IPRs, Technological Development, and Economic Development

In the year 2000 some $142 billion in royalties were paid internationally by users of a specific piece of knowledge that were protected under Intellectual Property Right law (IPR) to those parties that owned these rights. Under current circumstances where knowledge & innovation play an increasingly significant role in the economy (Foray & Lundvall 1996, Cowan, David and Foray 2000, Cooke 2002, Dolfsma & Soete 2006, Dolfsma 2005). IPRs have become increasingly prominent in debates and are almost unanimously deemed to favor economic development by policymakers, and certainly by policymakers in developed countries. While it has been acknowledged that some parties may benefit more from a system of IPRs than others, in relative terms a Pareto improvement is the expected outcome (Langford 1997). This has not always been the case. In addition, the academic (economic) community is almost unanimous about the system of IPR overshooting its goals. This has been the motivation to include IPRs in the WTO negotiations. The TRIPS agreement (Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) has resulted in 1994 from these negotiations. Especially during the 1990s the number of patents granted has grown tremendously despite the fact that many a scholar still supports Machlup’s (1958, p.28) conclusion that:“it would be irresponsible, on the basis of our present knowledge of its consequences, to recommend instituting one. But since we have had a patent system for a long time, it would be irresponsible, on the basis of our present knowledge, to recommend abolishing it.â€From other corners, where specific effects of IPRs are considered, a different and less circumspect sound may be heard. Examples of this are attempts to make available HIV/AIDS drugs at a reduced price compared to what the pharmaceutical companies that have the patents on these drugs demand. I will focus on patents.Empirical and theoretical findings bearing on the question of IPRs’ effect on technological development, and thus prospect for economic development, are reviewed. Static and dynamic effects are distinguished. Areas where static effects may be expected include transfer of knowledge, balance of payment effects, effects for large as opposed to small firms, and effect on the ‘extent of the market’. Areas for dynamic effects include technological development and technological preemption. The list may not be exhaustive, and effects are interlocking: they may be mutually reinforcing or they may conflict. I will mostly focus on ‘dynamic’ effects.Economic Dynamics;IPRs;Intellectual Property Rights;Technological Development

Lock-in & Break-out from Technological Trajectories: Modeling and policy implications

Arthur [1,2] provided a model to explain the circumstances that lead to technological lock-in into a specific trajectory. We contribute substantially to this area of research by investigating the circumstances under which technological development may break-out of a trajectory. We argue that for this to happen, a third selection mechanism--beyond those of the market and of technology--needs to upset the lock-in. We model the interaction, or mutual shaping among three selection mechanisms, and thus this paper also allows for a better understanding of when a technology will lock-in into a trajectory, when a technology may break-out of a lock-in, and when competing technologies may co-exist in a balance. As a system is conceptualized to gain a (third) degree of freedom, the possibility of bifurcation is introduced into the model. The equations, in which interactions between competition and selection mechanisms can be modeled, allow one to specify conditions for lock-in, competitive balance, and break-out

Towards a Dynamic (Schumpeterian) Welfare Economics

For an economy where knowledge plays an increasingly important role in shaping its dynamics, economics needs a dynamic (Schumpeterian) welfare theory. This paper sketches the role of knowledge in an economy and argues that a static Paretian welfare economics is inadequate, or at least needs to be supplemented. As suggested by the work of Schumpeter, a dynamic welfare economics acknowledges the role of knowledge. In a dynamic welfare economics, I suggest, different costs of communication are central, indicating that knowledge may not be readily diffused or exchanged. Recent developments in Intellectual Property Right (IPR) law are evaluated to determine the extent to which they affect communication costs and thus future economic welfare.communication;knowledge economy;IPR;communication costs;welfare theory

Technology Push, Demand Pull And The Shaping Of Technological Paradigms - Patterns In The Development Of Computing Technology

An assumption generally subscribed in evolutionary economics is thatnew technological paradigms arise from advances is science anddevelopments in technological knowledge. Demand only influences theselection among competing paradigms, and the course the paradigm afterits inception. In this paper we argue that this view needs to beadapted. We demonstrate that in the history of computing technology inthe 20th century a distinction can be made between periods in whicheither demand or knowledge development was the dominant enabler ofinnovation. In the demand enabled periods new technological (sub-)paradigms in computing technology have emerged as well.enablers of innovation;history of computing;technological paradigms

Appropriability in Services

Services constitute a major part of the economy, and, contrary to popular believe, service firms do innovate. In this paper I take a closer look at one aspect of innovation in services: appropriability. I discuss the different elements that are possibly of importance for appropriability, and discuss one element in more detail. Reputation has been argued to be decisive when service firms try to appropriate the benefits of their innovative activity. In this paper, some suggestions are brought forward that will be useful in thinking systematically about reputationshaping mechanisms

Accounting as Applied Ethics: Teaching a Discipline

In this article it is argued that there are notable parallels between all of the different strands within ethics on the one hand, and accountancy on the other that, in teaching, can be drawn upon to enhance students’ understanding of the latter. Accountancy, part of economics, draws on utilitarian ethics, but not solely so. Accounting, in addition, draws on deontological and communitarian strands in ethics. The article suggests that the teaching of accounting – especially to non-economists – would benefit substantially from highlighting and developing these parallels

Collective Consuming: Consumers as Subcontractors on Electronic Markets

In this article, contrary to popular belief, it is argued on the basis of Transaction Cost Economics that consumers will become dependent subcontractors on electronic markets. Consumers invest time and effort building up a relation with a producer or e-tailer; an investment that is idiosyncratic. The producer or e-tailer only needs to invest in generic assets that enable him to automate the process of collecting and processing customer information she needs to differentiate products and discriminate prices. As subcontractors consumers face high switching costs and are thus dependent on producers or e-tailers. Virtual communities of consumers that organize countervailing power will not mitigate this tendency

The Process of New Service Development: issues of formilization and appropriability

Services form an important part of the economy today. Innovation for service firms is as important as for manufacturing, but the innovation process for service firms is comparatively little studied. In this paper, I review the literature there is on the innovation process for service firms, and make two suggestions for formalizing that process. The common thought that service firms do not innovate does not hold. Innovation is, however, often ad hoc for services, and it can therefore be difficult to measure firms’ innovation efforts. These points are all related to issues of appropriability of the benefits of innovation in services. The two issues primarily discussed in this paper – the possibilities of formalizing and appropriating in case of NSD – are central for issues for service firms. It is here that this paper offers some contributions to the existing literature; it does not so much present an overview thereof

Currents and Sub-currents in the River of Innovations - Explaining Innovativeness using New-Product Announcements

In their seminal paper, Acs and Audretsch (1988) analyze innovation patterns across industries and identify several determinants of innovativeness, both positive and negative. Their work is seminal if only because of the unique data they use to measure innovativeness: new-product announcements. They show that industry concentration, degree of unionization would hamper innovation; industries characterized by increased shares of skilled labor and large firms provide favorable conditions for innovation. By analyzing a new and more consciously compiled database, we re-examine their original claims. Our results largely support the findings of Acs & Audretsch, but diverge from them in one important way. We suggest that the large firms do not contribute more to a industry’s innovativeness than small firms – a vindication of the Schumpeter Mark I perspective. In addition, we analyze micro-level data of individual firms. Firms within different sub-groups respond differently to their competitive environment. We show that less dedicated innovators prove more susceptible to environmental factors than more committed innovators. In addition, an unfavorable competitive environment decreases the likelihood that less successful innovators will announce new products.Innovation;Innovation Sub-Currents;New-Product Announcements;Schumpeter Mark I