IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Strenghtening Intellectual Property rights: Experience from the 1986 Taiwanese Patent Reforms

  • Shih-Tse Lo

    ()

    (Department of Economics, Concordia University)

Registered author(s):

    Intellectual property rights (IPR) have recently moved to the forefront of debates over international policy. As each country establishes its own institutions of IPR, a divergence exists between net producers and net consumers in the returns to providing strong protection. Under pressure from the developed world, many developing countries have begun to strengthen their IPR, particularly as regards patents. These changes in policy provide us with an opportunity to learn more about the effects of intellectual property institutions in developing countries. Whether and to what extent do stronger IPR spur inventive activity in a developing country? What are the factors or characteristics of industries in which strengthening patent rights has the most favorable impact on inventive activity? Will the strengthening of IPR in developing countries induce more foreign direct investment and technology transfer from abroad? In an attempt to answer these questions, this paper uses the 1986 Taiwanese patent reforms to examine the impact of strengthening patent rights in a developing economy. The evidence on the number of patents awarded to Taiwanese inventors as well as that on R&D spending in Taiwan suggests that the reforms stimulated additional inventive activity, especially in industries where patent protection is generally regarded as an effective strategy for extracting returns, and in industries which are more R&D intensive. The reforms also seemed to induce additional foreign direct investment in Taiwan. On the other hand, for industries that chiefly use other mechanisms to extract returns from their innovations, such as secrecy, the strengthening of patent rights had little effect on their inventive activity. Neither investment in R&D nor the number of patents awarded in these industries appeared to be much affected by the strengthening of patent protection.

    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://economics.concordia.ca/documents/working_papers/04004sl.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Concordia University, Department of Economics in its series Working Papers with number 04004.

    as
    in new window

    Length: 55 pages
    Date of creation: Sep 2004
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:crd:wpaper:04004
    Contact details of provider: Postal: 1455, de Maisonneuve Blvd, Montréal, Québec, H3G 1M8
    Phone: (514) 848-3900
    Fax: (514) 848-4536
    Web page: http://economics.concordia.ca

    More information through EDIRC

    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. Richard Gilbert & Carl Shapiro, 1990. "Optimal Patent Length and Breadth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 106-112, Spring.
    2. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G, 1981. "Several Tests for Model Specification in the Presence of Alternative Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(3), pages 781-93, May.
    3. Kortum, Samuel & Lerner, Josh, 1999. "What is behind the recent surge in patenting?1," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 1-22, January.
    4. Josh Lerner, 2002. "150 Years of Patent Protection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 221-225, May.
    5. Petra Moser, 2003. "How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from Nineteenth-Century World Fairs," NBER Working Papers 9909, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. MacKinnon, James G. & White, Halbert & Davidson, Russell, 1983. "Tests for model specification in the presence of alternative hypotheses : Some further results," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 53-70, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Jean O. Lanjouw & Iain Cockburn, 2000. "Do Patents Matter?: Empirical Evidence after GATT," NBER Working Papers 7495, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Zvi Griliches, 1990. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Working Papers 3301, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1999. "Innovation in Israel 1968-97: A Comparative Analysis Using Patent Data," NBER Working Papers 7022, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. 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), pages 783-832.
    12. Denicolo, Vincenzo, 1996. "Patent Races and Optimal Patent Breadth and Length," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 249-65, September.
    13. Tandon, Pankaj, 1982. "Optimal Patents with Compulsory Licensing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 90(3), pages 470-86, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:crd:wpaper:04004. 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: (Economics Department)

    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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.