自主产权、物品产权和知识产权背景的制度效能

产权制度构成一切制度体系的根本支撑,其他制度均由产权所内生。产权制度的基本效能是激励、惩罚和预期,完整有效的产权束由所有权、使用权、处置权、交易权和收益权所有机构成。一切发展的核心是人的主体发展,其实质是主体自由权利有效而持续的扩展,劳动力自主产权由此成为产权制度的核心构件。劳动力自主产权或主体自由度决定了人的解放和发展程度,从而成为解释国家发展差异的根本解释变量,对一切发展而言,劳动力自主产权具有核心价值和基础意义。     

Intellectual Property Rights in the Asian-Pacific Region: problems, patterns, and policy

This paper explores recent theory and evidence regarding increased protection of intellectual property rights (ZPRs) in Asia. Knowledge has significant public good aspects making optimal provision a problem of trading off universal access against adequate incentives for R&D. Given the ease of evasion of IPR relative to tariffs, attempts to push low and middleincome countries to higher levels of protection may be against their national interests. The Uruguay Round may encounter less than enthusiastic enforcement. Further efforts to refine IPR protection might usefully be focused on flexibility instead of harmonisation.     

企业众包下分布式协同创新知识产权：转移、界定和归属

创新的速度和效率是企业追求的目标之一,开放式创新成为现在企业所注重的创新形式之一,其下所属的众包下分布式协同创新是当下较为热门的模式,在分布式协同创新中知识产权问题成为制约其发展的核心要素。通过梳理过去理论界对于知识产权问题的研究,发现知识产权在转移、界定和归属方面依然存在转移路径、界定的依据、归属与对创新的影响等方面存在模糊,并指出未来的研究应注重对转移路径的实证、知识产权界定的理论和实际的依据、归属权对创新的作用和影响机理等。     

知识产权保护、东道国特征与外商直接投资:一个跨国的经验研究

经济理论表明,加强知识产权保护强化了区位优势,使得跨国公司的所有权优势和内部化优势更加巩固,从而促使跨国公司以FDI方式代替出口贸易。但过强的知识产权保护又会降低跨国公司内部化的必要性,从而导致跨国公司以技术许可方式代替FDI。因此理论上,知识产权保护对FDI的影响是不确定的。为此,本文利用1976～2000年60个发展中国家的面板数据考察了知识产权保护对发展中国家FDI的影响。研究结果显示:加强知识产权保护对发展中国家FDI的影响受到经济发展水平、市场规模、吸收能力、开放政策、关税政策和制度质量等东道国特征的制约。知识产权保护对FDI的影响存在显著的行业特征:对于那些技术含量低或不易模仿的行业如劳动密集型和资本密集型行业,东道国知识产权保护强度对FDI的影响不显著;而对于那些技术含量高或较易模仿的行业如技术密集型行业,知识产权保护强度对FDI的影响非常显著。     

Go West Young Man: Self‐Selection and Endogenous Property Rights

If, as Hume argues, property is a self‐referring custom of a group of people, then property rights depend on how that group forms and orders itself. In this article we investigate how people construct a convention for property in an experiment in which groups of self‐selected individuals can migrate between three geographically separate regions. To test a hypothesis of Demsetz's, we vary across two treatments the external benefits of migrating. We find that self‐selection has a powerful effect on establishing conventions of property and begetting increases in wealth through exchange and specialization. We also find support for the Demsetz hypothesis.     

知识产权保护、资源禀赋与FDI技术选择——来自我国FDI企业面板数据的经验分析

充分考虑我国宏观环境因素及外资企业自身要素禀赋特征,本文考察了知识产权保护制度对在华外资企业技术选择的影响及在不同技术水平企业间的体现,并诠释了其作用渠道。系统GMM及分位数估计结果提供了知识产权保护促进外资企业技术水平的证据,适度技术水平外资企业更易受益于我国知识产权制度的完善。知识产权保护主要通过"市场需求拉动"改变外资企业技术选择,"技术资源驱动"的作用并不显著。     

贸易、知识产权与出口企业创新:基于美国337调查的实证分析

在全球经济一体化背景下,开放的贸易制度和知识产权制度同时影响着企业的创新活动。由于知识产权制度的地域性特征和有条件的国民待遇原则,国外知识产权保护可能对中国企业的出口创新活动存在正反两方面影响:一是当出口企业具有较强的创新能力时,国外知识产权保护可能会激励企业创新,以强化对出口市场的占有;二是当出口企业缺乏持续创新的能力时,由贸易制度获得的市场份额可能会因为国外严格的知识产权制度而丢失,从而抑制了出口创新活动。由于中国是一个转型国家,在转型期获得的技术储备大多来自于发达国家的技术扩散,因此在面对国外严格的知识产权制度环境时,必然面临更大的压力。然而这一压力对中国企业的出口创新活动是激励还是抑制却并没有文献进行研究。文章基于《中国工业数据库》和《海关数据库》中的企业数据,使用PSM-DID方法实证分析了美国337调查对中国出口企业自主创新活动的影响。分析发现:(1)337调查对中国出口企业创新存在着显著的正向影响;(2)从OECD技术分类标准出发,337调查对高技术企业的激励作用要大于中高和中低技术的企业;(3)337调查对1998年之后开业的新企业存在着明显的激励作用,而对1998年之前开业的老企业而言,激励大小和显著性水平都不如新企业;(4)从控股的资本来源上看,337调查对在华外资控股的企业存在显著的激励作用,而对本地中资企业的激励作用相对较弱。     

An Economic Analysis of Audit and Nonaudit Services: The Trade‐off between Competition Crossovers and Knowledge Spillovers*

In this paper, I present a model in which both markets for audit services and nonaudit services (NAS) are oligopolistic. Accounting firms providing both audit services and NAS will employ oligopolistic competition in each of these markets. In addition to auditors' gaining “knowledge spillovers” from auditing to consulting or vice versa, oligopolistic competition in one market will influence the counterpart in the other market ‐ what I call “competition crossovers”. Although scope economies due to knowledge spillovers (for example, cost savings) are always beneficial to auditors, such benefits can entice accounting firms to adopt strategies (for example, price reductions) to compete aggressively in the audit market so that some, or all, firms become worse off. A trade‐off arises between these two economic forces in the two oligopolistic markets. Given the trade‐off between competition crossovers and knowledge spillovers, accounting firms may not reduce their audit prices, even though supplying NAS enables firms to decrease auditing costs — a nontrivial impact of oligopolistic competition in two markets on audit pricing. The empirical implication of my results is that because of competition‐crossover effects between the auditing and consulting service markets, finding empirical evidence for knowledge‐spillover benefits is likely to be difficult. Control variables for “audit‐market concentration” concerned with competition‐crossover effects and “auditor expertise” concerned with knowledge‐spillover benefits should be included in audit‐fee regressions to increase the power of empirical tests. With regard to policy implications, my analyses help explain the impact of the Sarbanes‐Oxley Act on “market segmentation” and, hence, the profitability of accounting firms.