Ohio State University Economists: “Increase in Southern IPR Does Not Always Benefit North”

By Dr. Danny Friedmann

 

A never ending scholarly debate, put on the agenda by Professor Keith E. Maskus many years ago, about whether intellectual property rights harness or hinder Economic Development including Foreign Direct Investment from North (developed countries) to South (developing countries) has been enriched by Yuan Wang and Huanxing Yang (both Ohio State University, Department of Economics) with some interesting insights.

 

In their article ‘Foreign Direct Investment Cycles and Intellectual Property Rights in Developing Countries’ Wang and Yang distinguish between short and long run effects of IPR in developing countries.

 

Their model generates FDI cycles:

“[N]ew FDI, which brings new generations of products, occurs only when the technology gap between the South and the North exactly reaches some threshold. The FDI cycle length captures how frequent new FDI occurs, and in general determines the technology gap between the North and the South. Within this framework, we identify the short run effect and the long run effect of South IPR. In the short run (within each FDI cycle), a stronger IPR tends to discourage imitation and reduce South welfare. However, in the long run (across FDI cycles), a stronger IPR tends to reduce the FDI cycle length (FDI becomes more frequent) and increase South welfare.”

 

The authorse gave the following example of a FDI cycle in the automotive industry Volkswagen Passat’s production in China (see more here):

Volkswagen Passat B2 was introduced in Europe in 1981. Its variant Santana has been produced in China since 1986, and another variant Quantum was produced in Brazil from 1985 to 2002. In late 1980s, new generations of Passat, B3 and B4, were introduced in Europe (1988) and North American (1990). But they were never produced in China, and Volkswagen started to produce them in South America only after 1995. However, shortly after the newer generation of Passat, B5, was introduced in 1996 in Europe, Volkswagen started to produce it in China.

However, the big improvements in IPR in China came in the run up to WTO membership in 2001 and afterwards, so this example is probably in need of an update.

The conclusion of the study confirms previous findings that developing countries, and especially least-developed countries, each have different IPRs requirements to maximize their welfare.

 

According to Wang and Yang:

 

the “North does not always benefit from an increase in the Southern IPR. This is because an increase in the Southern IPR might reduce the equilibrium cycle length. In this case, FDI would occur more frequently, which reduces the expected length of the monopoly of any existing FDI, or the competition among different generations of the Northern FDIs is intensified.

 

Read Wang and Yang’s article here.
continue reading…

Professor T. Ginsburg’s “Eastphalia” Theory Applicable To IPR Law in China?

Yesterday, Professor Tom Ginsburg of University of Chicago Law School was giving a presentation at the University of Hong Kong about his paper ‘Eastphalia As The Perfection Of Westphalia’, which will be published in the Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies. In it he is trying to answer whether the following claims are each valid […]

IPR elasticity of FDI is back in China?

The last years there seemed to be no relation between the level of protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights and foreign direct investments (FDI) in China. Most companies did not let them scare by the intellectual property related challenges in China and invested massively. Of course one can argue that if China had a […]

IPR Infringements Can Make Investments in China Capricious

The Financial Times of January 4th (online), 5th (HK paper version) has an interesting article about famous stock-picker Anthony Bolton who is trying his expertise/luck in China. In the article , written by Sundeep Tucker, Jamil Anderlini and Robert Cookon, they cite Jack Perkowski, managing partner of JFP Holdings about legal peculiaraties that influence investments […]

Why STAs are Different From EPAs/FTAs and Influencing IPR norms is Preferable to Being Influenced

Professor Peter K. Yu , one of the leading scholars on Intellectual Property Rights in China (director of the Intellectual Property Law Center at Drake University School of Law), informed me that he just wrote a paper called ‘Sino Trade Agreements and China’s Global Intellectual Property Rights‘. It is a great thought provoking read. In […]