贴与经济增长

文章构建了三部分模型,分析了知识产权保护、政府补贴对经济增长的作用,研究发现:知识产权保护对经济增长的作用是不确定的,根据本国自主创新的程度而异;政府补贴份额的增加有助于放大严格的知识产权保护对经济增长的正面效应或减缓严格的知识产权保护对经济增长的负面效应;政府补贴与经济增长休戚相关,政府补贴份额越高,越有利于经济增长;严格的知识产权保护会放大或消弭政府补贴对经济增长的正面效应;技术应用成本与经济增长呈现反向关系,技术应用成本越高,越不利于经济增长,较高的政府补贴份额会减缓技术应用成本对经济增长的负面影响;严格的知识产权保护会放大或减缓技术应用成本对经济增长的负面效应。     

知识产权保护执法力度、技术创新与企业绩效——来自中国上市公司的证据

知识产权制度及在其保护下的技术创新日益成为综合国力竞争的决定性因素。本文研究我国各省知识产权保护执法力度对上市公司技术创新及企业绩效的影响机制和作用效果。结果表明:政府加强知识产权保护执法力度,可以提升企业创新能力,表现为企业专利产出和研发投资的增加;进一步研究还发现,加强知识产权执法力度可以通过减少研发溢出损失和缓解外部融资约束两条途径来促进企业创新。当知识产权保护执法力度较强时,企业专利产出对未来财务绩效的提升作用更大。综合本文研究结果,作者认为政府部门可以通过加强知识产权保护执法力度,来提升企业创新能力和财务绩效,以科技创新驱动供给侧结构性改革,实现经济发展方式的转型。     

Endogenous growth and intellectual property rights: A north–south modeling proposal

In this paper, we develop a general equilibrium endogenous growth model that emphasizes the IPR enforcement effects on growth, in a scenario of north–south technological knowledge diffusion. The economy consists of three sectors, and firms are engaged in step-by-step innovation. In line with the literature, we introduce an IPR parameter that makes imitation more difficult. We find that, in steady state, the increases in IPR protection result in decreases in the growth rate. This result is in line with the literature, which argues that the enforcement of IPR does not always have a positive effect on economic growth. To sum up, we present some suggestions for future research which can help to clarify the relationship between IPR and endogenous growth.     

International intellectual property rights protection and economic growth with costly transfer

This paper develops a product‐cycle model with costly technology transfer, which requires resources from both the North and the South. In the basic model, we show that strengthening intellectual property rights (IPR) protection induces a large technology transfer and narrows the North–South wage gap. However, we obtain an ambiguous result regarding the effect on economic growth, which depends crucially on the size of the transfer cost. Although strengthening IPR protection induces a high growth rate when the transfer cost is small, it can induce a low growth rate when the transfer cost is large. In the extended model, in order to examine what factors determine the transfer cost, we consider the situation where the Southern firms may misbehave and the Northern firms incur a cost to monitor them. We show that the degree of investor protection and the degree of morality in developing countries influence the size of the transfer cost, which affects economic growth.     

Is trade in electrical and electronic products sensitive to IPR protection? Evidence from China’s exports

This article attempts to provide the first empirical evidence on the effect of intellectual property rights (IPRs) on China’s export of electrical and electronic products. It adopts a gravity model for unbalanced panel data of China’s 146 important trading partners over the period of 2002–2012. To eliminate the effects of FDI in determining the linkage between IPR and exports, the panel excludes the destination countries and territories that invest in China. The results reveal that the level of IPR protection in destination countries has a positive impact on China’s flow of exports. Further analysis on data disaggregated by IPR score demonstrates that a higher level of IPR protection in destination countries and territories is positively linked with China’s exports of these items in each of the IPR protection clusters and indicates a strong market power effect by the interplay between R&D expenditure and IPR in the destinations. Finally, both market power and market expansion effects are found to be prevalent in the destinations, as implied by the coefficient of IPR protection disaggregated by income level of China’s export destinations. The results generally resemble those in the literature that describe the linkage between IPR protection and trade flows.     

严格知识产权保护效用之争:基于文献综述

当前,严格知识产权保护成为国际法律、经济、政治的大势所趋。将技术进步作为直接和间接中间变量,梳理严格知识产权保护作用机理,回顾以往文献中关于严格知识产权保护对技术转移和创新、FDI、国际贸易、社会福利、收入分配及经济增长的效用争论,从研究框架、研究模型、研究视角3个方面解释该争论。分析影响知识产权制度效用的国际、国内因素,提出最大化知识产权制度效用的生态演化系统构想。从研究内容细化、研究视角拓展、研究模型深化、研究方法多样化4个方面对严格知识产权保护效用及作用机理的未来研究作出展望。     

Innovation,Imitation and Intellectual Property Rights in Developing Countries

This paper sets up a vertically related market model in which imitation and innovation are endogenously determined to study the impact of intellectual property rights (IPR) protection on less‐developed countries. It shows how a less‐developed country switches from imitation to innovation as it develops. It is also found that the relationship between IPR protection and economic development is U ‐shaped. The IPR protection tends to go down and then go up as income rises. This finding also conforms with that in the empirical literature on IPR protection.     

南方最优知识产权保护水平与南方企业自主创新

构建了一个扩展的南北贸易模型,讨论了南方知识产权保护的决定因素及其对南北双方福利的影响。在模型中,南方政府内生决定知识产权保护水平,北方厂商内生决定研发投资水平和市场竞争策略,南方厂商内生决定自主创新或模仿。研究发现:南方的最优知识产权保护水平与北方存在差异;当南方厂商模仿北方厂商的技术时,南方执行最严格的知识产权保护对北方福利和南方福利都造成损害;当南方厂商的创新效率较高时,严格的知识产权保护能激励南方厂商进行自主创新、改善南方福利。     

Intellectual property rights and the upgrading of the global value chain status

The present paper explores how intellectual property rights (IPR) protection affects an economy’s status in global value chains (GVC) by introducing IPR protection into the sequential production model. We find that a suitable IPR protection system that matches the phase of economic and technological development a country has reached is the key for developing countries to upgrade their status in GVC, which are dominated by multinational firms from developed countries. Empirical analysis with multinational panel data for 55 countries from 2005 to 2015 provides evidence in support of the predictions of this model, although the GVC‐enhancing effects of IPR protection are heterogeneous for developing and developed countries. The empirical conclusions are robust after using the instrumental variable method and controlling for endogeneity.     

Intellectual Property Rights and Economic Growth

Interest in links between protection of intellectual property and growth has been revived by developments in new growth theory and by the WTO’s TRIPS Agreement. The relationship between the strength of a country’s intellectual property rights (IPRs) regime and rate of growth is ambiguous from a theoretical standpoint, reflecting the variety of channels through which technology can be acquired and their differing importance at different stages of development. We investigate the impact of IPR protection on economic growth in a panel of 79 countries using threshold regression analysis. We show that whilst the effect of IPR protection on growth depends upon the level of development, it is positively and significantly related to growth for low‐ and high‐income countries, but not for middle‐income countries. This suggests that, although IPR protection encourages innovation in high‐income countries, and technology flows to low‐income countries, middle‐income countries may have offsetting losses from reduced scope for imitation.     

中国省际知识产权保护空间关联网络研究

运用主成分分析法测算2007-2017年中国省际知识产权保护强度，借助引力模型识别中国省际知识产权保护空间关联关系，在此基础上通过社会网络分析方法对中国省际知识产权保护空间关联网络进行深入分析。结果发现：首先，中国省际知识产权保护强度呈现显著的地区差异，且各省份间知识产权保护强度并非独立存在；其次，中国省际知识产权保护空间关联呈现出典型的网络结构形态，网络连通性较好且不存在明显等级性，但空间关联关系紧密程度有待加强；再次，不同省份由于经济发展水平和地理位置等不同在空间关联网络中表现迥异；最后，中国省际知识产权保护空间关联网络不可分割，不同板块在知识产权保护方面相互依赖，营造了一个信息互通的良好平台。     

Intellectual property rights, multinational firms and economic growth

This paper develops a model of North-South trade with multinational firms and economic growth in order to analyze formally the effects of stronger intellectual property rights (IPR) protection in developing countries. In the model, Northern firms invent new higher-quality products, multinational firms transfer manufacturing operations to the South and the Southern firms imitate products produced by multinational firms. It is shown that stronger IPR protection in the South (i.e., the adoption and implementation of the TRIPs agreement) leads to a permanent increase in the rate of technology transfer to the South within multinational firms, a permanent increase in R&D employment by Southern affiliates of Northern multinationals, a permanent decrease in the North-South wage gap, and a temporary increase in the Northern innovation rate.