[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cmi/wpaper/cemi-workingpaper-2009-001.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How compliant are developing countries with their TRIPS obligations?

Author

Listed:
  • Intan Hamdan-Livramento

    (Chaire en Economie et Management de l'Innovation, Collège du Management de la Technologie, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne)

Abstract
This paper constructs an intellectual property rights (IPR) index based on the World Trade Organization's Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement for 53 developing countries. TRIPS agreement attempts to standardize the minimum level of IPR protection for all 153 WTO member countries regardless of their income levels, and allows recourse to an effective dispute settlement mechanism, unlike previous international IPR agreements. The Agreement is thus applicable to a large number of countries and enforceable both at the national and international levels, making it an important legal agreement to study. This TRIPS-specific index takes into consideration the seven IPR categories defined by TRIPS agreement and the transition period for their implementation. In addition, it assumes the governments of the developing countries investigated would not necessarily implement the legislations for the seven IPR categories simultaneously. National IPR legislations, various IPR-specific reports and legal experts and practitioners, whenever possible, are consulted to build the index. Analysis of the data collected show three implementation trends. Firstly, almost all developing country members availed themselves to the transition period afforded by the Agreement, and in some cases have exceeded the time limit imposed by the transition period. Secondly, implementation efforts of developing countries vary, and not necessarily because of their income levels. And lastly, countries in regional trade agreements (RTAs) that specify IPR obligations tend to comply with the TRIPS agreement earlier than the rest. The results collected in this study show that TRIPS does imply a convergence of global IPR protection across countries, and that the implementation of this Agreement is an external factor, not influenced by the countries' level of economic development.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:cmi:wpaper:cemi-workingpaper-2009-001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cdm-repec.epfl.ch/cmi-wpaper/cemi-workingpaper-2009-001.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rod Falvey & Neil Foster & David Greenaway, 2006. "Intellectual Property Rights and Economic Growth," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(4), pages 700-719, November.
    2. Daniel Kaufmann & Aart Kraay & Massimo Mastruzzi, 2004. "Governance Matters III: Governance Indicators for 1996, 1998, 2000, and 2002," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 18(2), pages 253-287.
    3. 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.
    4. Smith, Pamela J., 1999. "Are weak patent rights a barrier to U.S. exports?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 151-177, June.
    5. 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.
    6. Archibugi, Daniele & Coco, Alberto, 2004. "A New Indicator of Technological Capabilities for Developed and Developing Countries (ArCo)," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 629-654, April.
    7. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2000. "Protecting Their Intellectual Assets: Appropriability Conditions and Why U.S. Manufacturing Firms Patent (or Not)," NBER Working Papers 7552, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Park, Walter G., 2008. "International patent protection: 1960-2005," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 761-766, May.
    9. Michael Ferrantino, 1993. "The effect of intellectual property rights on international trade and investment," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 129(2), pages 300-331, June.
    10. Robert L Ostergard, 2000. "The Measurement of Intellectual Property Rights Protection," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 31(2), pages 349-360, June.
    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. Nabokin, Tatjana, 2014. "Global Investment Decisions and Patent Protection: Evidence from German Multinationals," Discussion Papers in Economics 21266, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    2. Anja, Breitwieser & Neil, Foster, 2012. "Intellectual property rights, innovation and technology transfer: a survey," MPRA Paper 36094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Olena Ivus & Walter Park & Kamal Saggi, 2015. "Patent Protection and the Industrial Composition of Multinational Activity: Evidence from U.S. Multinational Firms," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 15-00014, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    4. Etienne Pfister & Bruno Deffains & Myriam Doriat-Duban & Stéphane Saussier, 2006. "Institutions and contracts: Franchising," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 53-78, January.
    5. Lin, Jenny X. & Lincoln, William F., 2017. "Pirate's treasure," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 235-245.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Olena Ivus & Walter G Park & Kamal Saggi, 2023. "Patent protection and the composition of multinational activity: Evidence from US multinational firms," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kamal Saggi (ed.), Technology Transfer, Foreign Direct Investment, and the Protection of Intellectual Property in the Global Economy, chapter 14, pages 317-345, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Papageorgiadis, Nikolaos & Cross, Adam R. & Alexiou, Constantinos, 2013. "The impact of the institution of patent protection and enforcement on entry mode strategy: A panel data investigation of U.S. firms," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 278-292.
    10. Titus O. Awokuse & Weishi Grace Gu, 2015. "Does Foreign Intellectual Property Rights Protection Affect Us Exports And Fdi?," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(3), pages 256-264, July.
    11. 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).
    12. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Biancini, Sara & Paillacar, Rodrigo, 2023. "Intellectual property rights protection and trade: An empirical analysis," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    13. 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.
    14. Weinhold, Diana & Nair-Reichert, Usha, 2009. "Innovation, Inequality and Intellectual Property Rights," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 889-901, May.
    15. 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.
    16. Jenny X. Lin & William Lincoln, 2017. "Pirate�s Treasure," Working Papers 17-51, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    17. Balsmeier, Benjamin & Delanote, Julie, 2015. "Employment growth heterogeneity under varying intellectual property rights regimes in European transition economies: Young vs. mature innovators," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 1069-1084.
    18. repec:cte:wbrepe:wb022514 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Ivus, Olena & Park, Walter, 2019. "Patent reforms and exporter behaviour: Firm-level evidence from developing countries," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 129-147.
    20. Olena Ivus, 2011. "Trade-related intellectual property rights: industry variation and technology diffusion," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 44(1), pages 201-226, February.
    21. Chih‐Hai Yang & Yi‐Ju Huang, 2009. "Do Intellectual Property Rights Matter To Taiwan'S Exports? A Dynamic Panel Approach," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(4), pages 555-578, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    intellectual property rights; developing countries;

    JEL classification:

    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • K33 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - International Law
    • C43 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Index Numbers and Aggregation

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cmi:wpaper:cemi-workingpaper-2009-001. 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: Julio Raffo (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.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.