Having Faith in IP: Empirical Evidence of IP Conversions (original) (raw)

2011, SSRN Electronic Journal

Developing countries; Intellectual property; United States The puzzle of global IP politics The field of global intellectual property (IP) politics is booming. Still seen as esoteric in the mid-1990s, the number of new publications is now rapidly growing. Tellingly, at the 2011 Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, as many as 23 papers presented looked at the global governance of IP. 1 In exploring power struggles underlying the global IP regime, political scientists have built on two of the legal experts' legacies. 2 The first is a propensity to define the dependent variable in terms of legal standards for IP protection. This focus is exemplified by the few studies that aim at explaining anything other than legal standards, such as preferences, behaviours, practices, principles or worldviews related to IP. 3 Concentrating on a single dependant variable, however, is not necessarily a scientific sin. Arguably, a focus on only one dependent variable but eclecticism in the search for significant independent variables is a fruitful strategy to advance a research program. The second of the IP lawyers' legacies is a strong tendency to picture IP debates as binary oppositions. Political stances are located on a unidimensional continuum opposing the advocates of stronger IP protection with the supporters of weaker protection. The reference point used to define the meaning of the terms "strong" and "weak" evolve as new narratives are constructed to explain the past and to encapsulate aspirations for the future. 4 At present, the division between "strong" and "weak" seems to be embodied by the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPs), which several OECD countries and businesses see as weak and outdated while many developing countries and nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) consider overly strong and unfair. The reality of political debates is obviously more complex than simplistic dichotomies. For analytical purposes, however, binary oppositions are useful heuristic devices to apprehend empirical realities.