An Integrated Model of Legal Transplantation: The Diffusion of Intellectual Property Law in Developing Countries

Abstract

Why do some countries adopt exogenous rules into their domestic law when those rules contravene their specific interests? We draw on the policy-diffusion literature to identify four causal mechanisms that we hypothesize explain the adoption of such rules. While existing literature treats these mechanisms as independent, we argue that each works in combination with the others to facilitate legal transplantation. While one mechanism-coercion-tends to initiate the transplantation process, it fades over time and three others largely supplant it: contractualization, socialization, and regulatory competition. These mechanisms act in a mutually supportive manner. We test our claims via a quantitative analysis of legal transplants in the field of intellectual property (IP) that incorporates an original index of IP protection in 121 developing countries over 14 years. This article concludes with a plea for theoretical eclecticism, acknowledging multi-causality and context-conditionality. Any comprehensive explanation of legal transplantation must include the identification of mutual reinforcement between causal mechanisms, rather than simply rank their relative contributions.

TRIPS Implementation and Secondary Pharmaceutical Patenting in Brazil and India

“…If that is true, national differences about TRIPS implementation, including policies and practices regarding the granting of secondary patents, are relevant to future theorizing and empirical work on patents and development. In particular, if there are gaps between patent laws on the books and how patent prosecution works in practice -as our sample appears to show for India and Brazil -the common approach of characterizing countries' patent systems based on statutory and treaty provisions could yield misleading impressions (Liu and La Croix 2015;Morin and Gold 2014;Park 2008). We hope that the approach introduced here, based on tracing of actual patent prosecution outcomes, can contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the effects of TRIPS among both scholars and practitioners.…”

The Right of Access to Environmental Information and Legal Transplant Theory: Lessons from London and Beijing

“…27 allowing the 'legal elite' to build on the experience of the donor jurisdiction and prevent costly errors arising from the implementation of unsuitable laws. 28 Additionally, the desire to increase the legitimacy of the state at the domestic and international level through incorporating internationally recognized legal norms into domestic law 29 has been identified as a key reason for jurisdictions to look beyond their own borders for legal reforms. This is of particular importance in the context of the right of access to environmental information because the Aarhus Convention acts as the normative international instrument in this area.…”

Does intellectual property lead to economic growth? Insights from a novel IP dataset

“…In this scenario, (mostly foreign) investors react to a country's increased levels of IP not to actually obtain IP rights there, but because increases in IP protection feed into their belief that the economy is likely to grow. According to this theory, it would thus be these political beliefssuggested by Briggs (2010) and described in detail by Morin and Gold (2014) rather than direct economic consequences of IP alone that lead to growth. This does not imply that IP has no direct effects.…”