IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/cegedp/32.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Geistige Eigentumsrechte im Welthandel: Stellt das TRIPs-Abkommen ein Protektionsinstrument der Industrieländer dar?

Author

Listed:
  • Stremmel, Dennis

Abstract

Geistige Eigentumsrechte gewinnen in Zuge der Globalisierung eine immer grössere Bedeutung. Neue Produktionstechniken, schnellere Kommunikationswege und nicht zuletzt die rasante Entwicklung der neuen Medien erleichtern zunehmend Imitationen, Kopien und Piraterie. Im Jahre 1995 wurde mit der Implementierung des TRIPs-Abkommens ein sehr grosser Schritt in Richtung globale Harmonisierung geistiger Eigentumsrechte vollzogen. Ein global verbindlicher Schutzrechtsstandard auf geistiges Eigentum soll nach Auffassung der Befürworter des TRIPs-Abkommens globale Wohlstandsverluste aus Imitationen, Kopien und Piraterie verhindern. Kritiker bezeichnen das TRIPs-Abkommen hingegen als protektionistisches Instrument der Industrieländer mit dem alleinigen Ziel, den Entwicklungsländern dauerhaft den Zugang zu neuen Technologien zu verwehren und sich so vor einem potentiellen Wettbewerb mit Niedriglohnländern zu schützen. Der vorliegende Beitrag soll zwei Punkte klären: zum einen wird untersucht, ob das TRIPs-Abkommen aus ordnungspolitischer Sicht generell abzulehnen ist und zum anderen wie die tatsächliche Ausgestaltung des Abkommens im Hinblick auf ihren Protektionsgehalt zu beurteilen ist.

Suggested Citation

  • Stremmel, Dennis, 2004. "Geistige Eigentumsrechte im Welthandel: Stellt das TRIPs-Abkommen ein Protektionsinstrument der Industrieländer dar?," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 32, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:cegedp:32
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/22159/1/Stremmel_32.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keith E. Maskus, 2000. "Intellectual Property Rights in the Global Economy," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 99, April.
    2. Connolly, Michelle, 2003. "The dual nature of trade: measuring its impact on imitation and growth," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 31-55, October.
    3. Abbott, Frederick M, 1998. "The Enduring Enigma of Trips: A Challenge for the World Economic System," Journal of International Economic Law, Oxford University Press, vol. 1(4), pages 497-521, December.
    4. Nicole Zürcher Fausch, 2002. "Die Problematik der Nutzung von Zwangslizenzen durch Staaten ohne eigene Pharmaindustrie," Aussenwirtschaft, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science, Swiss Institute for International Economics and Applied Economics Research, vol. 57(04), pages 495-522, December.
    5. Mazzoleni, Roberto & Nelson, Richard R., 1998. "The benefits and costs of strong patent protection: a contribution to the current debate," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 273-284, July.
    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. repec:got:cegedp:32 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Panle Jia & Pinelopi K. Goldberg & Shubham Chaudhuri, 2006. "Estimating the Effects of Global Patent Protection in Pharmaceuticals: A Case Study of Quinolones in India," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1477-1514, December.
    3. Jung Kwan Kim & Ram Mudambi, 2020. "An ecosystem-based analysis of design innovation infringements: South Korea and China in the global tire industry," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(1), pages 38-57, March.
    4. Joseph Savirimuthu, 2003. "The Corporate Pharmaceutical Model and the Legacy of Doha: Whither a Global Consensus on Public Health Governance?," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 4(1), pages 73-98, March.
    5. Mercedes Campi & Marco Dueñas & Matteo Barigozzi & Giorgio Fagiolo, 2019. "Intellectual property rights, imitation, and development. The effect on cross-border mergers and acquisitions," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 230-256, February.
    6. Gnanaraj Chellaraj & Ramesh Govindaraj, 2002. "The Indian Pharmaceutical Sector : Issues and Options for Health Sector Reform," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 15231.
    7. Alexandre Almeida & Aurora A.C. Teixeira, 2008. "One size does not fit all… An economic development perspective on the asymmetric impact of Patents on R&D," FEP Working Papers 292, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    8. Roffe, Pedro & Santa Cruz, Maximiliano, 2007. "Intellectual property rights and sustainable development: a survey of major issues," Documentos de Proyectos 3591, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    9. Lederman, Daniel & Saenz, Laura, 2005. "Innovation and development around the world, 1960-2000," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3774, The World Bank.
    10. 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.
    11. Dilani Hirimuthugodage, 2011. "The Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Agreement and Agriculture in South Asia," South Asia Economic Journal, Institute of Policy Studies of Sri Lanka, vol. 12(2), pages 287-305, September.
    12. Shiyuan Pan & Heng-fu Zou & Tailong Li, 2010. "Patent Protection, Technological Change and Wage Inequality," CEMA Working Papers 437, China Economics and Management Academy, Central University of Finance and Economics.
    13. 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.
    14. Dolfsma, W.A., 2006. "IPRs, Technological Development, and Economic Development," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2006-004-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    15. Gauguier, Jean-Jacques, 2009. "L’industrialisation de l’Open Source," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/4388 edited by Toledano, Joëlle.
    16. Eric W. Bond & Kamal Saggi, 2023. "Compulsory licensing, price controls, and access to patented foreign products," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kamal Saggi (ed.), Technology Transfer, Foreign Direct Investment, and the Protection of Intellectual Property in the Global Economy, chapter 19, pages 437-448, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    17. Lin, Jenny X. & Lincoln, William F., 2017. "Pirate's treasure," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 235-245.
    18. Desbordes, Rodolphe & Vicard, Vincent, 2009. "Foreign direct investment and bilateral investment treaties: An international political perspective," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 372-386, September.
    19. Penin, Julien, 2005. "Patents versus ex post rewards: A new look," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 641-656, June.
    20. Patricia Laurens & Christian Le Bas & Antoine Schoen, 2019. "Worldwide IP coverage of patented inventions in large pharma firms: to what extent do the internationalisation of R&D and firm strategy matter?," Post-Print hal-01725229, HAL.
    21. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Intellectual Property Rights; Public Goods; Knowledge; WTO; TRIPs;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F0 - International Economics - - General
    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade
    • F2 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business

    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:zbw:cegedp:32. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cdgoede.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.