IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/deveco/v90y2009i1p50-56.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the strength of intellectual property protection that nations provide

Author

Listed:
  • Kanwar, Sunil
  • Evenson, Robert

Abstract

Researchers studying the commitment of countries to intellectual property rights run into the claim that the technology-haves (the developed countries) opt for relatively stronger protection of intellectual property, whereas the technology-have-nots (the developing countries) opt for weaker protection. It is but a short step from this assertion to the claim that this results in huge trade losses for the former. Using cross-national panel data for 1981-2000 we find that the evidence is only weakly consistent with this conjecture at best; and that the technology-have-nots more likely provided weaker protection due to paucity of financial resources and human capital, and their inward-looking trade-orientation.

Suggested Citation

  • Kanwar, Sunil & Evenson, Robert, 2009. "On the strength of intellectual property protection that nations provide," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 50-56, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:deveco:v:90:y:2009:i:1:p:50-56
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304-3878(08)00130-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1990. "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 172-187, Spring.
    3. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ginarte, Juan C. & Park, Walter G., 1997. "Determinants of patent rights: A cross-national study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 283-301, October.
    5. Geroski, P A & Walters, C F, 1995. "Innovative Activity over the Business Cycle," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(431), pages 916-928, July.
    6. Samuel S. Kortum, 1997. "Research, Patenting, and Technological Change," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(6), pages 1389-1420, November.
    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. Li, Yan & Zhang, Yiren & Hu, Jian & Wang, Zeyu, 2024. "Insight into the nexus between intellectual property pledge financing and enterprise innovation: A systematic analysis with multidimensional perspectives," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 93(PA), pages 700-719.
    2. Ang, James B., 2010. "Financial Reforms, Patent Protection, and Knowledge Accumulation in India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1070-1081, August.
    3. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2023. "The Least developed countries' TRIPS Waiver and the Strength of Intellectual Property Protection," EconStor Preprints 271537, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    4. Wantao Chen & Xiang Yu & Wei Yang, 2024. "International trademark protection strength: 1990–2020," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(7), pages 3168-3198, July.
    5. 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.
    6. Chen, Wantao & Yu, Xiang & Yang, Wei, 2024. "Is worldwide patent protection converging? A cross-country index of patent protection strength 1990–2020," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    7. Qianqian Gu & Lei Hang, 2022. "A Game Analysis-Based Behavioral Interaction Framework between Governments and Innovative Enterprises for Intellectual Property Regulation Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-20, May.
    8. Kristina M. Lybecker, 2014. "Innovation and Technology Dissemination in Clean Technology Markets and The Developing World: The Role of Trade, Intellectual Property Rights, and Uncertainty," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 10(2), pages 7-38.
    9. Gallini, Nancy, 2015. "Promoting Competition by Coordinating Prices: When Rivals Share Intellectual Property," Economics working papers nancy_gallini-2015-22, Vancouver School of Economics, revised 07 Dec 2015.
    10. Demir, Caner, 2016. "Do Technology Transfer and IPR Spur Domestic Innovation?: An International Panel Data Analysis," MPRA Paper 76693, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Tuan Doanh Le & Duong Phuong Thao Pham & Tuan Bach Le, 2019. "The Relationship Between Financial Development and Innovation: Empirical Evidence from Selected Asian Countries," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 67(1), pages 287-298.
    12. Wen Chen, 2017. "Do stronger intellectual property rights lead to more R&D-intensive imports?," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(7), pages 865-883, October.
    13. Lisa D. Cook & Chaleampong Kongcharoen, 2010. "The Idea Gap in Pink and Black," NBER Working Papers 16331, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2023. "The least developed countries' transitional exemption in the TRIPS agreement and the strength of intellectual property protection," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).

    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. Sunil Kanwar, 2002. "Does Intellectual Property Lead to Intellectual Property Protection?," Working papers 108, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    2. de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Dernis, Hélène & Guellec, Dominique & Picci, Lucio & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2013. "The worldwide count of priority patents: A new indicator of inventive activity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 720-737.
    3. Ufuk Akcigit & William Kerr, 2015. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovation, Second Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 15-020, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 25 Mar 2015.
    4. Nicolas van Zeebroeck & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "Filing strategies and patent value," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 539-561, February.
    5. Archontakis, Fragiskos & Varsakelis, Nikos C., 2017. "Patenting abroad: Evidence from OECD countries," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 62-69.
    6. Ufuk Akcigit & William R. Kerr, 2018. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1374-1443.
    7. Fabio Montobbio & Annalisa Primi & Valerio Sterzi, 2015. "IPRs and International Knowledge Flows: Evidence from Six Large Emerging Countries," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 106(2), pages 187-204, April.
    8. Sirio Aramonte, 2015. "Innovation, investor sentiment, and firm-level experimentation," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2015-67, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    9. Gao, Wenlian & Chou, Julia, 2015. "Innovation efficiency, global diversification, and firm value," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 278-298.
    10. Sirio Aramonte & Matthew Carl, 2021. "Firm-level R&D after periods of intense technological innovation: the role of investor sentiment," BIS Working Papers 916, Bank for International Settlements.
    11. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2013_028 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Ufuk Akcigit & William R. Kerr, 2018. "Growth through Heterogeneous Innovations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(4), pages 1374-1443.
    13. Burhan, Muqbil & Singh, Anil K. & Jain, Sudhir K., 2017. "Patents as proxy for measuring innovations: A case of changing patent filing behavior in Indian public funded research organizations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 181-190.
    14. Nguyen, Quoc Phu & Vo, Duc Hong, 2022. "Artificial intelligence and unemployment:An international evidence," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 40-55.
    15. Kyriakos Drivas & Claire Economidou & Elena Ketteni & Konstantina Kottaridi, 2021. "Firms’ knowledge investment and market responses," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(5), pages 2363-2394, November.
    16. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    17. Josh Lerner, 2002. "Where Does State Street Lead? A First Look at Finance Patents, 1971 to 2000," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(2), pages 901-930, April.
    18. Guan-Can Yang & Gang Li & Chun-Ya Li & Yun-Hua Zhao & Jing Zhang & Tong Liu & Dar-Zen Chen & Mu-Hsuan Huang, 2015. "Using the comprehensive patent citation network (CPC) to evaluate patent value," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 1319-1346, December.
    19. Jos� Lobo & Charlotta Mellander & Kevin Stolarick & Deborah Strumsky, 2014. "The Inventive, the Educated and the Creative: How Do They Affect Metropolitan Productivity?," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 155-177, February.
    20. Stephen G. Dimmock & Jiekun Huang & Scott J. Weisbenner, 2022. "Give Me Your Tired, Your Poor, Your High-Skilled Labor: H-1B Lottery Outcomes and Entrepreneurial Success," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(9), pages 6950-6970, September.
    21. Fontana, Roberto & Nuvolari, Alessandro & Shimizu, Hiroshi & Vezzulli, Andrea, 2013. "Reassessing patent propensity: Evidence from a dataset of R&D awards, 1977–2004," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(10), pages 1780-1792.

    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:eee:deveco:v:90:y:2009:i:1:p:50-56. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/devec .

    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.