This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

How do firms protect their “knowledge capital”? socialization versus appropriation (Comment les firmes protègent-elles leur “capital savoir”? socialisation versus appropriation)

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Blandine Laperche () (labrii, ULCO)
Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to study the strategies implemented by firms to protect their knowledge base. Intellectual property rights – and notably patents - are the first tools that come to mind. Their rationale, since their origin, has been to give inventors some incentives and at the same time to facilitate a large diffusion of knowledge, so that the cumulative process of innovation may take place. However, due to this restriction, and also for reasons of cost, other tools than patents have been used by enterprises: one of the contributions of the paper is to show that firms use a whole set of tools to protect their knowledge capital. However, to assess properly the protection strategies implemented by firms implies to take account of today’s characteristics of elaboration of the knowledge capital by firms. We will see that, due to the profitability imperative, external means of formation of a knowledge capital are now of growing importance – even if in-house strategies are still essential. How do such strategies impact the way firms protect their knowledge capital? According to us, the recent trend to extend patenting possibilities to new fields (information technology, genetics) and closer to the scientific border is driven by the same profitability imperative. As firms are more and more open to their environment, they need to have a wider and stronger protection of their own knowledge base in which patents have a major part to play, even though they have important restrictions. We finally present the consequences of this growing contradiction between, on the one hand, the socialization of the knowledge capital and, on the other hand, its growing oligopolistic appropriation. L’objet de ce document est d’étudier les stratégies mises en oeuvre par les entreprises pour protéger leur capital savoir. Les droits de propriété intellectuelle – et notamment les brevets - sont les premiers outils qui viennent à l’esprit. Depuis leur origine, leur objet a été d’inciter les inventeurs et en même temps de faciliter une large diffusion des connaissances, pour que le processus cumulatif de l’innovation puisse exister. Mais, en raison de cette restriction, et aussi du fait de leur coût, d’autres outils, autres que les brevets ont été utilisés par les entreprises : l’une des contributions de cet article est de montrer que les firmes utilisent un ensemble d’outils pour protéger leur capital savoir. Toutefois, pour évaluer correctement les stratégies de protection des entreprises ; il est nécessaire de prendre en compte les caractéristiques actuelles de l’élaboration du capital savoir. Nous verrons que compte tenu de l’impératif de profitabilité, les stratégies externes de constitution du capital savoir ont une importance grandissante, même si les stratégies internes sont toujours essentielles. Quels sont les impacts de telles stratégies sur la façon dont les entreprises protègent leur capital savoir ? Selon nous, la tendance récente d’étendre les capacités à breveter dans de nouveaux domaines (technologies de l’information, génétique) et plus proches de la frontière scientifique est conduite par le même impératif de profitabilité. Comme les firmes sont plus ouvertes sur leur environnement, elles ont besoin d’une plus large et d’une plus forte protection de leur propre base de savoir, où les brevets, malgré leurs défauts, jouent un rôle majeur. Nous présentons finalement quelques conséquences de cette contradiction croissante entre d’une part la socialisation de la constitution du capital savoir et d’autre part, son appropriation oligopolistique croissante.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://riifr.univ-littoral.fr/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/doc104.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Laboratoire de Recherche sur l'Industrie et l'Innovation. ULCO / Research Unit on Industry and Innovation in its series Working Papers with number 104.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 17 pages
Date of creation: Jul 2005
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in Cahiers du Lab.RII, Juillet 2005
Handle: RePEc:rii:riidoc:104

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Maison de la recherche en sciences de l'homme, 21 quai de la Citadelle, 59140 Dunkerque
Phone: (33) 3 28 23 71 35
Fax: (33) 3 28 23 71 43 or (33) 3 28 23 71 10
Email:
Web page: http://riifr.univ-littoral.fr/
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Philippe Chagnon).

Related research
Keywords: knowledge capital; property right; innovation; socialization; appropriation;

Find related papers by JEL classification:
P14 - Economic Systems - - Capitalist Systems - - - Property Rights
L19 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Other
O34 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Technological Change - - - Intellectual Property Rights
K23 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Regulated Industries and Administrative Law

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

  1. Bondonio, Daniele, 2002. "Evaluating the Employment Impact of Business Incentive Programs in EU Disadvantaged Areas. A case from Northern Italy," P.O.L.I.S. department's Working Papers 27, Department of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS. [Downloadable!]
  2. Hagedoorn, John, 2002. "Inter-firm R&D partnerships: an overview of major trends and patterns since 1960," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 477-492, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Scotchmer, Suzanne, 1991. "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 29-41, Winter. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Dosi, Giovanni, 1988. "Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 26(3), pages 1120-71, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Nancy T. Gallini, 2002. "The Economics of Patents: Lessons from Recent U.S. Patent Reform," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 131-154, Spring. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? There are NEP reports in over 80 fields that deliver new research to your email.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-6.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.