Intellectual Property Rights,FDI, R&D and Economic Growth: A Cross‐country Empirical Analysis

This paper aims to empirically examine how intellectual property rights (IPRs) protection, foreign direct investment (FDI) and research and development (R&D), along with other possible variables, may affect the economic growth of the host country. Using the panel data of 92 countries during 1970–2007, I conclude from the system generalised method of moments estimation that domestic investment share, FDI, R&D capacity, openness to trade, human capital and IPRs protection all have statistically significant and positive impacts on economic growth. A further investigation of countries at different levels of development suggests two striking findings. First, besides the domestic investment, openness, human capital and IPRs protection, R&D is the key to drive economic growth in the higher‐income countries, while FDI is the engine of growth in both higher‐income and middle‐income countries. Second, a positive and significant impact of IPRs protection on economic growth is found in both higher‐income and lower‐income countries. However, such an impact is not detected in the middle‐income countries.     

When an Importer's Protection of IPR Interacts with an Exporter's Level of Technology: Comparing the Impacts on the Exports of the North and South

Using bilateral trade data of countries from 2000 to 2007, this paper contributes to the empirical literature on the role of intellectual property rights (IPRs) in global trade. The existing literature has focused on how IPRs in the destination country affect exports from a source country. In this paper, we add an additional dimension: the level of technology of the exporting country (LT). This is quite important for distinguishing the impact of IPRs on the exports of developed and developing countries, since the technology levels vary across countries at different stages of development and intellectual property rights better protect exports that are technologically advanced than exports that are imitative and potentially infringing. By factoring in the level of technology (LT), our empirical analysis makes the case that IPRs can act as a barrier to the exports from the South, especially the rapidly catching‐up economies, and thus be a source for the middle‐income trap phenomenon.     

知识产权保护对中国对外直接投资的影响——基于“一带一路”建设视角的研究

发展导向的“一带一路”倡议是否需要完善知识产权保护规则？文章以世界经济论坛知识产权保护指标作为核心解释变量,运用面板数据模型,实证考察了知识产权保护对中国对外直接投资存量的影响。发现东道国加强知识产权保护对中国对外直接投资具有显著的促进作用,而且这种作用有两个显著的特点,一是在“一带一路”沿线国家样本中强于非沿线国家样本,二是在低知识产权保护度的国家样本中强于高知识产权保护度的国家样本。“一带一路”沿线多为发展中国家,知识产权保护度较低,中国企业在这些国家进行投资更多是处于被模仿的地位,需要通过双边或者多边协定,敦促沿线国家加强知识产权保护。文章结论为在“一带一路”倡议中完善知识产权保护规则的政策导向提供了实证基础。     

Intellectual property rights,imitation, and development. The effect on cross-border mergers and acquisitions

In this paper, we analyze whether the recent global process of strengthening and harmonization of intellectual property rights (IPRs) affects decisions of cross-border mergers and acquisitions (M&As). We investigate if IPRs have a differential effect across sectors of different technology content and for countries of different development level. Also, we study how imitation abilities of target countries interact with the tightening of IPRs. Using data for the post-TRIPS period (1995–2010), we estimate an extended gravity model to study the bilateral number of M&As, including a measure of the strength of IPRs systems on target countries and a set of control variables usually considered as determinants of M&As. The estimation results verify the gravity structure for M&As and show that IPRs –and enforcement– influence decisions of cross-border M&As in all sectors regardless of their technological content. However, IPRs are more important in countries with high imitation abilities and in sectors of high-technology content. Furthermore, a strengthening of IPRs leads to a larger increase of M&As in developing countries than in developed countries. These results call the attention on the possible implications for least developed economies and challenge the adequacy of a globally harmonized IPRs systems.     

Intellectual Property Rights in China: The Changing Political Economy of Chinese–American Interests

We review the evolution of modern Chinese intellectual property right (IPR) laws and enforcement and explore economic and political forces involved in international conflicts over Chinese IPR protection. Our analysis considers why the US and China moved from conflict to cooperation over intellectual property rights. Structural and institutional aspects of the political economy of IPRs within each country are considered, and data on Chinese‐US trade in intellectual property‐intensive goods are examined. We conclude that although enforcement of IPRs within China continues to be relatively weak, Chinese IPR institutions are converging on those in the OECD nations.     

Intellectual property rights,FDI, and technological development

This paper presents two simultaneous trade-offs faced by a developing country in protecting intellectual property rights (IPRs), namely (1) between attracting foreign direct investment and deterring international technology spillovers, and (2) between encouraging domestic innovation and suppressing technology diffusion. The optimal level of IPR protection depends on the technological capability of the host country. In less developed countries, IPRs should be just strong enough to induce FDI since international technology spillovers are the dominant source of technological development. A stronger level of IPR protection is instead recommended for more advanced emerging economies as a tool to exploit the potential of their domestic innovators. The results cast doubt on the adequacy of globally harmonized IPR standards that do not consider the level of development.     

Bilateral intra-industry trade flows and intellectual property rights protections: further evidence from the United Kingdom

This paper investigates the relationship between the United Kingdom's (hereafter referred as UK) bilateral intra-industry trade (IIT) and foreign intellectual property rights (IPRs) protections. The empirical investigation is based on pooled UK data and benefits from the theoretical distinction between horizontal and vertical IIT. It also estimates a gravity equation for international trade using both fixed and random effects models. We then extend the analysis by employing the GMM system for dynamic panel models. The principal findings suggest that the UK's IIT is stimulated when the level of a trading partner's IPRs and its imitative ability are considered jointly. However, when IPRs and imitation abilities are considered separately, their disparate effects are not an important factor in determining UK IIT flows.     

从中美知识产权争端看“特别301”条款的实质

“特别301”条款是用于保障美国的知识产权在外国得到有效保护．保障依赖于知识产权保护的美国人公平和平等地进入外国市场的。在“‘特别301’条款年度审查报告”中,美国的贸易代表曾多次指出,中国的国内市场仿冒和盗版问题十分严重,给美国企业、个人带来巨额经济损失。特别是,近年来美中贸易赤字不断增加,已逾千亿美元,因此知识产权的有效保护成为美国扭转对外贸易状况的关键。本文以对“特别301”条款的实体内容及适用程序的介绍为基础,以中美知识产权谈判为具体案例,深刻剖析“特别301”条款的实质。     

双向知识产权保护对中国出口三元边际的影响

理论分析了双向知识产权保护对出口国出口三元边际的影响,并选取2005—2015年中国出口到世界65个国家的HS-6位贸易数据,构建引力模型进行了实证验证。主要结论是,国内加强知识产权保护可以提升中国的出口种类和数量,贸易伙伴国加强知识产权保护可以提升中国的出口种类;没有证据表明,国内或国外知识产权保护水平的提升会影响中国的出口价格;当国内知识产权保护更强时,双向知识产权保护对中国出口种类的促进作用都有所增强,反之则二者作用都不显著;分国家类型的研究表明,双向知识产权保护的同时加强更有益于中国向发展中国家出口产品种类的扩张,但对发达国家则不显著。     

Intellectual Property Rights in Agriculture and the Interests of Asian‐Pacific Economies

This paper describes recent and ongoing processes of technological change in agriculture, which has become a highly R&D‐intensive sector in many countries of the Asia‐Pacific region. It also considers the role of various forms of intellectual property rights (IPRs) in promoting such technological changes and in affecting their diffusion through the region. A central part of the discussion is a review of how these various IPRs operate and are protected in major economies of the region. There is an assessment of the economic interests of key countries, including the United States, Canada, Australia, China, Japan and the Republic of Korea, in global and regional policy evolution in agricultural IPRs. These interests are a mix of comparative advantage in farming, which is quite distinctive among these countries, and the technological basis of production, which is more convergent. A review of available measures of innovation in the region suggests that all of these economies are active in developing new agricultural technologies, although there is considerable specialisation in the types of processes developed. Given this mix of divergence in comparative costs and convergence in technology interests, it is difficult to describe sharply the preferences these economies may have in continued globalisation of agricultural IPRs. However, the analysis points to some areas in which countries may continue to specialise – thereby retaining the ability to remain in specific areas of farming – and other fields in which international collaboration may be sensible.     

The business of product counterfeiting in China and the post-WTO membership environment

China is generally acknowledged to be the world's number one country producer of counterfeit products. After becoming a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) China is now obligated to comply with WTO provisions on protection of intellectual property rights (IPRs). However, product counterfeiting operations in China are well entrenched. The postWTO membership environment has changed little, and such illicit operations are unlikely to subside soon. Furthermore, there is not much foreign companies can do because the response strategies recommended in the business literature have limited effect in the Chinese environment. Foreign companies may have to wait until China becomes on balance a victim instead of a benefactor of product counterfeiting before they can hope to see better protection of their IPRs.     

Zum Aneignungsverhalten innovationsaktiver kleiner und mittlerer Unternehmen

This paper examines recent contributions on innovation protection practices in small and medium enterprises (SMEs), with a specific focus on the role of intellectual property rights (IPRs). Several empirical findings and possible particularities on the appropriability of SME innovations are discussed. In this way, the paper contributes to the ongoing debate about whether the less frequent use of IPRs by smaller firms should necessarily give rise to public concern. In exploring this question, the paper takes into consideration that in addition to the resource and capability constraints that smaller firms face in coping with the formal IPR system, their less frequent use of IPRs could also be related to the specific nature of their appropriability regimes.     

Fighting Software Piracy: Which Governance Tools Matter in Africa?

This article integrates previously missing components of government quality into the governance-piracy nexus in exploring governance mechanisms by which global obligations for the treatment of IPRs are effectively transmitted from international to the national level in the battle against piracy. It assesses the best governance tools in the fight against piracy and upholding of intellectual property rights (IPRs). The instrumentality of IPR laws (treaties) in tackling piracy through good governance mechanisms is also examined. Findings demonstrate that: (1) while all governance tools under consideration significantly decrease the incidence of piracy, corruption-control is the most effective weapon; (2) but for voice and accountability, political stability and democracy, IPR laws (treaties) are instrumental in tackling piracy through government quality dynamics of rule of law, regulation quality, government effectiveness, corruption-control, and press freedom. Hence, the need for a policy approach most conducive to expanding development is to implement an integrated system of both IPRs and corollary good governance policies. Moreover, our findings support the relevance of good governance measures in developing countries wishing to complement their emerging IPR regimes.     

知识产权保护差异与贸易摩擦诱发机制——基于利益集团视角的分析

文章在简述了发达国家和发展中国家知识产权保护差异的现状和原因之后,从利益集团的视角分析了知识产权保护政策的需求和供给的形成过程,并在此基础上剖析了两种不同类型的知识产权贸易摩擦的诱发机制。研究结论认为:发达国家和发展中国家的利益集团从自身的经济利益出发形成了不同的知识产权保护需求;发达国家和发展中国家政府从政治捐赠和总福利水平效用最大化的角度出发形成了知识产权保护政策的供给。从而形成了制度层面和产品层面的知识产权贸易摩擦的诱发机制。     

Foreign direct investment and intellectual property rights: evidence from Hollywood's global distribution of movies and videos

Traditional thinking about intellectual property rights (IPR) suggests that as a country strengthens its IPR standards, firms will move their governance structures away from equity based institutions such as foreign direct investment (FDI) towards more market-based relations such as licensing agreements. This hypothesis is explored by examining the behavior of Hollywood studios in both the feature film and video markets in 40 foreign countries. The analysis reveals that the behavior of Hollywood studios is more complex than this: although moderate IPRs are associated with a high degree of licensing, both high and low standards of IPR encourage more integrated governance structures.     

知识产权保护对国际贸易的影响及中国的对策

随着经济全球化的深入,知识产权保护的国际贸易化特征凸显,发达国家与发展中国家在与贸易有关的知识产权保护领域的矛盾与冲突加剧,国际市场及利益分配格局发生改变.充分认识知识产权保护对国际贸易的影响并制定相应的知识产权策略,是中国以及广大发展中国家的重要课题.     

知识产权保护与自由贸易的冲突与协调

知识产权保护与自由贸易的冲突由来已久,TRIPS协议实施后,更引发了国家之间尤其是发达国家和发展中国家之间在贸易及其他利益方面的多种冲突,因此发达国家和发展中国家应加强在知识产权保护方面的协调,我国也应采取相应对策以减少知识产权冲突,充分发挥知识产权保护机制的积极作用。     

TRIPs as an adjustment mechanism in North-South trade

Developing countries tend to take a negative view of the protection of intellectual property rights as reflected in the TRIPs agreement, as this seems to conflict with their own developmental needs. As the following article points out, there are, however, a number of reasons why developing countries, too, may benefit from stronger protection of intellectual property rights.     

知识产权保护的负面效应与发展中国家的回应性政策研究

文章立足于知识产权保护的负面效应,探究知识产权保护的中观基础,指出产业结构是决定知识产权保护效应的决定力量,有力地解释了不同经济发展水平下知识产权保护体现不同效应的原因,并从制度层面和产业层面指出了发展中国家的回应性策略。     

为“天才之火”添加利益之油——论知识经济时代高校知识产权的法律保护

高校的知识产权保护是一个薄弱环节，存在着意识不强、行为不规范、管理制度不完善等问题。在当今知识经济时代，高校应进一步增强对知识产权的法律保护意识，不断完善高校知识产权保护的法律法规和管理服务体制，加大知识产权保护的执法力度，清晰合理地界定科技成果的产权归属，细化科技成果的分配标准，通过法律手段促进高校科技成果转化，不断提高高校知识产权的管理水平。