IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v20y2004i2p415-437.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Political Economy of Intellectual Property Treaties

Author

Listed:
  • Suzanne Scotchmer

Abstract

Intellectual property treaties create two types of obligations: for national treatment of foreign inventors and for certain harmonized protections. I investigate both the incentive to join such treaties and the incentive to harmonize. As compared to an equilibrium in which the countries' policy makers make independent choices, harmonization will generally strengthen protections. This analysis recognizes that public sponsorship is sometimes an efficient alternative to intellectual property. However, there are no institutions to harmonize public spending, and there are no international mechanisms to repatriate the spillovers it generates. As a consequence, there may be too little public sponsorship and too much intellectual property. A country's inclination to strengthen harmonized protections will depend both on its innovativeness (positively) and on the size of its domestic market (negatively). Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Suzanne Scotchmer, 2004. "The Political Economy of Intellectual Property Treaties," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 415-437, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:20:y:2004:i:2:p:415-437
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nancy Gallini & Suzanne Scotchmer, 2002. "Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2, pages 51-78, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Suzanne Scotchmer, 2004. "The Political Economy of Intellectual Property Treaties," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 415-437, October.
    3. Gallini, Nancy & Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2001. "Intellectual Property: When Is It the Best Incentive System?," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt9wx2c2hz, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    4. Dixit, Avinash & Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1997. "Common Agency and Coordination: General Theory and Application to Government Policy Making," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(4), pages 752-769, August.
    5. Helpman, Elhanan, 1993. "Innovation, Imitation, and Intellectual Property Rights," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(6), pages 1247-1280, November.
    6. Gene M. Grossman & Edwin L.-C. Lai, 2004. "International Protection of Intellectual Property," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1635-1653, December.
    7. Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2003. "The Political Economy of Intellectual Property Treaties," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt9j50z2gz, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    8. Keith E. Maskus, 1993. "Intellectual property rights and the Uruguay Round," Economic Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, vol. 78(Q I), pages 10-25.
    9. Lai, Edwin L. -C. & Qiu, Larry D., 2003. "The North's intellectual property rights standard for the South?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 183-209, January.
    10. Lanjouw, Jean O. & Cockburn, Iain M., 2001. "New Pills for Poor People? Empirical Evidence after GATT," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 265-289, February.
    11. Keith E. Maskus, 2000. "Intellectual Property Rights in the Global Economy," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 99, October.
    12. Barbara J. Spencer & James A. Brander, 1983. "International R & D Rivalry and Industrial Strategy," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 50(4), pages 707-722.
    13. Moonsung Kang, 2000. "Patent Infringement and Strategic Trade Policies : R&D and Export Subsidies," Trade Working Papers 21759, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    14. Moonsung Kang, 2000. "Patent Protection and Strategic Trade Policy," Trade Working Papers 21761, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    15. Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2001. "The Political Economy of Intellectual Property Treaties," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt1383g11z, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    16. Robert W. Staiger & Kyle Bagwell, 1999. "An Economic Theory of GATT," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 215-248, March.
    17. Scotchmer, Suzanne, 2001. "The Political Economy of Intellectual Property Treaties," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt3pr2040r, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    18. Aoki, Reiko & Prusa, Thomas J., 1993. "International standards for intellectual property protection and R & D incentives," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(3-4), pages 251-273, November.
    19. Keith Maskus, 1998. "The international regulation of intellectual property," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 134(2), pages 186-208, June.
    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. Auriol, Emmanuelle & Biancini, Sara & Paillacar, Rodrigo, 2019. "Universal intellectual property rights: Too much of a good thing?," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 51-81.
    2. Gene M. Grossman & Edwin L.-C. Lai, 2006. "International Protection of Intellectual Property: Corrigendum," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 456-456, March.
    3. Sumner J La Croix & Denise Eby Konan, 2006. "Have Developing Countries Gained From the Marriage Between Trade Agreements and Intellectual Property Rights?," Working Papers 200605, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Economics.
    4. Kamal Saggi, 2016. "Trade, Intellectual Property Rights, and the World Trade Organization," Vanderbilt University Department of Economics Working Papers 16-00014, Vanderbilt University Department of Economics.
    5. GianCarlo Moschini, 2004. "Intellectual Property Rights and the World Trade Organization: Retrospect and Prospects," Chapters, in: Giovanni Anania & Mary E.. Bohman & Colin A. Carter & Alex F. McCalla (ed.), Agricultural Policy Reform and the WTO, chapter 19, pages 474-511, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Difei Geng & Kamal Saggi, 2018. "Is there a case for non-discrimination in the international protection of intellectual property?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kamal Saggi (ed.), Economic Analysis of the Rules and Regulations of the World Trade Organization, chapter 5, pages 109-123, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Liao, Pei-Cheng & Wong, Kar-yiu, 2009. "R&D subsidy, intellectual property rights protection, and North-South trade: How good is the TRIPS agreement?," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 191-201, March.
    8. Aniruddha Bagchi & Abhra Roy, 2012. "Endogenous Research and Development and Intellectual Property Laws in Developed and Emerging Economies," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(3), pages 895-930, January.
    9. Werner Hölzl, 2007. "Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and European IPR Policy," Austrian Economic Quarterly, WIFO, vol. 12(1), pages 71-82, May.
    10. Staiger, Robert & Bagwell, Kyle & Bown, Chad, 2015. "Is the WTO Passé?," CEPR Discussion Papers 10672, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Wright, Brian D. & Pardey, Philip G. & Nottenburg, Carol & Koo, Bonwoo, 2007. "Agricultural Innovation: Investments and Incentives," Handbook of Agricultural Economics, in: Robert Evenson & Prabhu Pingali (ed.), Handbook of Agricultural Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 48, pages 2533-2603, Elsevier.
    12. Kyle Bagwell & Chad P. Bown & Robert W. Staiger, 2016. "Is the WTO Passé?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1125-1231, December.
    13. Linda Cohen, "undated". "Patented drugs, generic alternatives, and intellectual property regimes in developing countries," American Law & Economics Association Annual Meetings 1066, American Law & Economics Association.
    14. Alireza Naghavi & Yingyi Tsai, 2015. "Cross-Border Intellectual Property Rights: Contract Enforcement and Absorptive Capacity," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 62(2), pages 211-226, May.
    15. Bagchi, Aniruddha & Roy, Abhra, 2011. "Endogenous R&D and Intellectual Property Laws in Developed and Emerging Economies," MPRA Paper 31822, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Borota, Teodora, 2010. "Innovation and Imitation in a Model of North-South TradeRecent evidence on world trade patterns reveals North-South specialization across," Working Paper Series 2010:6, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    17. Gilles Koléda, 2005. "Northern and Southern Patent Novelty Requirements Harmonization, Growth and Trade," DEGIT Conference Papers c010_025, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    18. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2013_001 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Ugo Pagano & Maria Rossi, 2004. "Incomplete Contracts, Intellectual Property and Institutional Complementarities," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 55-76, July.
    20. Tuomas Takalo, 2012. "Rationales and Instruments for Public Innovation Policies," Journal of Reviews on Global Economics, Lifescience Global, vol. 1, pages 157-167.
    21. Mukherjee, Arijit & Stern, Scott, 2009. "Disclosure or secrecy? The dynamics of Open Science," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 449-462, May.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F1 - International Economics - - Trade
    • L5 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy

    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:oup:jleorg:v:20:y:2004:i:2:p:415-437. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jleo .

    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.