IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/ecjilt/23839.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The TRIPS Disagreement: Should GATT Traditions Have Been Abandoned?

Author

Listed:
  • Gaisford, James D.
  • Richardson, R. Stephen

Abstract

The world standards for patents and copyrights established by the Agreement on Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) have been controversial from their inception. This article establishes parallels between cooperative increases in the duration of intellectual property protection and cooperative reductions in tariff protection. Whereas a country's tariffs lead to unintended harm to other countries, its intellectual property protection generates unintended benefits. The long-established GATT principle of trade liberalization has traditionally achieved mutual gains for countries of all types through symmetric tariff rate cuts that result in different final rates. By contrast, the TRIPS agreement created the likelihood of losses for developing countries by requiring asymmetric increases in patents and copyrights to establish common worldwide standards. The technical annex to this paper formalizes the analysis with a simple model of North-South patent protection. Sample calculations suggest a decline in the net benefits from innovation in developing countries in the order of 40 percent.

Suggested Citation

  • Gaisford, James D. & Richardson, R. Stephen, 2001. "The TRIPS Disagreement: Should GATT Traditions Have Been Abandoned?," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 1(2), pages 1-15.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ecjilt:23839
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.23839
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/23839/files/01020137.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.23839?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Diwan, Ishac & Rodrik, Dani, 1991. "Patents, appropriate technology, and North-South trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1-2), pages 27-47, February.
    2. repec:bla:econom:v:59:y:1992:i:233:p:35-51 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Johnson, William R, 1985. "The Economics of Copying," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(1), pages 158-174, February.
    4. Suzanne Scotchmer & Jerry Green, 1990. "Novelty and Disclosure in Patent Law," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 131-146, Spring.
    5. Maskus, Keith E. & Penubarti, Mohan, 1995. "How trade-related are intellectual property rights?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3-4), pages 227-248, November.
    6. Stanley M. Besen & Leo J. Raskind, 1991. "An Introduction to the Law and Economics of Intellectual Property," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 3-27, Winter.
    7. Helpman, Elhanan, 1993. "Innovation, Imitation, and Intellectual Property Rights," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(6), pages 1247-1280, November.
    8. Paul Klemperer, 1990. "How Broad Should the Scope of Patent Protection Be?," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 113-130, Spring.
    9. James R. Markusen, 2021. "Contracts, intellectual property rights, and multinational investment in developing countries," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: BROADENING TRADE THEORY Incorporating Market Realities into Traditional Models, chapter 8, pages 159-174, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. R. Stephen Richardson & James D. Gaisford, 1996. "North-South Disputes over the Protection of Intellectual Property," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 29(s1), pages 376-381, April.
    11. Richard Gilbert & Carl Shapiro, 1990. "Optimal Patent Length and Breadth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 106-112, Spring.
    12. Subramanian, Arvind, 1991. "The international economics of intellectual property right protection: A welfare-theoretic trade policy analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 19(8), pages 945-956, August.
    13. Alison Butler, 1990. "The trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights: what is at stake?," Review, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, issue Nov, pages 34-46.
    14. M. Scott Taylor, 1993. "TRIPS, Trade, and Technology Transfer," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 26(3), pages 625-637, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. GianCarlo Moschini, 2004. "Intellectual Property Rights and the World Trade Organization: Retrospect and Prospects," Chapters, in: Giovanni Anania & Mary E.. Bohman & Colin A. Carter & Alex F. McCalla (ed.), Agricultural Policy Reform and the WTO, chapter 19, pages 474-511, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Kerr, William A., 2008. "Trade Agreements: The Important Role of Transparency," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12.
    3. Gaisford, James D., 2002. "Agricultural Biotechnology and the FTAA: Issues and Opportunities," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 3(2), pages 1-18.
    4. Ivus, Olena, 2010. "Do stronger patent rights raise high-tech exports to the developing world?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 38-47, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gaisford, James D. & Richardson, R. Stephen, 2000. "The TRIPS Disagreement: Should GATT Traditions Have Been Abandoned? Technical Annex," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 1(2), pages 1-19.
    2. Anja, Breitwieser & Neil, Foster, 2012. "Intellectual property rights, innovation and technology transfer: a survey," MPRA Paper 36094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Hudson, John & Minea, Alexandru, 2013. "Innovation, Intellectual Property Rights, and Economic Development: A Unified Empirical Investigation," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 66-78.
    4. Lu, Louis Y.Y. & Liu, John S., 2016. "A novel approach to identify the major research themes and development trajectory: The case of patenting research," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 71-82.
    5. Leonard F.S. Wang & Arijit Mukherjee, 2014. "Patent Protection, Innovation and Technology Licensing," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3-4), pages 245-254, December.
    6. Elif Bascavusoglu & Maria Pluvia Zuniga, 2005. "The effects of intellectual property protection on international knowledge contracting," Cahiers de la Maison des Sciences Economiques bla05009, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1).
    7. McAusland, Carol & Kuhn, Peter, 2011. "Bidding for brains: Intellectual property rights and the international migration of knowledge workers," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(1), pages 77-87, May.
    8. Stephen P. A. Brown & William C. Gruben, 1997. "Intellectual property rights and product effectiveness," Economic and Financial Policy Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, issue Q IV, pages 15-20.
    9. Yang, Xuebing, 2013. "Horizontal inventive step and international protection of intellectual property," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 338-355.
    10. Wisniewski, Suzanne L.W., 2003. "Effects Of Foreign Intellectual Property Rights On U.S. Bilateral Exports Of Biotechnology Related Agricultural Inputs," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22222, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    11. David Moroz, 2005. "Production of Scientific Knowledge and Radical Uncertainty: The Limits of the Normative Approach in Innovation Economics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 305-322, November.
    12. Asongu Simplice & Antonio R. Andrés, 2012. "Fighting software piracy: which governance tools matter in Africa?," Working Papers of the African Governance and Development Institute. 12/017, African Governance and Development Institute..
    13. Bessy, Christian & Brousseau, Eric, 1998. "Technology licensing contracts features and diversity1," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 451-489, December.
    14. GianCarlo Moschini, 2004. "Intellectual Property Rights and the World Trade Organization: Retrospect and Prospects," Chapters, in: Giovanni Anania & Mary E.. Bohman & Colin A. Carter & Alex F. McCalla (ed.), Agricultural Policy Reform and the WTO, chapter 19, pages 474-511, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Wright, Brian D. & Pardey, Philip G. & Nottenburg, Carol & Koo, Bonwoo, 2007. "Agricultural Innovation: Investments and Incentives," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: Robert Evenson & Prabhu Pingali (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 48, pages 2533-2603, Elsevier.
    16. James R. Markusen, 2021. "Contracts, intellectual property rights, and multinational investment in developing countries," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: BROADENING TRADE THEORY Incorporating Market Realities into Traditional Models, chapter 8, pages 159-174, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    17. Antonio Andrés & Simplice Asongu, 2013. "Fighting Software Piracy: Which Governance Tools Matter in Africa?," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 667-682, December.
    18. Antonio Andrés, 2006. "The relationship between copyright software protection and piracy: Evidence from europe," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 29-51, January.
    19. Josh Lerner, 2002. "Patent Protection and Innovation Over 150 Years," NBER Working Papers 8977, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Belton M. Fleisher & Mi Zhou, 2010. "Are Patent Laws Harmful to Developing Countries? Evidence from China," Working Papers 09-07, Ohio State University, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    International Relations/Trade;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ecjilt:23839. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/esteyca.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.