Intellectual property related development aid: is supply aligned with demand?

Ghafele, Roya and Engel, Jakob (2011): Intellectual property related development aid: is supply aligned with demand?

Abstract

We assessed to what extent developed country development aid programmes are likely to have interacted with, and potentially contributed to the promotion of country-appropriate sustainable changes in IP strategies and technological capacities over the period 2005-10. This was done primarily on the basis of an imputed impact assessments of four emerging and transition economies; namely Brazil, India, Poland and Thailand. Through an analysis of various measures of the domestic economic, technological and Intellectual Property context, we studied to what extent the supply of IP-related development aid provided between 2005 and 2010 responded to the likely needs of recipient countries. While the data shows that technical and financial assistance in this area could be of great use, and there is clearly a need for well-targeted IP TA and much scope for useful IP TA interventions, there seemed to only be a partial alignment between country needs and the direction of IP TA. On the whole, most IP-related development aid and technical assistance ended to focus on similar areas in each country, regardless of the development context. In Brazil and India’s case, training on IP administration may have influenced increased efficiency (from a low base) at the INPI and IP India, while the substantial EU support to raise SME IP awareness in Poland is likely to have had some significant impacts. In India, sustained development aid in this area likely influenced legislation on plant variety protection, as did WIPO TA on legislative reforms in Thailand. In all cases, the substantial US (and to a more limited extent EC) focus on development aid directed towards enforcement coincided with improvements in this area, though the political and economic pressures by both providers, and especially the US Section 301 System probably dwarfed the impact of this type of aid. Further, the typology and direction of IP related development aid reflects the comparative advantage of IP TA providers, as well as political and diplomatic interests, trade priorities and colonial ties, among many other things. As such, it is important to understand that IP TA is also highly political – a fact often concealed in the emphasis on its “technical” nature.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Intellectual Property and development, aid and technical assistance technological capacities in Brazil, India, Poland, Thailand, taxonomy of development, funding flows Intellectual Property and development, aid and technical assistance technological capacities in Brazil, India, Poland, Thailand, taxonomy of development, funding flows Intellectual Property and development, aid and technical assistance, technological capacities in Brazil, India, Poland, Thailand, taxonomy of development, funding flows Intellectual Property and development, aid and technical assistance technological capacities in Brazil, India, Poland, Thailand, taxonomy of development, funding flows
• Subjects: O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O1 - Economic Development; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O34 - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital; F - International Economics > F5 - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy > F59 - Other

References

UNCTAD-ICTSD (2005) Resource Book on TRIPS and Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Hassan, E., Yaqub, O. and Diepeveen, S. (2010) ‘Intellectual Property and Developing Countries: A review of the literature’. Prepared for the UK Intellectual Property Office and the UK Department for International Development.

CIPR (2002) Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy: Report of the Commission on Intellectual Property Rights. London: UK Department for International Development

These pillars are in part adapted from Leesti, M. and Pengelly, T. (2007) ‘Assessing Technical Assistance Needs for Implementing the TRIPS Agreement in LDCs.’ Commissioned by the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Geneva.

Deere-Birkbeck, C. and Marchant, R. (2010). ‘The Technical Assistance Principles of the WIPO Development Agenda and their Practical Implementation,’ International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), Issue Paper No. 28.

See WIPO document CDIP/4/8/REV/TOR.

Ghafele, R. (2008) “Perceptions of Intellectual Property: A Review.” London: Intellectual Property Institute.

“TRIPs: A Blessing or Curse for Developing Countries?” Discussions at the European Patent Forum. http://www.epo.org/topics/patent-system/scenarios-for-the-future/forum.html.

Sell, S. K. & C. May (2001). “Moments in law: contestation and settlement in the history of intellectual property,“ Review of International Political Economy 8, pp. 467 – 500.

TRIPS book reviews. IP Kat, 24.8.2009, http://ipkitten.blogspot.com/2009/08/trips-book-reviews.html

Ghafele, R. (2010): Can IP Diplomacy be More than War by other Means? Oxford Journal on IP Rights & Practice. March 2010.

Kostecki, M. (2006). ‘Intellectual Property and Economic Development: What Technical Assistance to Redress the Balance in Favour of Developing Nations?’ http://ictsd.org/i/ip/18075/?view=document

Leesti M.& Pengelly, T. (2002) "Institutional Issues for Developing Countries in IP Policymaking, Admnistration and Enforcemnt": Background paper prepared for CIPR; - M.

Leesti & T. Pengelly (2007) "Assessing Technical Assistance Needs for Implementing TRIPS in LDCs" International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, Geneva, Switzerland.

Sagar, R. (2006). “Identifying models of best practices in the provision of technical assistance to facilitate the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement.” Produced for the European Commission under its Sixth Framework Programme.

Musungu, S. (2003) "Designing Development-Oriented Intellectual Property Technical Assistance Programmes" paper prepared at the Second Bellagio Series of the Rockefeller Foundation;

Pengelly, T (2004) "Technical Assistance for the Formulation and Implementation of Intellectual Property Policy in Developing Countries and Transition Economies. " Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development.

Leesti, M. (2006) "Special Challenges for IP TA in Capacity Building in an LDC." http://www.iprsonline.org/ictsd/docs/LDCToolkit-final.pdf;

P. Roffe & D. Vivas (2006) "Case Study on IP TA in Regional and Bilateral Trade Agreements" Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development

M.A. Heller & R.S. Eisenberg (1998). ‘Can Patents Deter Innovation? The anticommons in Biomedical Research.’ Science 280: 698-701

Horwitz, A. and E. Lai, (1996). Patent Length and the Rate of Innovation. International Economic Review 37: 785-801. N. Gallini, Patent Policy and Costly Imitation. Rand Journal of Economics 23: 52-63.

Reichman, J.H. (2003). The TRIPS Agreement Comes of Age: Conflict or Cooperation in the Post-Transitional Phase? In

T. Cottier and P.C. Mavroidis, eds., Intellectual Property: Trade, Competition, and Sustainable Development, p. 115-140. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

A.V. Deardorff, A.V. (1992). Should Patent Protection Be Extended to All Developing Countries? The World Economy 13: p. 497-508;

A. V. Deardorff, (1992). Welfare Effects of Global Patent Protection. Economica 233:35-51.

Maskus, K.E. (1998). “The Role of Intellectual Property Rights in Encouraging Foreign Direct Investment and Technology Transfer.” Duke Journal of Comparative and International Law 9:109-161.

Maskus, K.E. 2005. “Strengthening Intellectual Property Rights in Lebanon.” In C. Fink and K.E. Maskus, eds., Intellectual Property and Development: Lessons from Recent Economic Research, p. 259-294. New York: Oxford University Press.

Y. Qian, 2006. Do National Patent Laws Stimulate Domestic Innovation In a Global Patenting Environment? A Cross-Country Analysis of Pharmaceutical Patent Protection: 1978- 2002. Review of Economics and Statistics (RESTAT), MIT;

P.G. Sampath, 2006. Breaking the Fence: Patent Rights and Biomedical Innovation in “Technology Followers.” United Nations University Working Paper # 2006-008

Qian, Y (2006). “Do National Patent Laws Stimulate Domestic Innovation In a Global Patenting Environment? A Cross-Country Analysis of Pharmaceutical Patent Protection: 1978- 2002.” Review of Economics and Statistics (RESTAT), MIT

The IPRI outlines the performance of these four countries based on This Index is a survey-based international comparative study, assessing the significance of intellectual property rights and their protection for economic development. See http://www.internationalpropertyrightsindex.org/

Baecklund, A. (2009): ’Impact Assessment in the European Commission – A System with Multiple Objectives. Environmental Science & Policy 2009 – Article in Press

George, C. & C. Kirckpatrick (2004), ’Trade and Development: Assessing the Impact of Trade liberalisation on Sustainable Development,’ Journal of World Trade 38 (3):441- 46.

Intarakumnerd, P., Chairatana, P. and T. Tangchitpiboon (2002): ‘National Innovation System in Less Successful developing Countries: the case of Thailand.’ Research Policy 31, p. 1445-1457

Intarakumnerd, P., Chairatana, P., and Tangchitpiboon, T. (2002). ‘National Innovation System in Less Successful developing Countries: the case of Thailand.’ Research Policy 31, p. 1445-1457.

Danvivathana, P. (2002) “What are the Needs for Technical Assistance from an Asian Developing Country’s Perspective?” Presented at a Conference on ‘Implementation of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health.’ Conference Contribution Geneva 28th of March 2002;

Limsamarnphun, N. “Thai R&D lags far behind our competitors.” http://www.nationalmedia.com “R&D Country Profile Thailand.” http://www.sea-eu.net/asia/info/10/thailand.html

WTO (2007) Trade Policy Review - Thailand. Geneva: WTO. “IP Capitalization.” http://www.thailawonline.com/en/others/intellectual-property.html

Kuanpoth, J. (2005): Intellectual Property- Related Technical Assistance, Cooperation, and Capacity Building: The Thailand Experience. ICTSD Dialogue on Technical Cooperation for IP Policy in Developing Countries, Geneva, 11-12 2005

DG Trade (2010) “State of IP in Third Member Countries”; United States Trade Representative (2010) “Special 301 Report. Thailand’s Progress in Protecting and Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights.”

United States Trade Representative: Special 301 Report. Thailand’s Progress in Protecting and Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights. March 18 2010

United States Trade Representative: Special 301 Report. Thailand’s Progress in Protecting and Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights. March 18 2010

Subsompson, W. (2009) ‘Thailand’ in Intellectual Property in Asian Countries, WIPO, Geneva, p. 286.

Kuanpoth, J. (2005): “Intellectual Property- Related Technical Assistance, Cooperation, and Capacity Building: The Thailand Experience.” ICTSD Dialogue on Technical Cooperation for IP Policy in Developing Countries, Geneva, 11-12 2005

Subsompson, W. (2009) ‘Thailand’ in Intellectual Property in Asian Countries, WIPO, Geneva, p. 286.

Subsompson, W. (2009) ‘Thailand’ in Intellectual Property in Asian Countries, WIPO, Geneva, p. 286.

Intarakumnerd, P. Chairatana, P. and Tangchitpiboon, T. (2002): ‘National Innovation System in Less Successful developing Countries: the case of Thailand.’ Research Policy 31 1445-1457

Kuanpoth, J.: Intellectual Property- Related Technical Assistance, Cooperation, and Capacity Building: The Thailand Experience. ICTSD Dialogue on Technical Cooperation for IP Policy in Developing Countries, Geneva, 11-12 2005

OECD: Economic Survey of Poland, 2010. Policy Brief. www.oecd.org

OECD: Economic Survey of Poland, 2010. Policy Brief. www.oecd.org

OECD (2010) “Poland, science and Innovation Country Notes,” OECD Science, Technology and Industry Outlook 2010.

World Bank Data 2010 Special 301 Report Poland, www.iipa.com http://www.ipeuropaware.eu/

OECD: DAC Special Review of Poland 2010. www.oecd.org See http://www.innovationcouncil.gov.in/ Rambabu, V. (2007) “Modernisation of intellectual Property Offices in India: The Experience of the Japan Patent Office” Unpublished Report.

Deere, C. (2009) The Implementation Game: The TRIPS Agreement and the Global Politics of Intellectual Property Reform in Developing Countries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Rambabu, V. (2007) “Modernisation of intellectual Property Offices in India: The Experience of the Japan Patent Office” Unpublished Report. (2007) and Ranjan, R. (2006) “India’s Experience of IPRTA Reforms and Technical Assistance/Capacity Building Programme”. Prepared for IPRTA Forum Meeting 2006; and Ramanna , A. (n/d) “Interest Groups and Patent Reform in Inida” as well as the annual reports from IP India.

Ranjan, R. (2006) “India’s Experience of IPRTA Reforms and Technical Assistance/Capacity Building Programme”.

OECD (2006) Science and Innovation Outlook, and OECD (2009) Economic Survey of Brazil.

OECD (2008). “Science and Innovation Country Notes.”

OECD S&I Outlook, (2006) and the OECD Economic Survey of Brazil

OECD (2006) “Brazil Science and Innovation Outlook”. Dahlman and Frischtak (1993), p. 414

Latha Jishnu, http://business.rediff.com/column/2010/mar/19/guest-intellectual -property-brazil-vs-us.htm IP Watch, Mara 2009.

Leest M. (2005), “Special challenges for intellectual Property Technical Assistance (IPRTA) in capacity building in an LDC.”

This section draws on Pengelly, T. and Engel, J. (forthcoming). Using technical and financial assistance for implementation of the TRIPS Agreement: A guidebook for LDCs. Geneva: WTO. Source: http://www.unctad.org/templates/Page.asp?intItemID=3443&lang=1

Quaker United Nations Office , A conceptual framework for priority Identification and Delivery of IP Technical Assistance for LDCs during the Extended Transition Period under the TRIPs Agreement These needs assessments can be found at: http://www.iprsonline.org/ictsd/LDCneeds.htm.

Leesti, M. and Pengelly, T. (2007). Technical and Financial Co-operation Needs for Implementation of the WTO TRIPS Agreement in Sierra Leone. Final Report of Needs Assessment Diagnostic, ICTSD Programme on IPRs and Sustainable Development, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, Geneva, Switzerland.

Leest M. (2005), “Special challenges for intellectual Property Technical Assistance (IPRTA) in capacity building in an LDC.”

J. Schumpeter, J. (1942) Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper and Brothers.

F.H. Knight (1942) “Profit and Entrepreneurial Functions”, Journal of Economic History , pp 126-132.