IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v130y2025i8d10.1007_s11192-025-05351-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Firms’ intellectual property protection with national versus European design rights: a count model

Author

Listed:
  • Doris Schartinger

    (AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH)

  • Michael Barber

    (AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH)

Abstract

Design rights as an intellectual property are used by firms to exclude others from benefitting from design features of a protected product and can be registered via different institutional settings. This paper employs a unique data set on design rights in Austria over a ten-year period, integrating national and EU-level data into a single database. The overall goal is to increase our understanding of registering industrial designs as a means of appropriability and to contribute to our understanding of the co-evolution of national and EU-wide intellectual property rights institutions. A multivariate analysis of the structural characteristics of firms choosing industrial designs yields new insights into which firms protect creativity and innovation with design rights of differing geographical coverage. The results of this paper show that design rights are an intellectual property that has increased in use over the time period but is still not yet widely used. National industrial design registration and EU industrial design registration as two distinct types of intellectual property are used by different types of firms, with little overlap of firms using both. National design registrations are used by firms with domestic markets in decorative and creative sectors like wood or advertising, and in the car and motor industry. Firms that choose EU-wide protection are mostly large firms with high export ratios that use IP strategically in applying bundles of IP including patents and trademarks, or firms in sectors with high aesthetic standards like fashion, leather, or wood.

Suggested Citation

  • Doris Schartinger & Michael Barber, 2025. "Firms’ intellectual property protection with national versus European design rights: a count model," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 130(8), pages 4157-4186, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:130:y:2025:i:8:d:10.1007_s11192-025-05351-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-025-05351-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-025-05351-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-025-05351-w?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cameron,A. Colin & Trivedi,Pravin K., 2013. "Regression Analysis of Count Data," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107667273, November.
    2. Block, Jörn H. & Fisch, Christian O. & Hahn, Alexander & Sandner, Philipp G., 2015. "Why do SMEs file trademarks? Insights from firms in innovative industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1915-1930.
    3. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Stuart J.H. Graham & Galen Hancock & Alan C. Marco & Amanda Fila Myers, 2013. "The USPTO Trademark Case Files Dataset: Descriptions, Lessons, and Insights," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(4), pages 669-705, December.
    5. Christine Greenhalgh & Mark Rogers, 2012. "Trade Marks and Performance in Services and Manufacturing Firms: Evidence of Schumpeterian Competition through Innovation," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 45(1), pages 50-76, February.
    6. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 026260065x, December.
    7. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Corey C. Phelps & Ralph Heidl & Anu Wadhwa, 2012. "Networks, knowledge, and knowledge networks: A critical review and research agenda," Post-Print hal-00715591, HAL.
    9. Klevorick, Alvin K. & Levin, Richard C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1995. "On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 185-205, March.
    10. James Utterback & Bengt-Arne Vedin & Eduardo Alvarez & Sten Ekman & Susan Walsh Sanderson & Bruce Tether & Roberto Verganti, 2006. "Design-Inspired Innovation And The Design Discourse," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Design-Inspired Innovation, chapter 6, pages 154-185, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Leonid Kogan & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Noah Stoffman, 2017. "Technological Innovation, Resource Allocation, and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(2), pages 665-712.
    12. 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.
    13. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Helmers, Christian, 2019. "The impact of international patent systems: Evidence from accession to the European Patent Convention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    14. Flikkema, Meindert & Castaldi, Carolina & de Man, Ard-Pieter & Seip, Marcel, 2019. "Trademarks’ relatedness to product and service innovation: A branding strategy approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1340-1353.
    15. Bronwyn Hall & Christian Helmers & Mark Rogers & Vania Sena, 2014. "The Choice between Formal and Informal Intellectual Property: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 52(2), pages 375-423, June.
    16. Haeussler, Caroline & Harhoff, Dietmar & Müller, Elisabeth, 2009. "To Be Financed or Not... - The Role of Patents for Venture Capital Financing," Discussion Paper Series of SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems 253, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich.
    17. Moultrie, James & Livesey, Finbarr, 2014. "Measuring design investment in firms: Conceptual foundations and exploratory UK survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 570-587.
    18. 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 232-243, May.
    19. Chen, Zhiyuan & Zhang, Jie, 2019. "Types of patents and driving forces behind the patent growth in China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 294-302.
    20. Carolina Castaldi & Joern Block & Meindert J. Flikkema, 2020. "Editorial: why and when do firms trademark? Bridging perspectives from industrial organisation, innovation and entrepreneurship," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1-2), pages 1-10, February.
    21. 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.
    22. Haeussler, Carolin & Harhoff, Dietmar & Mueller, Elisabeth, 2009. "To Be Financed or Not … - The Role of Patents for Venture Capital Financing," Discussion Papers in Business Administration 8970, University of Munich, Munich School of Management.
    23. Mann, Ronald J. & Sager, Thomas W., 2007. "Patents, venture capital, and software start-ups," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 193-208, March.
    24. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    25. Crass, Dirk, 2020. "Which firms use trademarks? Firm-level evidence from Germany on the role of distance, product quality and innovation," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 27(7), pages 730-755.
    26. Castaldi, Carolina, 2018. "To trademark or not to trademark: The case of the creative and cultural industries," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 606-616.
    27. Herz, Benedikt & Mejer, Malwina, 2020. "The effect of design protection on price and price dispersion: Evidence from automotive spare parts," MPRA Paper 109645, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 Sep 2021.
    28. Harhoff, Dietmar & Scherer, Frederic M. & Vopel, Katrin, 2004. "Erratum to "Citations, family size, opposition and the value of patent rights" [Research Policy 32 (2003) 1343-1363]," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 363-364, March.
    29. Hu, Mei-Chih & Kang, Jin-Su & Wu, Ching-Yan, 2017. "Determinants of profiting from innovation activities: Comparisons between technological leaders and latecomers," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 223-236.
    30. Heikkilä, Jussi & Peltoniemi, Mirva, 2019. "Great expectations: Learning the boundaries of design rights," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    31. Thomä, Jörg & Bizer, Kilian, 2013. "To protect or not to protect? Modes of appropriability in the small enterprise sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 35-49.
    32. 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.
    33. Suma Athreye & Claudio Fassio, 2020. "Why do innovators not apply for trademarks? The role of information asymmetries and collaborative innovation," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1-2), pages 134-154, February.
    34. Masatoshi Kato & Koichiro Onishi & Yuji Honjo, 2022. "Does patenting always help new firm survival? Understanding heterogeneity among exit routes," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 449-475, August.
    35. Harabi, Najib, 1995. "Appropriability of technical innovations an empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 981-992, November.
    36. Geertjan De Vries & Enrico Pennings & Joern H. Block & Christian Fisch, 2017. "Trademark or patent? The effects of market concentration, customer type and venture capital financing on start-ups’ initial IP applications," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(4), pages 325-345, May.
    37. Guellec, Dominique & Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno v., 2001. "The internationalisation of technology analysed with patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(8), pages 1253-1266, October.
    38. Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
    39. Charles A. W. deGrazia & Amanda Myers & Andrew A. Toole, 2020. "Innovation activities and business cycles: are trademarks a leading indicator?," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1-2), pages 184-203, February.
    40. Andersson, David E. & Ekman, Anton & Huila, Anton & Tell, Fredrik, 2023. "Industrial design rights and the market value of firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    41. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
    42. David J. Teece, 2007. "Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(13), pages 1319-1350, December.
    43. Paul H. Jensen & Elizabeth Webster, 2009. "Knowledge management: does capture impede creation?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 18(4), pages 701-727, August.
    44. Bernhard Dachs & Andreas Pyka, 2010. "What drives the internationalisation of innovation? Evidence from European patent data," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 71-86.
    45. Filitz, Rainer & Henkel, Joachim & Tether, Bruce S., 2015. "Protecting aesthetic innovations? An exploration of the use of registered community designs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 1192-1206.
    46. Bastian Lange & Elke Schüßler, 2018. "Unpacking the middleground of creative cities: spatiotemporal dynamics in the configuration of the Berlin design field," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(11), pages 1548-1558, November.
    47. Bjorn Asheim & Lars Coenen & Jerker Moodysson & Jan Vang, 2007. "Constructing knowledge-based regional advantage: implications for regional innovation policy," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 7(2/3/4/5), pages 140-155.
    48. 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.
    49. Herz, Benedikt & Mejer, Malwina, 2021. "The effect of design protection on price and price dispersion: Evidence from automotive spare parts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    50. Margaret A. Peteraf & Jay B. Barney, 2003. "Unraveling the resource-based tangle," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 309-323.
    51. Peter Teirlinck & Andre Spithoven, 2008. "The Spatial Organization of Innovation: Open Innovation, External Knowledge Relations and Urban Structure," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(5), pages 689-704.
    52. Fernando Galindo-Rueda & Fabien Verger, 2016. "OECD Taxonomy of Economic Activities Based on R&D Intensity," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2016/4, OECD Publishing.
    53. Thomas Hatzichronoglou, 1997. "Revision of the High-Technology Sector and Product Classification," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 1997/2, OECD Publishing.
    54. James Utterback & Bengt-Arne Vedin & Eduardo Alvarez & Sten Ekman & Susan Walsh Sanderson & Bruce Tether & Roberto Verganti, 2006. "Design-Inspired Innovation," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 6052, April.
    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. Joseph Amankwah-Amoah & Stephen Kehinde Medase, 2024. "Extracting Innovation Value from Intellectual Property: Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(2), pages 8933-8967, June.
    2. Pablo Morales & Meindert Flikkema & Carolina Castaldi & Ard‐Pieter de Man, 2024. "Why use or forgo formal and informal appropriation mechanisms? A qualitative study of sustainable innovations from small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(3), pages 1937-1961, March.
    3. Yougen Cao & Shengce Ren & Mei Du, 2022. "Strategic trademark management: a systematic literature review and prospects for future research," Journal of Brand Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 29(5), pages 435-453, September.
    4. Max Nathan & Anna Rosso, 2017. "Innovative events," Development Working Papers 429, Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano, University of Milano, revised 08 Apr 2019.
    5. Carolina Castaldi, 2021. "Sustainable innovation and intellectual property rights: friends, foes or perfect strangers?," LEM Papers Series 2021/11, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    6. Nathan, Max & Rosso, Anna, 2022. "Innovative events: product launches, innovation and firm performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    7. repec:osf:socarx:t3jrq_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. 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.
    9. Block, Jörn & Lambrecht, Darius & Willeke, Tom & Cucculelli, Marco & Meloni, Damiano, 2025. "Green patents and green trademarks as indicators of green innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    10. Barros, Henrique M., 2021. "Neither at the cutting edge nor in a patent-friendly environment: Appropriating the returns from innovation in a less developed economy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    11. Carolina Castaldi, 2024. "The geography of urban innovation beyond patents only: New evidence on large and secondary cities in the United States," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(7), pages 1248-1272, May.
    12. D’Agostino, Lorena M. & Schiavo, Stefano, 2024. "Using trademarks to fend off import competition: Evidence from the top R&D-spending companies," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 33(1).
    13. Nasirov, Shukhrat, 2020. "Trademark value indicators: Evidence from the trademark protection lifecycle in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    14. Block, Joern H. & De Vries, Geertjan & Schumann, Jan H. & Sandner, Philipp, 2014. "Trademarks and venture capital valuation," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 525-542.
    15. Drivas, Kyriakos & Anagnosti, Afroditi, 2025. "On the role of innovation in the generation of value-added trade opportunities," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 128033, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Gnangnon, Sèna Kimm, 2022. "Effect of the duration of membership in the World Trade Organization on Trademark Applications," EconStor Preprints 253266, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    17. Seip, Marcel & Castaldi, Carolina & Flikkema, Meindert & De Man, Ard-Pieter, 2018. "The timing of trademark application in innovation processes," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 72, pages 34-45.
    18. Ghisetti, Claudia & Montresor, Sandro & Vezzani, Antonio, 2021. "Design and environmental technologies: Does ‘green-matching’ actually help?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(5).
    19. 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.
    20. Herz, Benedikt & Mejer, Malwina, 2020. "The effect of design protection on price and price dispersion: Evidence from automotive spare parts," MPRA Paper 109645, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 Sep 2021.
    21. Leonardo Costa Ribeiro & Ulisses Pereira Santos & Valbona Muzaka, 2022. "Trademarks as an indicator of innovation: towards a fuller picture," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(1), pages 481-508, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:spr:scient:v:130:y:2025:i:8:d:10.1007_s11192-025-05351-w. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.