IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eko/ekoeko/27_137.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Significance of Intellectual Protection Rights System in the Knowledge Based Economy

Author

Listed:
  • Adam P. Balcerzak
  • Elżbieta Rogalska

Abstract

The article discuses the increasing significance of protecting intellectual property rights in the knowledge based economy. The most common approach to this problemwhich can be seen in the public debate stresses the role of technological competition between market players and says that reforms of intellectual property protection system should facilitate process of obtaining patent protection for bigger amount of innovations of all kinds for longer time. This should encourage all companies to invest in research and development, which will improve innovation capability of the whole economy. The article shows that realization of this common belief can lead to some counterproductive results, which can especially be important in case of knowledge based economy sectors. On the other hand, the article argues that the discussion on intellectual property protection should not only concentrate on the technological competition process, but it should also take into consideration an influence of the reform on the technological cooperation process. This is especially important in case of creating an institutional background for cooperation between so called general purpose technology sectors and application technology sectors, which can be the core of innovation process in the knowledge based economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Adam P. Balcerzak & Elżbieta Rogalska, 2011. "The Significance of Intellectual Protection Rights System in the Knowledge Based Economy," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 27.
    • Handle: RePEc:eko:ekoeko:27_137
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ekonomia.wne.uw.edu.pl/ekonomia/getFile/324
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bresnahan, Timothy F. & Trajtenberg, M., 1995. "General purpose technologies 'Engines of growth'?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 83-108, January.
    2. Dirk Pilat & Franck Lee & Bart van Ark, 2003. "Production and Use of ICT: A Sectoral Perspective on Productivity Growth in the OECD Area," OECD Economic Studies, OECD Publishing, vol. 2002(2), pages 47-78.
    3. Michele Boldrin & David Levine, 2002. "The Case Against Intellectual Property," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 209-212, May.
    4. Baumol, William J., 2003. "Innovations and growth: two common misaprehensions," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 435-444, July.
    5. Robert M. Hunt, 1999. "Patent reform: a mixed blessing for the U.S. economy?," Business Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, issue Nov, pages 15-29.
    6. Robert M. Hunt, 1999. "Nonobviousness and the incentive to innovate: an economic analysis of intellectual property reform," Working Papers 99-3, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    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. R. Nahuis & H. van der Wiel, 2005. "How Should Europe’s ICT Ambitions look like? An Interpretative Review of the Facts," Working Papers 05-22, Utrecht School of Economics.
    2. David Encaoua & Dominique Guellec & Catalina Martínez, 2010. "Sistemas de patentes para fomentar la innovación: Lecciones de análisis económico," Working Papers 1015, Instituto de Políticas y Bienes Públicos (IPP), CSIC.
    3. Rob Alessie & Agar Brugiavini & Guglielmo Weber, 2006. "Saving and Cohabitation: The Economic Consequences of Living with One's Parents in Italy and the Netherlands," NBER Chapters, in: NBER International Seminar on Macroeconomics 2004, pages 413-457, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Encaoua, David & Guellec, Dominique & Martinez, Catalina, 2006. "Patent systems for encouraging innovation: Lessons from economic analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1423-1440, November.
    5. Robert M. Hunt, 2004. "Patentability, Industry Structure, and Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 401-425, September.
    6. Szalavetz, Andrea, 2004. "Technológiai fejlődés, szakosodás, komplementaritás, szerkezetátalakulás [Technological development, technological complementarity and structural change]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(4), pages 362-378.
    7. Lutz Arnold & Christian Bauer, 2009. "On the growth and welfare effects of monopolistic distortions," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 97(1), pages 19-40, May.
    8. Antonin BERGEAUD & Gilbert Cette & Rémy Lecat, 2017. "What role did education, equipment age and technology play in 20th century productivity growth?," Rue de la Banque, Banque de France, issue 43, may..
    9. Irene Bertschek & Joern Block & Alexander S. Kritikos & Caroline Stiel, 2024. "German financial state aid during Covid-19 pandemic: Higher impact among digitalized self-employed," Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1-2), pages 76-97, January.
    10. Patricia Crifo & Etienne Lehmann, 2001. "Why the Kuznets Curve Will Always Reverse," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00150324, HAL.
    11. Guido Cozzi, 2009. "Intellectual Property, Innovation, And Growth: Introduction To The Special Issue," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 56(4), pages 383-389, September.
    12. Szalavetz, Andrea, 2002. "Az informatikai szektor és a felzárkózó gazdaságok [The informatics sector and the advancing economies]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(9), pages 794-804.
    13. Czarnitzki, Dirk & Fernández, Gastón P. & Rammer, Christian, 2023. "Artificial intelligence and firm-level productivity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 188-205.
    14. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2017. "Digital knowledge generation and the appropriability trade-off," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(10), pages 991-1002.
    15. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563, Elsevier.
    16. repec:cbh:journl:v:14:y:2015:i:3:p:88-105 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Ghisetti, Claudia, 2017. "Demand-pull and environmental innovations: Estimating the effects of innovative public procurement," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 178-187.
    18. Battke, Benedikt & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Stollenwerk, Stephan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Internal or external spillovers—Which kind of knowledge is more likely to flow within or across technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 27-41.
    19. Alje van Dam & Koen Frenken, 2020. "Vertical vs. Horizontal Policy in a Capabilities Model of Economic Development," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2037, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.
    20. P. Guerrieri & M. Luciani & V. Meliciani, 2011. "The determinants of investment in information and communication technologies," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(4), pages 387-403.
    21. repec:dgr:rugggd:gd-79 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Gambardella, Alfonso & Conti, Raffaele & Novelli, Elena, 2018. "Specializing in Generality: Firm Strategies When Intermediate Markets Work," CEPR Discussion Papers 12782, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    More about this item

    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:eko:ekoeko:27_137. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fesuwpl.html .

    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.