Does intellectual property lead to economic growth? Insights from a novel IP dataset (original) (raw)
Related papers
Regulation and Governance, 2019
While policymakers often make bold claims on the positive impact of intellectual property (IP) rights on both developed and developing country economies, the empirical literature is more ambiguous. IP rights have both incentive and inhibitory effects that are difficult to isolate in the abstract and dependent on economic context. To unravel these contradictory effects, this article introduces an index that evaluates the strength of IP protection in 124 developing countries for the years 1995 to 2011. We illustrate the value of this index to economics study and show evidence that is consistent with IP leading to increased growth. Our results are further consistent with two causal pathways highlighted in the literature: that IP leads to greater levels of technology transfer and increased domestic inventive activity. Yet, other aspects of our study fit uneasily with this simple story. We find, for example, evidence suggesting that increased levels of growth lead to greater levels of IP protection, contradictory evidence in the literature linking IP with growth, a lack of evidence that increased levels of IP protection lead to actual use of the IP system and problems with what IP indexes measure. Because of this, we suggest another – and so far undertheorized – explanation of the links between IP and growth: that IP may have few direct effects on growth and that any causality is due to belief rather than actual deployment of IP.
Does Intellectual Property Lead to Economic Growth? Insights from an Improved IP Dataset
Social Science Research Network, 2017
While policymakers often make bold claims as to the positive impact of intellectual property (IP) rights on both developed and developing country economies, the empirical literature is more ambiguous. IP rights have both incentive and inhibitory effects that are difficult to isolate in the abstract and are dependent on economic context. To unravel these contradictory effects, this article introduces an index that evaluates the strength of IP protection in 124 developing countries for the years 1995 to 2011. We illustrate the value of this index to economics study and show evidence that is consistent with IP leading to increased growth. Our results are further consistent with two causal pathways highlighted in the literature: that IP leads to greater levels of technology transfer and increased domestic inventive activity. Yet other aspects of our study fit uneasily with this simple story. For example, we find evidence suggesting that increased levels of growth lead to greater levels of IP protection, contradictory evidence in the literature linking IP with growth, a lack of evidence that increased levels of IP protection lead to actual use of the IP system, and problems with what IP indexes measure. Because of this, we suggest anotherand so far undertheorizedexplanation of the links between IP and growth: that IP may have few direct effects on growth and that any causality is a result of belief rather than actual deployment of IP.
2011
This paper examines how the role of patents and utility models in innovation and economic growth varies by level of economic development. Using a panel dataset of over 70 countries, we find that patent protection is an important determinant of innovation and that patentable innovations contribute to economic growth in developed countries, but not in developing. Instead, in developing economies, a minor form of intellectual property rights (IPRs)–namely utility models–is conducive to innovation and growth, controlling for other factors.
Intellectual property rights, political risk and economic growth in developing countries
Journal of Economics and International Finance, 2009
This paper examines the impact of intellectual property rights (IPRs) on economic growth for a crosssection of 73 developing countries over a period of 19 years (1985-2003). The results of the study indicate that: 1) strengthening IPRs has a negative effect on economic growth; 2) the impact of patent protection on economic growth after the TRIPS agreement is far and above that of the pre-TRIPS era; 3) domestic investment and good economic and political institutional infrastructure are positively correlated with economic growth.
Intellectual Property Rights and Economic Growth
Contemporary Economic Policy, 1997
and physical capital. The positive effects of IPRs on factor accumulation, particularly of R&D capital, are present even when the analysis controls for a more general measure of property rights. (JEL 034, 040)
2000
Following the conclusion of the TRIPS Agreement, much has been written on the potential costs and benefits of stronger Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) protection in terms of growth and technology transfer, particularly for developing countries. This paper reviews this literature and provides new evidence linking protection of IPRs to economic growth, innovation and technology diffusion. Results suggest that while stronger IPR protection can ultimately reap rewards in terms of greater domestic innovation and increased technology diffusion in developing countries with sufficient capacity to innovate, it has little impact on innovation and diffusion in those developing countries without such capacity and may impose additional costs. There is a considerable incentive, therefore, for countries at different stages of development to use the flexibilities in the TRIPS Agreement to maximize its net benefits for their development.
The Effects of Intellectual Property Rights Violations on Economic Growth
ABSTRACT This paper examines the relationship between intellectual property rights (IPRs) and the growth rate of per capita GDP during the period 1996-2006 in a sample 71 countries. Using software piracy data as a proxy for IPR violations, we find that countries with increasing rates of software piracy have lower growth rates. We also find that states with strong commitments to enact policies to protect intellectual property rights are able to achieve higher growth rates.
Following the conclusion of the TRIPS Agreement much has been written on the potential costs and benefits of stronger Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) protection in terms of growth and technology transfer, particularly for developing countries. This paper reviews this literature and provides new evidence linking protection of IPRs to economic growth, innovation and technology diffusion. Results suggest that while stronger IPR protection can ultimately reap rewards in terms of greater domestic innovation and increased technology diffusion in developing countries with sufficient capacity to innovate, it has little impact on innovation and diffusion in those without such capacity and may impose additional costs, especially for the least developed countries that will be precluded from using imitation as a means to develop innovative capacity. There is a considerable incentive, therefore, for countries at different stages of development to use the flexibilities in the TRIPS Agreement to maximise its net benefits for their development.