The impact of stronger intellectual property rights on science and technology in developing countries

Research Policy

Volumn 35, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 808-824

  Forero Pineda, Clemente ^a  

^a Universidad de los Andes   (Colombia)

Author keywords

Access; Development; Intellectual property; Patents; Scientific cooperation

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; DRUG PRODUCTS PLANTS; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY; LAWS AND LEGISLATION; PATENTS AND INVENTIONS; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

ACCESS; ETHNIC KNOWLEDGE; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS PROTECTION; SCIENTIFIC COOPERATION;

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY;

EID: 33745240022     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2006.04.003     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Aboites J., and Cimoli M. Intellectual property rights and national innovation systems. Some Lessons from the Mexican Experience Revue d'Économie Industrielle 99 (2002) 215-232
2. Albuquerque E. Domestic patents and developing countries: arguments for their study and data from Brazil (1980-1995). Research Policy 29 (2001) 1047-1060
3. Albuquerque E., and Bernardes A. Cross-over, thresholds and interactions between science and technology: a tentative simplified model and initial notes about statistics from 120 countries. Research Policy 32 (2003) 867-887
4. Bancomext, 2000. The pharmaceutical industry in Mexico, http://mexico.businessline.gob.mx/espa/sectorial_i/farmaceutica_ingles.html, accessed August 2, 2000.
5. Barton J. Intellectual property, biotechnology, and international trade. Two examples. In: Cottier T., and Mavroidis P. (Eds). Intellectual Property: Trade, Competition, and Sustainable Development (2003), University of Michigan Press, Michigan 215
6. Bessy, C., Brousseau, E., 1997. The Governance of Intellectual Property Rights: Patents and Copyrights in France and the US. Working Paper, ATOM, Université de Paris I, September.
7. Bubert, I., Büning, M., 2001. Trademark Law: Domain Name Issues. In: Walden, I., Hörnle, J. (Eds.), E-commerce Law and Practice in Europe. Woodhead, loose-leaf.
8. Byström, M., Einarsson, P., Nycander, G., 1999. Fair and Equitable: Sharing the Benefits from Use of Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge. Swedish Scientific Council on Biological Diversity.
9. Cañón C., and Forero-Pineda C. La Propiedad Intelectual en la Negociación de los Acuerdos Comerciales. Economía Colombiana 300 (2004) 45-57
10. CGIAR, 2001. Consultative Group in International Agricultural Research. What is CGIAR? http://www.cgiar.org/whatis.htm, accessed April 26, 2001.
11. Chakravarthi, R., 1999. IPRs, Genes, and Life-patenting, South-North Development Monitor, SUNS, http://www.biotech-info.net/IPRs_genes.html, accessed August 31, 2001.
12. Chin J., and Grossman G. Intellectual property rights and north-south trade. In: Jones R., and Krueger A. (Eds). The Political Economy of International Trade (1990), Basil Blackwell, Cambridge 90-107
13. Colciencias, 1993. Tecnologías de la Vida para el Desarrollo: Bases para un Plan del Programa Nacional de Biotecnología. Tercer Mundo Editores, Bogotá.
14. CORFO, 1970. La Propiedad Industrial en Chile y su Impacto en el Desarrollo Industrial, Documento Preliminar (Santiago, Septiembre).
15. Correa, C., 1996. Uruguay Round and Drugs. WHO Task Force on Health Economics/Action Program on Essential Drugs (Geneva).
16. Correa, C., 1999. Intellectual Property Rights and the Use of Compulsory Licenses: Options for Developing Countries. Working paper No. 5 (Trade Related Agenda, Development and Equity, South Centre), October.
17. Correa, C., 2000. Implementing National Public Health Policies in the Framework of WTO Agreements. World Health Organization, http://www.cct-freiburg.de/who/global/documents/implementingnatpubhlthpol.pdf, accessed August 31, 2001.
18. Cruz, M., 1998. History of the Industrial Property Strategies and Transfer of Technology Administrative System in Brazil, 1950-1997. Universidade Estacio de Sa, http://www.estacio.br/categorias/cursos/mestrado/mestrado/adm/artigos/hi.htm, accessed August 31, 2001.
19. Dasgupta P., and David P.A. Toward a new economics of science. Research Policy 23 (1994) 487-521
20. Davenport S., and Bibby D. Rethinking a national innovation system: the small country as "SME". Technology Analysis and Strategic Management 11 (1999) 431-462
21. David P.A. Intellectual property institutions and the panda's thumb: patents, copyrights, and trade secrets in economic theory and history. In: Wallerstein M.B., Mogee M., and Schoen R.A. (Eds). Global Dimensions of Intellectual Property Rights in Science and Technology (1993), National Academy Press, Washington, DC 19-62
22. David P.A. Re-thinking technology transfers: incentives, institutions and knowledge-based industrial development. In: Feinstein C.H., and Howe C. (Eds). Chinese Technology Transfer in the 1990s: Current Experience, Historical Problems and International Perspectives (1997), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham 13-37
23. David, P.A., 2000. A Tragedy of the Public Knowledge 'Commons'?: Global Science, Intellectual Property and the Digital Technology Boomerang. Electronic Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, OIPRC, Oxford, September [Also available at: http://siepr.stanford.edu/papers/pdf/00-02.html].
24. Deardorff A. Welfare effects of global patent protection. Economica 59 (1992) 35-51
25. Forero-Pineda, C., 1997. Convergence of Research Processes, Big and Small Scientific Communities. IIASA Workshop, Laxenburg, Austria, May.
26. Forero-Pineda C. Scientific research, information flows, and the impact of database protection in developing countries. In: Esanu J., and Uhlir P. (Eds). Open Access and the Public Domain in Digital Data and Information for Science (2004), National Academies Press, Washington DC
27. Forero-Pineda C., and Jaramillo-Salazar H. The access of researchers from developing countries to international science and technology. International Social Science Journal 54 (2002) 129-140
28. Grossman, G., Lai, E., 2002. International Protection of Intellectual Property, NBER Working Paper No. 8704, Cambridge, January.
29. Helpman E. Innovation, imitation, and intellectual property rights. Econometrica 61 (1993) 1247-1280
30. Jaffe A. The US patent system in transition: policy innovation and the innovation process. Research Policy 29 (2000) 531-557
31. Jaramillo, H., Latorre, C., Restrepo, J.M., 2004. Mercado de Medicamentos, Regulación y Políticas Públicas. Working Paper # 34, Facultad de Economía, Universidad del Rosario, Bogotá.
32. Khor, M., 2001. The Proposed New Issues in the WTO and the Interests of Developing Countries. Third World Network, www.twnside.org.sg/title/mk10.htm, accessed August 31, 2001.
33. Krugman P. A model of innovation, technology transfer, and the world distribution of income. Journal of Political Economy 87 (1979) 253-266
34. Lai, E., Qiu, L., 2001. The North's Intellectual Property Rights-Standard for the South? City University of Hong Kong Working Paper, October.
35. Lanjouw, J., 1998. The Introduction of Pharmaceutical Product Patents in India: "Heartless Exploitation of the Poor and Suffering". National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper Series No. 6366, Cambridge.
36. Lerner, J., 1994. The Importance of Trade Secrecy: Evidence from Civil Litigation. Harvard University Working Paper, November.
37. Lerner, J., 2000. Where Does State Street Lead? A First Look at Finance Patents, 1971-2000. National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper Series No. 7918, Cambridge, September.
38. López, A., 2002. El Impacto de la Protección de las Bases de Datos no Originales Sobre los Países de América Latina y el Caribe. WIPO Working Paper, November 4-8, Geneva.
39. Maskus, K., 1997. Strengthening Intellectual Property Rights in Asia: Implications for Australia. Centre for International Economic Studies, University of Adelaide, www.adelaide.edu.au/CIES/sp9716.pdf, accessed August 31, 2001.
40. Mossinghoff, G., 1999. Progress in the Pharmaceutical Industry. Introduction to Intellectual Property Rights. U.S. Department of State. International Information Programs, October. http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/intelprp/progress.htm.
41. McCalman P. Reaping what you sow: an empirical analysis of international patent harmonization. Journal of International Economics 55 (2001) 161-186
42. Ministère de la Recherche, 2000. La Loi sur l'Innovation et la Recherche. République Francaise, http://www.recherche.gouv.fr/technologie/mesur/loi/inovloi.htm.
43. National Academy of Sciences, 1997. Intellectual Property Rights and the Dissemination of Research Tools in Molecular Biology. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
44. Oh, C., 2001. IPRs and Biological Resources: Implications for Developing Countries. Third World Network Working Paper, http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/cecilia.htm, accessed August 31, 2001.
45. Owen-Smith J., and Powell W. Careers and contradictions: faculty responses to the transformation of knowledge and its uses in the life sciences. Research in the Sociology of Work 10 (2001) 109-140
46. Penrose, E., 1951. The Economics of the International Patent System. Policies Relating to Technology of the Countries of the Andean Pact: Their Foundations. UNCTAD, Johns Hopkins Press.
47. Ragavan, S., 2001. Patent Amendments in India in the Wake of TRIPs. Casrip Newsletter, Winter, http://www.law.washington.edu/casrip/newsletter/newsv8i1Ragavan.pdf.
48. Rautiainen, T., 2001. Appendix 1: What is the Bayh-Dole Act, What Prompted It and Why Is It Important to University Technology Transfer. Pharmaceutical Business in California, http://www.tekes.fi/julkaisut/biopharma/appendix_1.htm.
49. Sampat, B.N., 2004. Patenting and US Academic Research in the Twentieth Century: The World Before And After Bayh-Dole. Research Policy 33, this issue.
50. SUNS/IPS, 1995. Parlamento Obstruye Nueva ley de Patentes. Tercer Mundo Económico. http://www.tercermundoeconomico.org.uy/TME-67/actualidades02.html.
51. Vaitsos C. Comercialización de Tecnología en el Pacto Andino (1973), Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima
52. Van den Klundert T., and Smulders S. North-south knowledge spillovers and competition: convergence versus divergence. Journal of Economic Development 30 (1996) 213-232
53. Vivas, E.D., 2001. Análisis de la Relación del ADPIC y de la Implementación Nacional de la CBD: El Caso del Sistema de Acceso y el Desvelo de los Recursos Genéticos en Venezuela. Diplomacia Comercial/UNCTAD, www.comunidadandina.org/agsoc/pdf/2David%20Vivas.pdf, accessed August 31, 2001.
54. World Health Organization and World Trade Organization, 2001. Report of the Workshop on Differential Pricing and Financing of Essential Drugs. Høsbjørg, Norway, April.
55. Zerda-Sarmiento, A., 2003. Derechos de Propiedad Intelectual sobre el Conocimiento Vernáculo, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogota, 190 p.
56. Zerda-Sarmiento A., and Forero-Pineda C. Intellectual property rights over ethnic communities' knowledge. International Social Science Journal 54 (2002) 99-114