IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v41y2012i3p499-511.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing the evidence of an IPR take-off in China and India

Author

Listed:
  • Godinho, Manuel Mira
  • Ferreira, Vítor

Abstract

Both China and India have been experiencing a historical take-off in the use of intellectual property rights (IPR). In terms of trademark applications filed with domestic IP offices in 2009, the evidence demonstrates that China now ranks 1st worldwide and India 5th, while for patent filings China ranks 3rd worldwide and India ranks 9th. This performance is remarkable as both China and India experienced negligible demand for IPR protection as recently as two decades ago. The IPR take up trends in these two countries are analyzed in detail, highlighting the structure of patent and trademark demand since 1990. Specifically, the available series are broken down and analyzed according to: (i) national versus foreign origin of patents and trademarks; (ii) technological (IPC) and trademark (NICE) classes; and (iii) the major individual patent users in each country. The data used refers to applications in the Chinese and Indian IP offices although the demand from residents of these two countries in both the international and other national systems is also assessed. Beyond the existing momentum in IPR registrations by China and India and their capacity to maintain it into the near future, the paper addresses practical questions about the strategies, motives and benefits behind the current trends. In particular, we seek to evaluate the capacity of both China's and India's National Innovation Systems to internalize the potential returns of this increasing demand for IPR. The insight reached finds that should both China and India sustain their current IPR growth rates, they will be able to catch up with the most advanced economies within the time span of a few decades.

Suggested Citation

  • Godinho, Manuel Mira & Ferreira, Vítor, 2012. "Analyzing the evidence of an IPR take-off in China and India," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 499-511.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:41:y:2012:i:3:p:499-511
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2011.09.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733311001855
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2011.09.009?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. V. Chandra & Osorio-Rodarte , I. & Braga, C. A. Primo, 2009. "Korea and the BICs (Brazil, India and China) : catching up experiences," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5101, The World Bank.
    2. Ulrich Schmoch, 2003. "Service marks as novel innovation indicator," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 149-156, August.
    3. Archibugi, Daniele & Pianta, Mario, 1992. "Specialization and size of technological activities in industrial countries: The analysis of patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 79-93, February.
    4. Kyoo-Ho Park & Keun Lee, 2006. "Linking the technological regime to the technological catch-up: analyzing Korea and Taiwan using the US patent data," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 15(4), pages 715-753, August.
    5. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Andersson, Martin & Ejermo, Olof, 2006. "Technology and Trade - an analysis of technology specialization and export flows," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 65, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    7. Landes, William M & Posner, Richard A, 1987. "Trademark Law: An Economic Perspective," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(2), pages 265-309, October.
    8. Jaffe, Adam B, 1989. "Real Effects of Academic Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 957-970, December.
    9. Carsten Fink & Beata Smarzynska Javorcik & Mariana Spatareanu, 2005. "Income-Related Biases in International Trade: What Do Trademark Registration Data Tell Us?," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 141(1), pages 79-103, April.
    10. Wesley M. Cohen & Richard R. Nelson & John P. Walsh, 2003. "Links and Impacts: The Influence of Public Research on Industrial R&D," Chapters, in: Aldo Geuna & Ammon J. Salter & W. Edward Steinmueller (ed.), Science and Innovation, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Mendonca, Sandro & Pereira, Tiago Santos & Godinho, Manuel Mira, 2004. "Trademarks as an indicator of innovation and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1385-1404, November.
    12. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1987. "R&D Rivalry with Licensing or Imitation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 402-420, June.
    13. Eugenia Baroncelli & Ekaterina Krivonos & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2007. "Trademark Protection or Protectionism?," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 126-145, February.
    14. Patel, Pari & Vega, Modesto, 1999. "Patterns of internationalisation of corporate technology: location vs. home country advantages1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(2-3), pages 145-155, March.
    15. Jinyoung Kim & Gerald Marschke, 2004. "Accounting for the recent surge in U.S. patenting: changes in R&D expenditures, patent yields, and the high tech sector," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(6), pages 543-558.
    16. Jorge Alcaide-Marzal & Enrique Tortajada-Esparza, 2007. "Innovation assessment in traditional industries. A proposal of aesthetic innovation indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(1), pages 33-57, July.
    17. Zoltan J. Acs & Luc Anselin & Attila Varga, 2008. "Patents and Innovation Counts as Measures of Regional Production of New Knowledge," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 11, pages 135-151, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    18. Harabi, Najib, 1995. "Appropriability of technical innovations an empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 981-992, November.
    19. 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.
    20. Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster, 2004. "Examining Biases in Measures of Firm Innovation," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n10, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    21. Sunil Mani, 2009. "Has India become more innovative since 1991? Analysis of the evidence and some disquieting features," Centre for Development Studies, Trivendrum Working Papers 415, Centre for Development Studies, Trivendrum, India.
    22. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2005. "Exploring the Patent Explosion," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 30(2_2), pages 35-48, January.
    23. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    24. repec:adr:anecst:y:1998:i:49-50:p:11 is not listed on IDEAS
    25. Hu, Albert Guangzhou & Jefferson, Gary H., 2009. "A great wall of patents: What is behind China's recent patent explosion?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 57-68, September.
    26. Archibugi, Daniele & Pianta, Mario, 1994. "Aggregate Convergence and Sectoral Specialization in Innovation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 17-33, March.
    27. 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.
    28. Malmberg, Claes, 2005. "Trademarks Statistics as Innovation Indicator? - A Micro Study," Papers in Innovation Studies 2005/17, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    29. Ariel Pakes & Zvi Griliches, 1984. "Patents and R&D at the Firm Level: A First Look," NBER Chapters, in: R&D, Patents, and Productivity, pages 55-72, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    30. Michael Fritsch, 2000. "Interregional Differences in R&D Activities—An Empirical Investigation," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(4), pages 409-427, August.
    31. Emmanuel Duguet & Isabelle Kabla, 1998. "Appropriation Strategy and the Motivations to Use the Patent System: An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level in French Manufacturing," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 49-50, pages 289-327.
    32. 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.
    33. Mark Rogers & Joanne Loundes, 2003. "The Rise of Trade Marking in Australia in the 1990s," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2003n08, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    34. Li, Xibao, 2009. "China's regional innovation capacity in transition: An empirical approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 338-357, March.
    35. Valentine Millot, 2009. "Trademarks as an Indicator of Product and Marketing Innovations," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2009/6, OECD Publishing.
    36. Nicholas Bloom & John Van Reenen, 2002. "Patents, Real Options and Firm Performance," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(478), pages 97-116, March.
    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. Giuliani, Elisa & Martinelli, Arianna & Rabellotti, Roberta, 2016. "Is Co-Invention Expediting Technological Catch Up? A Study of Collaboration between Emerging Country Firms and EU Inventors," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 192-205.
    2. Dang, Jianwei & Kang, Byeongwoo & Ding, Ke, 2019. "International protection of standard essential patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 75-86.
    3. Su, Zhongfeng & Wang, Chenfeng & Peng, Mike W., 2022. "Intellectual property rights protection and total factor productivity," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(3).
    4. Liu, Yang & Dong, Jiuyu & Mei, Liang & Shen, Rui, 2023. "Digital innovation and performance of manufacturing firms: An affordance perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    5. Rikap, Cecilia, 2022. "Becoming an intellectual monopoly by relying on the national innovation system: the State Grid Corporation of China's experience," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(4).
    6. Zhang, Yiran, 2021. "Technology Market Frictions and Economic Development: Evidence from China," MPRA Paper 122159, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 21 Sep 2024.
    7. Jiang Wei & Ding Wang & Yang Liu, 2018. "Towards an asymmetry-based view of Chinese firms’ technological catch-up," Frontiers of Business Research in China, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, December.
    8. Godinho, Manuel Mira & Simões, Vítor Corado, 2023. "The Tech Cold War: What can we learn from the most dynamic patent classes?," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(6).
    9. Rohman, Ibrahim Kholilul, 2013. "The globalization and stagnation of the ICT sectors in European countries: An input-output analysis," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 387-399.
    10. Cavalheiro, Gabriel Marcuzzo do Canto & Joia, Luiz Antonio & Van Veenstra, Anne Fleur, 2016. "Examining the trajectory of a standard for patent classification: An institutional account of a technical cooperation between EPO and USPTO," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 10-17.
    11. Mendonça, Sandro & Damásio, Bruno & Charlita de Freitas, Luciano & Oliveira, Luís & Cichy, Marcin & Nicita, António, 2022. "The rise of 5G technologies and systems: A quantitative analysis of knowledge production," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4).
    12. Christian Fisch & Tobias Hassel & Philipp Sandner & Joern Block, 2015. "University patenting: a comparison of 300 leading universities worldwide," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 318-345, April.
    13. Kim, Jeeeun & Lee, Sungjoo, 2015. "Patent databases for innovation studies: A comparative analysis of USPTO, EPO, JPO and KIPO," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 332-345.
    14. Mike W Peng & David Ahlstrom & Shawn M Carraher & Weilei (Stone) Shi, 2017. "An institution-based view of global IPR history," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 48(7), pages 893-907, September.
    15. Basant, Rakesh & Srinivasan, Shuchi, 2015. "Intellectual Property Protection in India and Implications for Health Innovation: Emerging Perspectives," IIMA Working Papers WP2015-04-01, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Research and Publication Department.
    16. Hugo Confraria & Vitor Hugo Ferreira & Manuel Mira Godinho, 2021. "Emerging 21st Century technologies: Is Europe still falling behind?," Working Papers REM 2021/0188, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    17. Rikap, Cecilia & Flacher, David, 2020. "Who collects intellectual rents from knowledge and innovation hubs? questioning the sustainability of the singapore model," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 59-73.
    18. Gabriel Marcuzzo Canto Cavalheiro & Mariana Brandao Cavalheiro, 2024. "Cluster Analysis of the Internationalization of Unicorns from Latin America Based on Trademark Registrations," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(1), pages 1650-1665, March.
    19. Ray, Sangeeta & Ray, Pradeep Kanta, 2021. "Innovation strategy of latecomer firms under tight appropriability regimes: The Indian pharmaceuticals industry," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(1).

    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. Jérôme Danguy & Gaetan de Rassenfosse & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2014. "On the origins of the worldwide surge in patenting: an industry perspective on the R&D–patent relationship," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 23(2), pages 535-572.
    2. Burhan, Muqbil & Singh, Anil K. & Jain, Sudhir K., 2017. "Patents as proxy for measuring innovations: A case of changing patent filing behavior in Indian public funded research organizations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 181-190.
    3. Hoenen, Sebastian & Kolympiris, Christos & Schoenmakers, Wilfred & Kalaitzandonakes, Nicholas, 2014. "The diminishing signaling value of patents between early rounds of venture capital financing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 956-989.
    4. 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.
    5. Insu Cho & Heejun Park & Joseph Kim, 2012. "The moderating effect of innovation protection mechanisms on the competitiveness of service firms," Service Business, Springer;Pan-Pacific Business Association, vol. 6(3), pages 369-386, September.
    6. Stephen Petrie & Mitchell Adams & Ben Mitra‐Kahn & Matthew Johnson & Russell Thomson & Paul Jensen & Alfons Palangkaraya & Elizabeth Webster, 2020. "TM‐Link: An Internationally Linked Trademark Database," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 53(2), pages 254-269, June.
    7. Matthias Siller & Christoph Hauser & Janette Walde & Gottfried Tappeiner, 2015. "Measuring regional innovation in one dimension: More lost than gained?," Working Papers 2015-14, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    8. Hu, Albert G.Z. & Zhang, Peng & Zhao, Lijing, 2017. "China as number one? Evidence from China's most recent patenting surge," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 107-119.
    9. Nikolas Zolas & Travis J. Lybbert & Prantik Bhattacharyya, 2017. "An ‘Algorithmic Links with Probabilities’ Concordance for Trademarks with an Application Towards Bilateral IP Flows," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(6), pages 1184-1213, June.
    10. Christodoulou, Demetris & Lev, Baruch & Ma, Le, 2018. "The productivity of Chinese patents: The role of business area and ownership type," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 107-124.
    11. Carolina Castaldi & Sandro Mendonca, 2021. "Regions and trademarks. Research opportunities and policy insights from leveraging trademarks in regional innovation studies," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2138, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Dec 2021.
    12. Matthias Siller & Christoph Hauser & Janette Walde & Gottfried Tappeiner, 2014. "The Multiple Facets of Regional Innovation," Working Papers 2014-19, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    13. Li, Xibao, 2012. "Behind the recent surge of Chinese patenting: An institutional view," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 236-249.
    14. Sanghoon Ahn & Bronwyn H. Hall & Keun Lee (ed.), 2014. "Intellectual Property for Economic Development," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 15464.
    15. Dziallas, Marisa & Blind, Knut, 2019. "Innovation indicators throughout the innovation process: An extensive literature analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 80, pages 3-29.
    16. 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.
    17. Crass, Dirk & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Do trademarks diminish the substitutability of products in innovative knowledge-intensive services?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Herz, Benedikt & Mejer, Malwina, 2019. "Effects of the European Union trademark: Lessons for the harmonization of intellectual property systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1841-1854.

    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:eee:respol:v:41:y:2012:i:3:p:499-511. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.