Skip to main content
Log in

The international regulation of intellectual property

  • Articles
  • Published:
Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The International Regulation of Intellectual Property. — The WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) will usher in a markedly stronger global system of defining and protecting intellectual property rights (IPRs). This paper first discusses the concept of intellectual property and the need for its protection and regulation. It presents evidence on the wide variations in IPRs across countries and discusses how TRIPS will affect these differences. Theoretical predictions about how this stronger system will influence global trade, investment, and technology innovation and diffusion are ambiguous, but limited empirical evidence suggests a modest positive effect overall. However, the distribution of costs and benefits will vary.

Zusammenfassung

Die internationalen Regeln über das geistige Eigentum. Das WHO-Abkommen über die geistigen Eigentumsrechte im grenzüberschreitenden Handel (TRIPS) wird ein wesentlich strengeres weltweites System zur Definition und zum Schutz geistiger Eigentumsrechte (IRPs) einführen. Der Verfasser erörtert zuerst das Konzept des geistigen Eigentums und den Bedarf, es zu schützen und zu regulieren. Er liefert Belege für die starken Variationen der IPRs im LÄndervergleich und prüft, wie das TRIPS diese Unterschiede beeinflu\t. Theoretische Voraussagen darüber, wie dieses strengere System auf internationalen Handel, Investitionen sowie Innovation und Verbreitung technischen Wissens einwirken wird, sind unklar, aber begrenzte empirische Befunde deuten allgemein auf bescheidene positive Wirkungen hin. Allerdings wird die Verteilung von Kosten und Nutzen variieren.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Coe, D. T., E. Helpman, and A. W. Hoffmaister (1997). North-South R&D Spillovers.Economic Journal 107 (January): 134–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Contractor, F. J. (1980). The Profitability of Technology Licensing by US Multinationals: A Framework for Analysis and an Empirical Study.Journal of International Business Studies 11 (2): 40–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, H. (1977). Technology Transfer through Commercial Transactions.Journal of Industrial Economics 26 (2): 161–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eaton, J., and S. J. Kortum (1996). Trade in Ideas: Patenting and Productivity in the OECD.Journal of International Economics 40 (3/4): 251–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evenson, R. E. (1992). Intellectual Property Rights for Appropriate Invention. In J.A. Roumasset and S. Barr (eds.),The Economics of Cooperation: East Asian Development and the Case for Pro-Market Intervention. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrantino, M. J. (1993). The Effect of Intellectual Property Rights on International Trade and Investment.Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 129 (2): 300–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gould, D. M., and W. C. Gruben (1996). The Role of Intellectual Property Rights in Economic Growth.Journal of Development Economics 48 (2): 323–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horstmann, I., and J. R. Markusen (1987). Licensing Versus Direct Investment: A Model of Internalization by the Multinational Enterprise.Canadian Journal of Economics 20 (3): 464–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lai, E. J. (1998). International Intellectual Property Rights Protection and the Rate of Product Innovation.Journal of Development Economics 55 (1): 115–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaCroix, S. (1992). The Political Economy of Intellectual Property Rights in Developing Countries. In J. A. Roumasset and S. Barr (eds.),The Economics of Cooperation: East Asian Development and the Case for Pro-Market Intervention. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J.-Y., and E. Mansfield, (1996). Intellectual Property Protection and U. S. Foreign Direct Investment.Review of Economics and Statistics 78 (2): 181–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levin, R. C., A. K. Klevorick, R. R. Nelson, and S. G. Winter (1987). Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development.Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 3: 783–831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E. (1994). Intellectual Property Protection, Foreign Direct Investment, and Technology Transfer. Discussion Paper 19. International Finance Corporation, Washingtion, D. C.

    Google Scholar 

  • — (1995).Innovation, Technology and the Economy: The Selected Essays of Edwin Mansfield, Volume II. London: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markusen, J. R. (1995). The Boundaries of Multinational Enterprises and the Theory of International Trade.Journal of Economic Perspectives 9 (2): 169–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maskus, K. E. (1996). Intellectual Property Rights in the Global Information Economy. In T. J. Courchene (eds.),Policy Frameworks for a Knowledge Economy. Kingston, Ontario: John Deutsch Institute for the Study of Economic Policy.

    Google Scholar 

  • — (1997a). Implications of Regional and Multilateral Agreements for Intellectual Property Rights.The World Economy 20 (5): 681–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • -Maskus, K. E. (1997b). Intellectual Property Rights in Lebanon. Report to the International Trade Division, The World Bank.

  • Maskus, K. E., and D. Eby-Konan (1994). Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights: Issues and Exploratory Results. In A. V. Deardorff and R. M. Stern (eds.),Analytical and Negotiating Issues in the Global Trading System. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maskus, K. E., and M. Penubarti (1995). How Trade-Related Are Intellectual Property Rights?Journal of International Economics 39 (3/4): 227–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (1996).Trade and Competition: Frictions after the Uruguay Round. OECD/GD(96)105.

  • PrimoBraga, C.A. (1996). Trade-Related Intellectual Property Issues: The Uruguay Round Agreement and Its Economic Implications. In W. Martin and L. A. Winters (eds.),The Uruguay Round and the Developing Countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapp, R. T., and R. P. Rozek (1990). Benefits and Costs of Intellectual Property Protection in Developing Countries.Journal of World Trade 24 (5): 75–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichman, J. H. (1994). Legal Hybrids Between the Patent and Copyright Regimes.Columbia Law Review 94 (8): 2415–2485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reichman, J. H., and P. Samuelson (1997). Intellectual Property Rights in Data?Vanderbilt Law Review 50 (1): 51–166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siebeck, W.E. (eds.) (1990).Strengthening Protection of Intellectual Property in Developing Countries: A Survey of the Literature. World Bank Discussion Paper 112. World Bank, Washington D. C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, P. J. (1998). Are Weak Patent Rights a Barrier to U. S. Exports?Journal of International Economics, forthcoming.

  • Stern, R.(1987). Intellectual Property. In M. Finger and J. Olechowski (eds.),The Uruguay Round: A Handbook on the Multilateral Trade Negotiations. Washington, D. C.: The World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (1986).The Multinational Corporation and the Resource Cost of International Technology Transfer. Cambridge: Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNCTAD (1996). Economic and Legal Implications for the Developing Countries of Implementing the TRIPS Agreement.Geneva: UNCTAD.

Download references

Authors

About this article

Cite this article

Maskus, K.E. The international regulation of intellectual property. Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv 134, 186–208 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02708092

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02708092

Navigation