Defining and Measuring the Institutional Context of National Intellectual Property Systems in a post-TRIPS world

Abstract

Indices that approximate for the quality and strength of intellectual property (IP) systems are commonly used as variables in empirical international management studies. However, while international IP systems have radically transformed after the implementation of the TRIPS agreement, these contextual changes have not been accounted for in existing international management research approaches. This study examines the institutional context of IP systems in the post TRIPS implementation years by conceptualizing how IP Law on the books (regulations) and IP Law in practice (enforcement) combine. This enables the identification of two new contextual categories of IP systems that have not been conceptually, theoretically, or empirically captured in existing international management research. A review of the existing literature on indices measuring different aspects of national IP systems provides insights into how to improve future theoretical and empirical international management work that aims to study the effects of the context of IP systems in the post TRIPS era.

Intellectual property rights, imitation, and development. The effect on cross-border mergers and acquisitions

“…It is important to note that the indexes of IPRs systems measure their regulatory aspect but do not address how the enforcement related aspects work in practice (Papageorgiadis and McDonald 2018). Although, enforcement necessarily determines the overall effect of the regulatory aspects of IPRs systems, systematic information on the actual enforcement at the country level is not available.…”

Does multilateral lending aid capital accumulation? Role of intellectual capital and institutional quality

“…The harmonization of national legal systems and its impact on law enforcement in practice gained attention in the recent international business literature. Studies such as (Papageorgiadis et al, 2014) develop an index to measure this, while (Papageorgiadis and McDonald, 2019) present the various measures generated in the literature on how to measure the strength of intellectual property rights. In our analysis, we also investigate whether the implementation of the TRIPs agreement brought any benefit to the developing nations in terms of generating higher capital stocks in the post-TRIPs period.…”

Intellectual Property Rights and Agricultural Development: Evidence from a Worldwide Index of IPRs in Agriculture (1961-2018)

“…We have used the index to investigate the impact of IPRs systems on agricultural productivity (Campi, 2017), international trade of agricultural products (Campi and Dueñas, 2016), and mergers and acquisitions in the agri-food sector . In addition, several authors have used the index to illustrate the strengthening and harmonization of IPRs systems in agriculture, to analyse their impact on agricultural productivity, or have cited the index as a reliable synthetic indicator of the evolution of agricultural IP protection (see, for example Spielman and Ma, 2016;Clancy and Moschini, 2017;Baker et al, 2017;Zhou et al, 2018;Nhemachena et al, 2019;Papageorgiadis and McDonald, 2019;Gold et al, 2019).…”