IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/manint/v50y2010i1d10.1007_s11575-009-0020-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights in Weak Appropriability Regimes

Author

Listed:
  • Marcus M. Keupp

    (Institute of Technology Management, University of St. Gallen)

  • Angela Beckenbauer

    (Institute of Technology Management, University of St. Gallen)

  • Oliver Gassmann

    (Institute of Technology Management, University of St. Gallen)

Abstract

Many emerging economies are characterised by weak appropriability systems and absent legal systems to punish imitators. This places foreign firms’ intellectual property rights at risk, because existing appropriation methods, such as patents or secrecy, cannot function effectively. This concern especially applies to China, the empirical context of this article. Such adverse conditions force managers to devise new strategies to safeguard their firms’ intellectual property rights. Yet no evidence describes whether strategies exist, which forms they take, how they have evolved or how they get implemented. This article addresses this knowledge gap and explores strategies that managers have developed to achieve de facto protection, despite China’s weak appropriability system. The analysis systematically explores 13 cases of foreign firms with wholly owned subsidiaries in China. The findings confirm that de facto strategies exist, describe how they work and detail how they were achieved. The findings suggest implications for both managers and academics.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcus M. Keupp & Angela Beckenbauer & Oliver Gassmann, 2010. "Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights in Weak Appropriability Regimes," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 109-130, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:manint:v:50:y:2010:i:1:d:10.1007_s11575-009-0020-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11575-009-0020-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11575-009-0020-9
    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/s11575-009-0020-9?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. Gould, David M. & Gruben, William C., 1996. "The role of intellectual property rights in economic growth," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 323-350, March.
    2. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. 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.
    4. John Child & Guido Möllering, 2003. "Contextual Confidence and Active Trust Development in the Chinese Business Environment," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 69-80, February.
    5. Mansfield, Edwin & Schwartz, Mark & Wagner, Samuel, 1981. "Imitation Costs and Patents: An Empirical Study," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 91(364), pages 907-918, December.
    6. Ove Granstrand, 1999. "The Economics and Management of Intellectual Property," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1651.
    7. Mowery, David C & Oxley, Joanne E, 1995. "Inward Technology Transfer and Competitiveness: The Role of National Innovation Systems," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(1), pages 67-93, February.
    8. Roberto Mazzoleni & Richard R. Nelson, 1998. "Economic Theories about the Benefits and Costs of Patents," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 1031-1052, December.
    9. Brent B Allred & Walter G Park, 2007. "Patent rights and innovative activity: evidence from national and firm-level data," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 38(6), pages 878-900, November.
    10. Walter G. Park & Douglas C. Lippoldt, 2006. "International licensing and the strengthening of intellectual property rights in developing countries during the 1990s," OECD Economic Studies, OECD Publishing, vol. 2005(1), pages 7-48.
    11. McGaughey, Sara L. & Liesch, Peter W. & Poulson, Duncan, 2000. "An unconventional approach to intellectual property protection: the case of an Australian firm transferring shipbuilding technologies to China," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-20, April.
    12. Sumner J. La Croix & Denise Eby Konan, 2002. "Intellectual Property Rights in China: The Changing Political Economy of Chinese–American Interests," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(6), pages 759-788, June.
    13. Harabi, Najib, 1995. "Appropriability of technical innovations an empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 981-992, November.
    14. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3, Specia), pages 783-832.
    15. Arundel, Anthony & Kabla, Isabelle, 1998. "What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 127-141, June.
    16. Walter G. Park & Juan Carlos Ginarte, 1997. "Intellectual Property Rights And Economic Growth," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 15(3), pages 51-61, July.
    17. Kegang You & Seiichi Katayama, 2005. "Intellectual Property Rights Protection And Imitation: An Empirical Examination Of Japanese F.D.I. In China," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(4), pages 591-604, December.
    18. 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.
    19. Edwin Mansfield, 1986. "Patents and Innovation: An Empirical Study," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(2), pages 173-181, February.
    20. Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-128, Spring.
    21. Blind, Knut & Edler, Jakob & Frietsch, Rainer & Schmoch, Ulrich, 2006. "Motives to patent: Empirical evidence from Germany," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 655-672, June.
    22. Glass, Amy Jocelyn & Saggi, Kamal, 2002. "Intellectual property rights and foreign direct investment," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 387-410, March.
    23. Kegang You & Seiichi Katayama, 2003. "Intellectual Property Rights Protection and Imitation - An empirical examination of Japanese FDI in China -," Discussion Paper Series 169, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University, revised Mar 2005.
    24. Bosworth, Derek & Yang, Deli, 2000. "Intellectual property law, technology flow and licensing opportunities in the People's Republic of China," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 453-477, August.
    25. Smith, Pamela J., 2001. "How do foreign patent rights affect U.S. exports, affiliate sales, and licenses?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 411-439, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Foege, J. Nils & Lauritzen, Ghita Dragsdahl & Tietze, Frank & Salge, Torsten Oliver, 2019. "Reconceptualizing the paradox of openness: How solvers navigate sharing-protecting tensions in crowdsourcing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1323-1339.
    2. Mkansi, Marcia & Nsakanda, Aaron Luntala, 2021. "Leveraging the physical network of stores in e-grocery order fulfilment for sustainable competitive advantage," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    3. J. Nils Foege & Erk P. Piening & Torsten-Oliver Salge, 2017. "Don’T Get Caught On The Wrong Foot: A Resource-Based Perspective On Imitation Threats In Innovation Partnerships," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 21(03), pages 1-42, April.
    4. Danai Christopoulou & Nikolaos Papageorgiadis & Chengang Wang & Georgios Magkonis, 2021. "IPR Law Protection and Enforcement and the Effect on Horizontal Productivity Spillovers from Inward FDI to Domestic Firms: A Meta-analysis," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 235-266, April.
    5. Yang, Jialei & Hurmelinna-Laukkanen, Pia, 2022. "Evolving appropriability – Variation in the relevance of appropriability mechanisms across industries," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    6. White, George O. & Hemphill, Thomas & Weber, Thomas & Moghaddam, Kaveh, 2018. "Institutional origins of WOFS formal contracting: A judicial arbitrariness perspective," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 654-668.
    7. Keupp, Marcus Matthias & Friesike, Sascha & von Zedtwitz, Maximilian, 2012. "How do foreign firms patent in emerging economies with weak appropriability regimes? Archetypes and motives," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1422-1439.
    8. Cowden, Birton & Tang, Jintong, 2022. "Institutional entrepreneurial orientation: Beyond setting the rules of the game for blockchain technology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    9. Prud'homme, Dan & von Zedtwitz, Max, 2019. "Managing “forced” technology transfer in emerging markets: The case of China," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 1-1.
    10. Papageorgiadis, Nikolaos & McDonald, Frank & Wang, Chengang & Konara, Palitha, 2020. "The characteristics of intellectual property rights regimes: How formal and informal institutions affect outward FDI location," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(1).
    11. Cai, Helen (Huifen) & Sarpong, David & Tang, Xiaoyun & Zhao, Guiqin, 2020. "Foreign patents surge and technology spillovers in China (1985–2009): Evidence from the patent and trade markets," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    12. 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.
    13. Simone Corsi & Alberto Di Minin, 2011. "Disruptive Innovation…in Reverse: a Theoretical Framework to Look at New Product Development from Emerging Economies," Working Papers 201104, Scuola Superiore Sant'Anna of Pisa, Istituto di Management.
    14. Gornostaeva, Galina, 2023. "The development of digital commerce in the fashion industry: The typology of emerging designers in London," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PA).
    15. Dan Prud’homme & Tony W. Tong & Nianchen Han, 2021. "A stakeholder-based view of the evolution of intellectual property institutions," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 52(4), pages 773-802, June.
    16. Papageorgiadis, Nikolaos & Cross, Adam R. & Alexiou, Constantinos, 2014. "International patent systems strength 1998–2011," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 586-597.
    17. Albino-Pimentel, João & Dussauge, Pierre & El Nayal, Omar, 2022. "Intellectual property rights, non-market considerations and foreign R&D investments," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    18. Olfa KAMMOUN & Mohieddine RAHMOUNI, 2013. "Intellectual Property Rights, Appropriation Instruments and Innovation Activities: Evidence from Tunisian Firms," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2013-01, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    19. Feng Zhang & Guohua Jiang, 2019. "Combination of Complementary Technological Knowledge to Generate “Hard to Imitate” Technologies," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(02), pages 1-24, June.
    20. Birgitte Grøgaard & Helene Loe Colman, 2016. "Interpretive Frames as the Organization’s “Mirror”: From Espoused Values to Social Integration in MNEs," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 171-194, April.

    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. Elizabeth Webster & Paul H. Jensen, 2011. "Do Patents Matter for Commercialization?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(2), pages 431-453.
    2. Keupp, Marcus Matthias & Friesike, Sascha & von Zedtwitz, Maximilian, 2012. "How do foreign firms patent in emerging economies with weak appropriability regimes? Archetypes and motives," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1422-1439.
    3. Anja, Breitwieser & Neil, Foster, 2012. "Intellectual property rights, innovation and technology transfer: a survey," MPRA Paper 36094, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. 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..
    5. Thomä, Jörg & Bizer, Kilian, 2013. "To protect or not to protect? Modes of appropriability in the small enterprise sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 35-49.
    6. Capponi, Giovanna & Criscuolo, Paola & Martinelli, Arianna & Nuvolari, Alessandro, 2019. "Profiting from innovation: Evidence from a survey of Queen's Awards winners," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 155-169.
    7. Barros, Henrique M., 2008. "The interaction between patents and other appropriability mechanisms: firm-level evidence from UK manufacturing," Insper Working Papers wpe_105, Insper Working Paper, Insper Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa.
    8. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 129-213, Elsevier.
    9. Sternitzke, Christian, 2013. "An exploratory analysis of patent fencing in pharmaceuticals: The case of PDE5 inhibitors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 542-551.
    10. Junghee Han & Almas Heshmati, 2021. "Innovation and SMEs patent propensity in Korea," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 42(1/2), pages 51-68.
    11. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    12. 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.
    13. Barros, Henrique M., 2008. "The Impact of the Distribution of R&D Expenses on Firms’ Motivations to Patent," Insper Working Papers wpe_140, Insper Working Paper, Insper Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa.
    14. Barros, Henrique M., 2011. "The Effects of Innovation Partnership, Foreign Ownership and Enhanced Management Practices on the Use of Patents in Brazilian Manufacturing," Insper Working Papers wpe_255, Insper Working Paper, Insper Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa.
    15. Arora, Ashish & Ceccagnoli, Marco & Cohen, Wesley M., 2008. "R&D and the patent premium," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 1153-1179, September.
    16. Fontana, Roberto & Nuvolari, Alessandro & Shimizu, Hiroshi & Vezzulli, Andrea, 2013. "Reassessing patent propensity: Evidence from a dataset of R&D awards, 1977–2004," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(10), pages 1780-1792.
    17. 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).
    18. Dirk Czarnitzki & Katrin Hussinger & Bart Leten, 2020. "How Valuable are Patent Blocking Strategies?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 56(3), pages 409-434, May.
    19. Danguy, Jérôme & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno, 2010. "The R&D-patent relationship: An industry perspective," EIB Papers 7/2009, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
    20. Tomasz Kijek, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights And Appropriability Of Innovation Capital: Evidence From Polish Manufacturing Firms," Equilibrium. Quarterly Journal of Economics and Economic Policy, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 11(2), pages 387-399, June.

    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:manint:v:50:y:2010:i:1:d:10.1007_s11575-009-0020-9. 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.