IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/36448.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Public sector IP management in the life sciences: reconciling practice and policy

Author

Listed:
  • Taubman, Antony
  • Ghafele, Roya

Abstract

This chapter reviews the options for effective public sector management of intellectual property (IP) in the life sciences, focusing on the need for a judicious, pragmatic choice of options along two axes: (1) deployment of exclusive rights over technology and (2) use of market mechanisms to bring a new technology to the public. The essence of public sector IP management is finding the right settings along these two axes that will deliver tangible outcomes in line with defined public-interest objectives. Experience shows that ex ante assumptions about how to gain optimal leverage from exclusive rights, and the appropriate degree of reliance on market mechanisms, are unlikely to serve a public sector IP manager well. In clarifying objectives and the practical means of achieving them, pragmatic coordination between the practical and policy levels is essential. Public sector IP managers are more likely to be assessed against public interest expectations than their private sector colleagues. In IP management in the life sciences, policy and practice are ultimately two sides of the same coin; practitioners cannot hope, expect, or plan to operate outside the broader policy perspective. Policy-makers therefore need to consider the actual practice of IP management when assessing a policy framework for innovation in the life sciences. IP managers should be open to using legal mechanisms flexibly for inclusion, or exclusion, as required to achieve their goals. Finally, managers should seek mechanisms to pragmatically structure and promote partnerships with those who have the resources necessary to bring life-sciences innovation to the public. Such partnerships may be centered in the public, philanthropic, or private sectors, but more likely fall into a hybrid mix of these categories.

Suggested Citation

  • Taubman, Antony & Ghafele, Roya, 2007. "Public sector IP management in the life sciences: reconciling practice and policy," MPRA Paper 36448, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:36448
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/36448/1/MPRA_paper_36448.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Smarzynska Javorcik, Beata, 2004. "The composition of foreign direct investment and protection of intellectual property rights: Evidence from transition economies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 39-62, February.
    2. 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.
    3. Nancy T. Gallini, 1992. "Patent Policy and Costly Imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 23(1), pages 52-63, Spring.
    4. Gehl Sampath, Padmashree, 2006. "Breaking the Fence: Patent Rights and Biomedical Innovation in 'Technology Followers'," MERIT Working Papers 2006-008, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    5. Horowitz, Andrew W & Lai, Edwin L-C, 1996. "Patent Length and the Rate of Innovation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(4), pages 785-801, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Anja, Breitwieser & Neil, Foster, 2012. "Intellectual property rights, innovation and technology transfer: a survey," MPRA Paper 36094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. 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).
    3. Lee Branstetter & Raymond Fisman & C. Fritz Foley, 2005. "Do Stronger Intellectual Property Rights Increase International Technology Transfer? Empirical Evidence from U.S. Firm-Level Data," NBER Working Papers 11516, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Lin, Jenny X. & Lincoln, William F., 2017. "Pirate's treasure," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 235-245.
    5. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Biancini, Sara & Paillacar, Rodrigo, 2023. "Intellectual property rights protection and trade: An empirical analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    6. Intan Hamdan-Livramento, 2009. "How compliant are developing countries with their TRIPS obligations?," CEMI Working Papers cemi-workingpaper-2009-00, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Collège du Management de la Technologie, Management of Technology and Entrepreneurship Institute, Chaire en Economie et Management de l'Innovation.
    7. Gideon Ndubuisi, 2024. "Patent Enforcement and Quality Upgrading of Exported Products," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(3), pages 13979-14011, September.
    8. Nagano, Mamoru, 2013. "Similarities and differences among cross-border M&A and greenfield FDI determinants: Evidence from Asia and Oceania," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 100-118.
    9. Edwin L Lai, 2004. "The Economics of Intellectual Property Protection in the Global Economy," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000000481, David K. Levine.
    10. Fatten Gazzah & Jean Bonnet & Sana El Harbi, 2017. "Exploring the Relationship between Micro-Enterprises and Regional Development: Evidence from Tunisia," Post-Print halshs-01910346, HAL.
    11. Nabokin, Tatjana, 2014. "Global Investment Decisions and Patent Protection: Evidence from German Multinationals," Discussion Papers in Economics 21266, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    12. Papageorgiadis, Nikolaos & McDonald, Frank, 2019. "Defining and Measuring the Institutional Context of National Intellectual Property Systems in a post-TRIPS world," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 3-18.
    13. Kanwar, Sunil, 2007. "Intellectual Property Protection and Technology Transfer: Evidence From US Multinationals," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt606508js, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    14. 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.
    15. Montobbio, Fabio & Sterzi, Valerio, 2013. "The Globalization of Technology in Emerging Markets: A Gravity Model on the Determinants of International Patent Collaborations," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 281-299.
    16. Maggie Xiaoyang Chen & Murat Iyigun, 2011. "Patent Protection and Strategic Delays in Technology Development: Implications for Economic Growth," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(1), pages 211-232, July.
    17. Biancini, Sara & Bombarda, Pamela, 2021. "Intellectual property rights, multinational firms and technology transfers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 191-210.
    18. Ryuhei Wakasugi & Banri Ito, 2009. "The effects of stronger intellectual property rights on technology transfer: evidence from Japanese firm-level data," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 145-158, April.
    19. Jenny X. Lin & William Lincoln, 2017. "Pirate’s Treasure," Working Papers 17-51, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    20. Ilayda Nemlioglu & Sushanta K. Mallick, 2017. "Do Managerial Practices Matter in Innovation and Firm Performance Relations? New Evidence from the UK," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 23(5), pages 1016-1061, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Public Interest Intellectual Property Management; Agricultural Biotechnology; Developing Countries;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • F59 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - Other

    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:pra:mprapa:36448. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.