IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ijoeps/v17y2023i1d10.1007_s42495-022-00103-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patent law harmonization and international trade

Author

Listed:
  • Banri Ito

    (Aoyama Gakuin University
    Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI))

  • Katsunori Shirai

    (Faculty of Economics, Osaka Gakuin University)

Abstract

Global harmonization of intellectual property rights (IPR) system is one of the major challenges in multilateral or regional trade negotiations. It remains even unclear as to whether the harmonization of the IPR system spurs international trade. The present study argues that institutional harmonization in terms of knowledge production plays an important role in trade of patent-sensitive goods, considering the fact that trade in patent-sensitive goods is heavily concentrated in trade between developed countries. This study empirically examines the relationship between harmonization of patent rights systems and international trade flow based on world bilateral trade data during 1995–2010. Differently to methods of previous studies on this topic, this study uses a structural gravity model based on a translog demand system that is more flexible than constant elasticity of substitution type preferences. The results reveal that institutional distance in terms of patent law has an inverted U-shaped relationship with bilateral trade share in patent-sensitive industries, suggesting similarity in patent systems of exporters and importers raises bilateral trade. This result is robust to the model with additional variables that affect trade costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Banri Ito & Katsunori Shirai, 2023. "Patent law harmonization and international trade," International Journal of Economic Policy Studies, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 289-306, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:ijoeps:v:17:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s42495-022-00103-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s42495-022-00103-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s42495-022-00103-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s42495-022-00103-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Chaney, 2008. "Distorted Gravity: The Intensive and Extensive Margins of International Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(4), pages 1707-1721, September.
    2. Novy, Dennis, 2013. "International trade without CES: Estimating translog gravity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 271-282.
    3. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2003. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 170-192, March.
    4. Marc J. Melitz & Giancarlo I. P. Ottaviano, 2021. "Market Size, Trade, and Productivity," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Firms and Workers in a Globalized World Larger Markets, Tougher Competition, chapter 4, pages 87-108, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Feenstra, Robert C., 2003. "A homothetic utility function for monopolistic competition models, without constant price elasticity," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(1), pages 79-86, January.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Henri L. F. De Groot & Gert‐Jan Linders & Piet Rietveld & Uma Subramanian, 2004. "The Institutional Determinants of Bilateral Trade Patterns," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(1), pages 103-123, February.
    9. 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.
    10. Awokuse, Titus O. & Yin, Hong, 2010. "Does Stronger Intellectual Property Rights Protection Induce More Bilateral Trade? Evidence from China's Imports," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 1094-1104, August.
    11. Elhanan Helpman & Marc Melitz & Yona Rubinstein, 2008. "Estimating Trade Flows: Trading Partners and Trading Volumes," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 123(2), pages 441-487.
    12. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/6apm7lruv088iagm4rv2c33jtg is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Marc J. Melitz & Gianmarco I. P. Ottaviano, 2008. "Market Size, Trade, and Productivity (DOI:10.111/j.1467-937x.2007.00463.x)," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 75(3), pages 985-985.
    14. Thomas Chaney, 2008. "Distorted Gravity: The Intensive and Extensive Margins of International Trade," SciencePo Working papers hal-03579844, HAL.
    15. Briggs, Kristie, 2013. "Does patent harmonization impact the decision and volume of high technology trade?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 35-51.
    16. Thomas Chaney, 2008. "Distorted Gravity: The Intensive and Extensive Margins of International Trade," Post-Print hal-03579844, HAL.
    17. Diewert, W. E., 1976. "Exact and superlative index numbers," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 115-145, May.
    18. David Hummels & Peter J. Klenow, 2005. "The Variety and Quality of a Nation's Exports," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(3), pages 704-723, June.
    19. Catherine Y. Co, 2004. "Do Patent Rights Regimes Matter?," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 359-373, August.
    20. Thomas Chaney, 2008. "Distorted Gravity: The Intensive and Extensive Margins of International Trade," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03579844, HAL.
    21. Mohammed Rafiquzzaman, 2002. "The impact of patent rights on international trade: evidence from Canada," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 35(2), pages 307-330, May.
    22. Mohammed Rafiquzzaman, 2002. "The impact of patent rights on international trade: evidence from Canada," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(2), pages 307-330, May.
    23. Jonathan Eaton & Samuel Kortum, 2002. "Technology, Geography, and Trade," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(5), pages 1741-1779, September.
    24. Ivus, Olena, 2010. "Do stronger patent rights raise high-tech exports to the developing world?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 38-47, May.
    25. Olena Ivus, 2015. "Does stronger patent protection increase export variety? Evidence from US product-level data," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 46(6), pages 724-731, August.
    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. Head, Keith & Mayer, Thierry, 2014. "Gravity Equations: Workhorse,Toolkit, and Cookbook," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 131-195, Elsevier.
    2. Bas, Maria & Mayer, Thierry & Thoenig, Mathias, 2017. "From micro to macro: Demand, supply, and heterogeneity in the trade elasticity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-19.
    3. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/dambferfb7dfprc9m01g1j1k2 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/dambferfb7dfprc9m01g1j1k2 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/nki2gcedn93280ns6fslbhdnm is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Natalie Chen & Dennis Novy, 2022. "Gravity and Heterogeneous Trade Cost Elasticities," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(644), pages 1349-1377.
    7. Novy, Dennis, 2013. "International trade without CES: Estimating translog gravity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 271-282.
    8. Thomas Orliac, 2012. "The economics of trade facilitation [L'économie de la facilitation des échanges]," SciencePo Working papers Main tel-03681980, HAL.
    9. Pamela Smith & Xiangwen Kong, 2022. "Intellectual property rights and trade: The exceptional case of GMOs," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 763-811, March.
    10. Ziran Ding, 2022. "Firm heterogeneity, variable markups, and multinational production: A review from trade policy perspective," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 1311-1357, December.
    11. Bas, Maria & Mayer, Thierry & Thoenig, Mathias, 2017. "From micro to macro: Demand, supply, and heterogeneity in the trade elasticity," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 1-19.
    12. Lota D. Tamini & Zakaria Sorgho, 2018. "Trade in Environmental Goods: Evidences from an Analysis Using Elasticities of Trade Costs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(1), pages 53-75, May.
    13. Kox, Henk L.M., 2022. "A micro-macro model of foreign direct investment: knowledge-based gravity forces, self-selection and third-country effects," MPRA Paper 115542, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Costinot, Arnaud & Rodríguez-Clare, Andrés, 2014. "Trade Theory with Numbers: Quantifying the Consequences of Globalization," Handbook of International Economics, in: Gopinath, G. & Helpman, . & Rogoff, K. (ed.), Handbook of International Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 0, pages 197-261, Elsevier.
    15. Bailey, Michael & Gupta, Abhinav & Hillenbrand, Sebastian & Kuchler, Theresa & Richmond, Robert & Stroebel, Johannes, 2021. "International trade and social connectedness," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    16. Rudy Douven & Remco Mocking & Ilaria Mosca, 2012. "The Effect of Physician Fees and Density Differences on Regional Variation in Hospital Treatments," CPB Discussion Paper 208.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    17. Föllmi, Reto & Schetter, Ulrich & Torun, David, 2022. "Gravity with History: On the Aggregate Implications of Incumbency Effects in International Trade," VfS Annual Conference 2022 (Basel): Big Data in Economics 264136, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    18. Arjan Lejour, 2008. "The Principle of Subsidiarity and Innovation Support Measures," CPB Memorandum 208.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    19. Güzin Bayar, 2018. "Estimating export equations: a survey of the literature," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 629-672, March.
    20. Roger Smeets & Harold Creusen & Arjan Lejour & Henk Kox, 2010. "Export margins and export barriers: uncovering market entry costs of exporters in the Netherlands," CPB Document 208.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    21. Luigi Capoani, 2023. "Review of the gravity model: origins and critical analysis of its theoretical development," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(5), pages 1-43, May.
    22. Minyu Zhou & Ian Sheldon & Jihyun Eum, 2018. "The role of intellectual property rights in seed technology transfer through trade: evidence from U.S. field crop seed exports," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(4), pages 423-434, July.
    23. Mercedes Delgado & Margaret Kyle & Anita M. McGahan, 2013. "Intellectual Property Protection and the Geography of Trade," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 733-762, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Intellectual property rights; Patent law; Gravity model; Bilateral trade;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F14 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Empirical Studies of Trade
    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:spr:ijoeps:v:17:y:2023:i:1:d:10.1007_s42495-022-00103-7. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.