IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rripxx/v21y2014i2p275-309.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Paradigm shift in the global IP regime: The agency of academics

Author

Listed:
  • Jean-Fr�d�ric Morin

Abstract

The global intellectual property (IP) regime is in the midst of a paradigm shift in favour of greater access to protected work. Current explanations of this paradigm shift emphasize the agency of transnational advocacy networks, but ignore the role of academics. Scholars interested in global IP politics have failed to engage in reflexive thinking. Building on the results from a survey of 1679 IP experts, this article argues that a community of academics successfully broke the policy monopoly of practitioners over IP expertise. They instilled some scepticism concerning the social and economic impacts of IP among their students as well as in the broader community of IP experts. They also provided expert knowledge that was widely amplified by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and some intergovernmental organizations, acting as echo chambers to reach national decision makers. By making these claims, this article illustrates how epistemic communities actively collaborate with other transnational networks, rather than competing with them, and how they can promote a paradigm change by generating, rather than reducing, uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean-Fr�d�ric Morin, 2014. "Paradigm shift in the global IP regime: The agency of academics," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 275-309, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rripxx:v:21:y:2014:i:2:p:275-309
    DOI: 10.1080/09692290.2013.819812
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09692290.2013.819812
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09692290.2013.819812?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
    ---><---

    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. James Bessen & Michael J. Meurer, 2008. "Introduction to Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk," Introductory Chapters, in: Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk, Princeton University Press.
    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. Himick, Darlene & Brivot, Marion, 2018. "Carriers of ideas in accounting standard-setting and financialization: The role of epistemic communities," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 29-44.
    2. Justus Dreyling, 2021. "Institutional Complexity and Opportunity Structures: Weaker Actor Influence in International Intellectual Property Regulation," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(S4), pages 37-46, May.
    3. Jean-Frédéric Morin & Richard E. Gold, 2014. "An Integrated Model of Legal Transplantation: The Diffusion of Intellectual Property Law in Developing Countries," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/149496, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    4. Jean-Frédéric Morin, 2020. "Concentration despite competition: The organizational ecology of technical assistance providers," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 75-107, January.
    5. Madison Cartwright, 2021. "Business conflict and international law: The political economy of copyright in the United States," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 152-167, January.
    6. Cynthia Couette, 2024. "Epistemic competition in global governance: The case of pharmaceutical patents," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 15(3), pages 516-527, June.

    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. Iain M. Cockburn & Megan J. MacGarvie, 2011. "Entry and Patenting in the Software Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 915-933, May.
    2. Krzysztof Klincewicz & Szymon Szumiał, 2022. "Successful patenting—not only how, but with whom: the importance of patent attorneys," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(9), pages 5111-5137, September.
    3. Danai Christopoulou & Nikolaos Papageorgiadis & Chengang Wang & Georgios Magkonis, 2021. "IPR Law Protection and Enforcement and the Effect on Horizontal Productivity Spillovers from Inward FDI to Domestic Firms: A Meta-analysis," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 235-266, April.
    4. Gaétan de Rassenfosse & Adam B. Jaffe, 2018. "Are patent fees effective at weeding out low‐quality patents?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(1), pages 134-148, March.
    5. Turner, John L., 2018. "Input complementarity, patent trolls and unproductive entrepreneurship," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 168-203.
    6. Ben Klemens, 2021. "Attributing Value to Patents and Trademarks in Complex Production Chains," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(2), pages 842-875, June.
    7. William Kingston, 2014. "Schumpeter and the end of Western Capitalism," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 449-477, July.
    8. Fischer, Timo & Henkel, Joachim, 2012. "Patent trolls on markets for technology – An empirical analysis of NPEs’ patent acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1519-1533.
    9. Douglas Hanley, 2014. "Innovation, Technological Interdependence, and Economic Growth," Working Paper 533, Department of Economics, University of Pittsburgh, revised Jan 2014.
    10. Ryan, Michael P., 2010. "Patent Incentives, Technology Markets, and Public-Private Bio-Medical Innovation Networks in Brazil," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1082-1093, August.
    11. Suma Athreye & Lucia Piscitello & Kenneth C. Shadlen, 2020. "Twenty-five years since TRIPS: Patent policy and international business," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(4), pages 315-328, December.
    12. Arjan van Rooij, 2012. "Claim and control: The functions of patents in the example of Berkel , 1898--1948," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(7), pages 1118-1141, October.
    13. Sudipto Bhattacharya & Sergei Guriev, 2013. "Control Rights Over Intellectual Property," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 564-591, September.
    14. Clancy, Matthew, 2015. "Combinatorial Innovation and Research Strategies: Theoretical Framework and Empirical Evidence from Two Centuries of Patent Data," Staff General Research Papers Archive 38400, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    15. Scott, Peter & Spadavecchia, Anna, 2023. "Patents, industry control, and the rise of the giant American corporation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    16. Dosi, Giovanni & Palagi, Elisa & Roventini, Andrea & Russo, Emanuele, 2023. "Do patents really foster innovation in the pharmaceutical sector? Results from an evolutionary, agent-based model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 564-589.
    17. Kelvin W. Willoughby, 2013. "Intellectual Property Management And Technological Entrepreneurship," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 10(06), pages 1-42.
    18. Useche, Diego, 2014. "Are patents signals for the IPO market? An EU–US comparison for the software industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(8), pages 1299-1311.
    19. Escolar, Emerson G. & Hiraoka, Yasuaki & Igami, Mitsuru & Ozcan, Yasin, 2023. "Mapping firms’ locations in technological space: A topological analysis of patent statistics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(8).
    20. Cheng, Yu & Huang, Lucheng & Ramlogan, Ronnie & Li, Xin, 2017. "Forecasting of potential impacts of disruptive technology in promising technological areas: Elaborating the SIRS epidemic model in RFID technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 170-183.

    More about this item

    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:taf:rripxx:v:21:y:2014:i:2:p:275-309. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rrip20 .

    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.