Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation in Developing Countries: Evidence from Panel Data

Contents:

Author Info

  • Léger, Andréanne

Abstract

The determinants of innovation and the role of intellectual property rights in different countries are not well understood. This paper estimates the determinants of innovation using a new panel dataset. It compares different panel estimation methods appropriate for finite size samples. Past R&D investments have a positive and significant impact on current innovation, while openness to trade has a negative and significant impact on innovation in developing countries and population size has a negative and significant impact on innovation in industrialized countries. Intellectual property protection is not significant for any of the groups. We discuss econometric issues and the policy implication of these results.

(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/19844/1/leger.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Verein für Socialpolitik, Research Committee Development Economics in its series Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, Berlin 2006 with number 17.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:zbw:gdec06:4740

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.ael.ethz.ch/
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

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.:
as in new window
  1. Sunil Kanwar & Robert Evenson, 2003. "Does intellectual property protection spur technological change?," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 55(2), pages 235-264, April.
  2. Helpman, E., 1992. "Innovation, Imitation and intellectual Property Rights," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1597, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
  3. Diwan, Ishac & Rodrik, Dani, 1991. "Patents, appropriate technology, and North-South trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1-2), pages 27-47, February.
  4. Judson, Ruth A. & Owen, Ann L., 1999. "Estimating dynamic panel data models: a guide for macroeconomists," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 9-15, October.
  5. Richard Blundell & Steve Bond, 1995. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," IFS Working Papers W95/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  6. Blair,Roger D. & Cotter,Thomas F., 2005. "Intellectual Property," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521833165, October.
  7. Blair,Roger D. & Cotter,Thomas F., 2005. "Intellectual Property," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521540674, October.
  8. Bruno, Giovanni S.F., 2005. "Approximating the bias of the LSDV estimator for dynamic unbalanced panel data models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 361-366, June.
  9. Jorge Crespo & Carmela Martín & Francisco J. Velázquez, 2004. "International technology spillovers from trade: the importance of the technological gap," Investigaciones Economicas, Fundación SEPI, vol. 28(3), pages 515-533, September.
  10. Alfranca, Oscar & Huffman, Wallace E, 2003. "Aggregate Private R&D Investments in Agriculture: The Role of Incentives, Public Policies, and Institutions," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 52(1), pages 1-21, October.
  11. Arellano, Manuel & Bond, Stephen, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(2), pages 277-97, April.
  12. Joshua Hall & Robert Lawson, 2009. "Economic Freedom and Peace," Atlantic Economic Journal, International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 37(4), pages 445-446, December.
  13. Deardorff, Alan V, 1992. "Welfare Effects of Global Patent Protection," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 59(233), pages 35-51, February.
  14. Scott Stern & Michael E. Porter & Jeffrey L. Furman, 2000. "The Determinants of National Innovative Capacity," NBER Working Papers 7876, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  15. Mark E Schaffer, 2005. "XTIVREG2: Stata module to perform extended IV/2SLS, GMM and AC/HAC, LIML and k-class regression for panel data models," Statistical Software Components S456501, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 24 Jul 2012.
  16. Kiviet, Jan F., 1995. "On bias, inconsistency, and efficiency of various estimators in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 53-78, July.
  17. Schneider, Patricia Higino, 2005. "International trade, economic growth and intellectual property rights: A panel data study of developed and developing countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(2), pages 529-547, December.
  18. David Roodman, 2003. "XTABOND2: Stata module to extend xtabond dynamic panel data estimator," Statistical Software Components S435901, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 09 Aug 2014.
  19. Keith E. Maskus, 1993. "Intellectual property rights and the Uruguay Round," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, issue Q I, pages 10-25.
  20. Giovanni S.F. Bruno, 2005. "Estimation and inference in dynamic unbalanced panel data models with a small number of individuals," KITeS Working Papers 165, KITeS, Centre for Knowledge, Internationalization and Technology Studies, Universita' Bocconi, Milano, Italy, revised Jun 2005.
  21. Frank Windmeijer, 2000. "A finite sample correction for the variance of linear two-step GMM estimators," IFS Working Papers W00/19, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  22. William F. Maloney & Daniel Lederman, 2004. "R&D and Development," Econometric Society 2004 Latin American Meetings 216, Econometric Society.
  23. Lall, Sanjaya, 1992. "Technological capabilities and industrialization," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 165-186, February.
  24. Cohen, Wesley M & Klepper, Steven, 1996. "Firm Size and the Nature of Innovation within Industries: The Case of Process and Product R&D," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(2), pages 232-43, May.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:gdec06:4740. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.