tentang IPR
-
Upload
siti-nur-azizah -
Category
Documents
-
view
225 -
download
0
Transcript of tentang IPR
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
1/117
Contents
Preface ........................................................................................................................
iii
Abbreviations..viii
Acknowledgements .....................................................................................................
. xi
Executive summary ..................................................................................................
xiii
Introduction
..............................................................................................................xiii
Main findings from past researc ...............................................................................
xiv
Intellectual property rigts! foreign direct investment and international
trade .................................................................................................. xiv
Intellectual property rigts! international tecnology transfer and
domestic innovation........................................................................... xiv
Intellectual property rigts and public ealt .................................................... xv
Intellectual property rigts! genetic resources and traditional knowledge ......... xvi
"uture researc directions .........................................................................................
xvii
Intellectual property rigts! foreign direct investment! trade and licensing ...... xvii
Intellectual property rigts! international tecnology transfer and
domestic innovation......................................................................... xviii
Intellectual property rigts and public ealt ................................................. xviii
Intellectual property rigts! genetic resources and traditional knowledge ......... xix
C#AP$E% & Introduction ..................................................................................... &
C#AP$E% ' Intellectual property and foreign direct investment .......................... (
'.& Introduction ...................................................................................................... (
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
2/117
'.' Intellectual property and foreign direct investment) te teory ..........................
*
'.'.& $e case for stronger intellectual property rigts .................................. *
'.'.' $e case against stronger intellectual property rigts ............................ +
'.( Intellectual property and foreign direct investment) te empirical
evidence ............................................................................................................ +
'.(.& Evidence from te perspective of developed countries .......................... +
'.(.' Evidence from te perspective of developing countries ......................... ,
'.* Conclusions and future researc directions ........................................................
-
C#AP$E% ( Intellectual property and trade ....................................................... & IPand /eveloping Countries %A0/ Europe
vi
(.& Introduction .................................................................................................... &
(.' Intellectual property and trade) te teory .......................................................
&&
(.'.& $e case for stronger intellectual property rigts ................................ &&
(.'.' $e case against stronger intellectual property rigts .......................... &&
(.( Intellectual property and trade) te empirical evidence .....................................
&'
(.(.& Evidence from te perspective of developed countries ........................ &'
(.(.' Evidence from te perspective of developing countries ....................... &*
(.* Conclusions and future researc directions ......................................................
&+
C#AP$E% * Intellectual property and innovation .............................................. &1
*.& Introduction .................................................................................................... &1
*.' Intellectual property rigts and innovation) te teory .....................................
&1
*.'.& $e case for stronger intellectual property rigts ................................ &,
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
3/117
*.'.' $e case against stronger intellectual property rigts .......................... &,
*.( Intellectual property and innovation) te empirical evidence ............................
'
*.(.& Evidence on international tecnology transfer .................................... '
*.(.' Evidence on domestic innovation ....................................................... '&
*.* Conclusions and future researc directions ......................................................
''
C#AP$E% + Intellectual property and public ealt .......................................... '+
+.& Introduction .................................................................................................... '+
+.' $e importance of patents for parmaceutical innovation ...............................
'2
+.( Intellectual property rigts and access to innovations .......................................
'1
+.(.& Patents are taken out only in selected countries .................................. '1
+.(.' Accessing ealtcare innovations by lowering prices ........................... '1
+.* Intellectual property rigts and innovation for ealt ......................................
(
+.*.& 3imits in using intellectual property rigts to address developing
country problems ............................................................................... (
+.*.' Creating conditions for more effective intellectual property
policy ................................................................................................. ('
+.+ Conclusions and furter researc directions .....................................................
(+
C#AP$E% 2 Intellectual property! genetic resources and traditional
knowledge ...................................................................................... (,
2.& Introduction .................................................................................................... (,
2.' Intellectual property! traditional knowledge and genetic resources) te
teory .............................................................................................................. (-
2.'.& An emerging field of researc ............................................................. (-
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
4/117
2.'.' Assumptions about te nature of traditional knowledge ..................... *
2.'.( #uman rigts discourse ..................................................................... *
2.( Intellectual property! genetic resources and traditional knowledge) te
empirical evidence ........................................................................................... *&
2.(.& Evidence from te perspective of developed countries ........................ *'
2.(.' Evidence from te perspective of developing countries ....................... *(
vii
2.* Conclusions and furter researc directions .....................................................
*1
C#AP$E% 1 Conclusion ..................................................................................... *,
%eferences .......................................................................................... *-
%eferences .............................................................................................. +
Appendix) International patent protection 4 &-24'+ ..........................................
2+
viii
Abbreviations
AI/5 Ac6uired Immune /eficiency 5yndrome
/fI/ /epartment for International /evelopment
"A7 8nited 0ations "ood and Agriculture 7ffice
"/I "oreign direct investment
9I 9eograpical indication
#I: #uman Immunodeficiency :irus
IP Intellectual property
IP7 Intellectual Property 7ffice
IP%s Intellectual property rigts
P:P Plant variety protection
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
5/117
%;/ %esearc and development
$%IP5 Agreement on $radeation
Executive summary
Introduction
$e debate concerning te economic implications of intellectual property rigts
?IP%s@ as
gained considerable attention over te past two decades in te context of te =orld
$rade
7rgani>ations ?=$7@ Agreement on $rade
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
6/117
strengten teir national intellectual property ?IP@ regimes! in order to armonise
tem
wit tose of developed countries.
$e movement towards strengtening IP%s in te laws of developing countries was
initiated by developed countries under te belief tat tis would generate additional
profits
leading to more researc and development ?%;/@! and it would be necessary to fuel
economic growt in tose countries. #owever! suc belief attracted many critics!
particularly researcers! wo stressed tat tis movement was initiated against
developing
countries! underscoring te absence of empirical evidence to Bustify te socioynska Gavorcik!
'*@. %A0/ Europe IP and "oreign /irect Investment
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
27/117
+
'.'.' $e case against stronger intellectual property rigts
5trengtening intellectual property rigts can increase market power
5trong IP%s negatively influence "/I by providing rigts olders wit increasedmarket
power. As a result! strong IP%s! at least teoretically! cause firms to divest and
reduce teir
service to foreign countries ?Maskus and Penubarti! &--+D Primo raga and "ink!
&--,a@.
$e market power effect can reduce te elasticity of demand facing te foreign
firm!
inducing tem to invest 4 or produce 4 less of its patentable product in te ost
country!
or products made by a patentable process in te market wit te stronger IP%s.
5tronger
IP%s can allow te practice of iger prices by foreign firms because IP%s reduce
competition among firms. $erefore! stronger prices can compensate for lower
investment
or production.
5tronger intellectual property rigts can deter foreign direct investment by
encouraging
licensing
0ot only can strong IP%s increase te market power of foreign firms! but tey also
can
cause multinationals to switc teir preferred mode of delivery from foreign
production
and %;/ to licensing ?Primo raga and "ink! &--,a@. "errantino ?&--(@ argues tat
firms
prefer "/I over licensing wen protection is weak! as firms are more able to
maintain
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
28/117
direct control over teir proprietary assets troug internalised foreign production
or iniarg and =elc! ',@. More
generally! international trade is viewed as an important instrument to reduce
poverty in
developing countries ?8nited 0ations Conference on $rade and /evelopment
?80C$A/@! '*@ by facilitating a process of sustained economic growt!
developing
productive capacities and expanding employment opportunities. "or most
developing
countries! exports allow tem to ac6uire goods troug importation tat are
necessary for
economic growt and poverty reduction! but are not produced domestically. In turn!
exports can make it possible to transform underutilised natural resources and
surplus
labour into foreign excange! in order to pay for imports to support economic
growt.
#owever! tis process re6uires speed and stability in export growt so as to meet
growing
import demand sufficiently.
/espite te results of tese empirical studies sowing te potential benefits of tradefor
developing countries! several prominent economists ?5tiglit>! '(D 5amuelson!
'*@ ave
argued tat! as guided by te rules set out in recent multilateral and bilateral
agreements!
international trade remains unfair to developing countries! as te maBority of gains
from
trade are accrued to developed countries. Moreover Cang ?''@ sows tat many
developed countries did not pursue trade liberalisation wen tey were climbing te
economic ladder of success in te nineteent century.
$e $%IP5 Agreement and increases in te strengt of IP%s troug bilateral
agreements
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
39/117
in te $%IP5
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
40/117
5tronger IP%s confer ownersip advantages to firms serving foreign markets by
providing
legal recourse against violation of teir assets. In tis regard! stronger IP%s expand
te
markets served by firms.
In addition! strong IP%s can increase bilateral excange to foreign markets by
reducing te
costs associated wit preventing loss of knowledge assets. 5uc costs consist of
foregone
revenues resulting from reduced bilateral excange andJor expenses incurred to
make
knowledge assets difficult to imitate. $us! under market expansion conditions!
strengtening IP%s can positively affect trade ?Maskus and Penubarti! &--+@!
especially
wen te destination country as strong imitative abilities ?5mit! '&@.
International armonisation of intellectual property rigts regimes can reduce te
transaction costs associated wit trade
/iscrepancies among national IP% regimes create effects tat are comparable to
non
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
41/117
Altoug strong IP%s enance ownersip advantage! tis enanced ownersip can
increase
or decrease bilateral excange. $e market power concept olds tat strong rigts
reduce
bilateral excange by ensuring a temporary monopoly over te protected
knowledge. $is
market power is attributed to te patent ?grant@ older! weter domestic or
foreign. %A0/ Europe IP and $rade
&'
"irms tat secure strong patent protection in foreign markets can exercise teir
market
power by restricting 6uantity and increasing te unit price of bilateral excange to
tat
market ?Maskus and Penubarti! &--+D "ink and Primo raga! '*@.
"irms beaviour depends on a variety of conditions. "or example! market power
can be
generated by relatively modest strengt of IP%s wen markets are segmented!wen few
close substitutes are available and tecnical absorption capacities are weak.
Concomitantly!
strong IP%s can reinforce market segmentation and reduce te ability to substitute
products. As a result! a negative relationsip can emerge between te strengt of
IP%s and
bilateral flows under market power conditions! especially wen tecnical absorptive
capacities are weak ?5mit! '&@. "irms are likely to reduce te 6uantity supplied
and
increase te protected products prices.
5tronger intellectual property rigts can deter trade and encourage licensing
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
42/117
A furter source of ambiguity stems from te fact tat differing levels of IP%s can
affect a
firms decision about its preferred mode of serving a foreign market.
In an environment caracterised by strong rigts! a firm may coose to serve a
foreign
market by "/I! or by licensing its intellectual assets rater tan troug direct
export. In
tis respect! strengtening intellectual property protection can ave negative
effects on
trade flows ?"ink and Primo raga! '*@.
(.( Intellectual property and trade) te empirical evidence
$e empirical literature on te effects of IP%s on trade as grown over te past two
decades. $e empirical evidence comes mainly from econometric studies and! to a
lesser
extent! from case studies.
$e empirical evidence can be divided into two main bodies of work) first!
examining te
impact of IP%s on trade flows from te perspective of developed countriesD and
second!
investigating ow IP%s can affect economic growt in developing countries troug
trade.
(.(.& Evidence from te perspective of developed countries
Intellectual property rigts positively affect trade! at least wit countries wit ig
tecnical absorptive capabilities
Early studies based on aggregate trade data suggested tat firms in developed
countries
were influenced by te strengt of importing countries IP regimes wen engaging
in
export activities. 8sing bilateral data for 85 exports from &-,- and covering (+
partner
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
43/117
countries! eiter developed or developing! Primo raga and "ink ?&--1@ estimated
te
impact of te strengt of IP%s as measured by te %appek index on armsed selectively and imaginatively ?'') -(-@. #owever!
pursuing
tis option aggressively is subBect to significant power relations. "or example! te
85
5ection (& =atc 3ist in te $rade Act of &-1* allows it to employ measures
against any
country tat it considers to be denying 85 companies or persons ade6uate and
effective
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
72/117
protection of teir IP rigts ?Parliamentary 7ffice of 5cience and $ecnology! '&@.
Abbotts ?'+@ legal analysis of te =$7 trade rules finds tat global institutions
need to
undertake regular cecks and balances to te $%IP5 framework! wile ensuring tat
te
85A does not exert its power to alter =$7 rules in bilateral arrangements ?i.e.
$%IP5on! '1@
find
tat te global pricing strategy tat best combines e6uity wit coverage of %;/
costs is
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
73/117
one were prices are muc lower in nations wit a low ability to pay! tan in
wealty
countries. #owever! suc differential pricing faces two callenges.
&(
"or example! local parmaceutical companies may obtain compulsory licenses to
produce generic versions of
patented medicines! or to import generic versions of medicines from foreign
manufacturers. %A0/ Europe IP and Public #ealt
'-
$e first issue is in parallel importing!
&*
were differential pricing is tougt to be
undermined by low
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
74/117
te nature of media coverage and te efficacy of various advocacy and none@ is ig! but
creating viable markets entails a concerted international effort! suc as te one
displayed in setting up an advanced purcase commitment
&1
for pneumococcal
vaccines.
"unding as improved! IP as been strengtened and te neglected disease
landscape as canged considerably since &-- in an effort to engage te
parmaceutical industry.
#owever! parmaceutical industries! including tose in countries suc as India!
are responding imperfectly to developing country needs. Instead! tey often focus
on developed country markets.
IP%s facilitate trade in knowledge but may stifle innov ation by reducing
researcers access to knowledge and increasing te costs of collaboration.
&1
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
92/117
"or more on advanced market commitments! see Hremer and 9lennerster ?'*@.
%A0/ Europe IP and Public #ealt
(1
Public4private partnersips ave emerged as a prevalent new institutional
arrangement for addressing neglected diseases! but it is not clear wat significant
roles! if any! IP%s ave in teir formation.
In future! IP may ave a bigger role to play in dealing wit te ealt problems
common
to bot developed and developing countries. $ere is evidence tat many of teir
problems
are converging.
&,
$e causes of tis convergence remain unclear! but tere are likely to be
important implications for IP systems in bot developed and developing countries.
$is capter also noted a significant lack of understanding in te role of IP in public4
private partnersips. 5ince tese types of arrangements ave emerged as te
dominant
paradigm for addressing neglected diseases! furter researc on tis issue is
needed
urgently.
A number of IP
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
93/117
&,
7f te disease burden in ig
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
94/117
$e use of traditional knowledge and genetic resources! bot inside and outside of
teir
local context! raises te prospect tat tey may play an important role in driving
development. $e issue for policymakers is ow tis prospect migt be realised
best!
particularly wen te use of traditional knowledge and genetic resources is
becoming
increasingly subBect to governance by various! and sometimes contradictory! IP
systems
?3aksmanan! ',@.
$%IP5 recognises te issue by allowing for sui generis protection of genetic
resources!
specifically plants! animals and biological processes ?Commission on Intellectual
Property
%igts! ''@. 5ui generis protection is a system of protection tailored to
accommodate te
special caracteristics of traditional knowledge ?Commission on Intellectual Property
%igts! ''@. 5ince $%IP5! tere as been pressure for increased protection of
knowledge
linked to genetic resources from plants! animals and micro
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
95/117
been formed tat empasise te knowledge and genetic resource rigts of more
marginalised stakeolders. In &--'! te Convention on iological /iversity was
created as %A0/ Europe IP! 9enetic %esources and $raditional Hnowledge
(-
a legally binding convention tat explicitly outlined principles of e6uitable access
and
benefit
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
96/117
knowledge preservation and innovation can promote alternative patways to
development!
building upon local contexts. In tis sense! protecting traditional knowledge and
genetic
resources may empower marginalised stakeolders to drive development from te
bottome and canola in developed countries are te main crops to
benefit
from IP protected innovations in genetic modification! generated mainly in 0ort
America.
Muc of te literature from developed countries concerns te use of geograpical
indications ?9Is@. Already included in $%IP5! 9Is protect products specific to a
geograpical area. $ere are tree levels of protection for 9Is in $%IP5) one forwines
only! one for wine and spirits! and one for all products ?7Connor! '*@.
'&
As defined in
Article ''.& of $%IP5! 9Is identify goods
Loriginating in te territory of a Member! or a region or locality in tat territory!
were a
given 6uality! reputation or oter caracteristic of te good is essentially
attributable to its
geograpical origin ?roude! '+@.
9Is facilitate te use of reputation in overcoming information asymmetries in
markets.
8nlike IP%s! 9Is do not protect te knowledge embodied in products ?/utfield! 'D
%angnekar! '*@D instead! protection is offered for te association of a given6uality wit
a geograpical location.
As outlined by Pacciani et al. ?'&@! 9Is can provide space for nice markets!
creating
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
104/117
collective monopolies and facilitating market access. $roug tis space for market
access!
9Is can enable communities or individuals to capture a market premium for a
product
?$iedig and 5ylvander! '@. In turn! te si>e of tis premium is dependent on
market
si>e! competition! consumer perceptions and elasticity of demand ?Correa! ''@.
$is
premium is not necessarily assured for developing countries enforcing 9Is. %ater!
less
well
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
105/117
European countries vary in teir experiences of 9Is in protecting te sare of
market
power eld by local communities. 5tudies find tat te effectiveness of 9Is in
protecting
local communities position in markets and production of local products depends on
market conditions! and local capabilities to market and distribute products
?%angnekar!
'*@.
Callois ?'*@ determined tat 6uality labels do not necessarily ensure te transfer
of
profits and rural developmentD rater! if benefits occur! tey are unlikely to benefit
te
wole rural region. =ilson et al. ?'@ compared te price premiums for two
varieties of
protected potatoes! finding tat premiums are iger for bot protected products!
but are
significantly greater for te product tat is protected troug a igly coordinated
and
organised supply cain.
In contrast! elletti ?'@ found tat une6ual capabilities can prevent premiums
from
being captured by local producers. In te case of olive oil from $uscany! e found
tat
production was capitalised upon by areas outside of $uscany! and tat premiums
were
reallocated to favour bottling companies rater tan producers ?elletti! '@.
$us! te
case studies from Europe sow tat local capabilities in developing market
products!
product! communication! marketing and distribution strategies determine te
effectiveness
of 9Is for producers ?$regear! ''@.
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
106/117
2.(.' Evidence from te perspective of developing countries
8niform IP laws cannot ensure diversity of access and benefiton ?$orremans et al.!'1@.
%einforcing te findings from developed countries! studies of istorical experiences
in
developing countries also suggest tat une6ual influence is linked to a low
capability to %A0/ Europe IP! 9enetic %esources and $raditional Hnowledge
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
107/117
**
engage in market production and excange. /eveloping countries ost te maBorityof
genetic resources but often lack te tecnological capacity and capital to develop
tese
resources sustainably. $rommetter ?'+@ suggests! troug reference to istorical
case
studies in parmaceuticals and agriculture! tat developing countries capacity to
negotiate!
teir bargaining power and perceptions of teir commitment to enforce agreements
affect
te e6uitable benefitagen and #olm
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
108/117
intellectual property
$%IP5 allows for sui generis IP regimes in relation to genetic resources and
traditional
knowledge. Empirical studies ave found tat sui generis IP systems can facilitate
increased
influence on te part of local communities in developing countries in innovation.
$o investigate te possibilities for sui generis protection to protect diversity! te
empirical
studies examine attempts to integrate traditional knowledge and IP%s troug
regional and
national legislation. Earlier studies describe ow different developing countries ave
tailored national laws to facilitate continued access to traditional knowledge
?7guamanam!
',@. $ese studies refer to experiences in a range of developing countries!
spanning
3atin America ?ra>il! Peru@! 5out and 5outation of African 5tates@. #owever! wile describing
te
legal frameworks for sui generis protection! tese studies do not provide evidenceabout
teir effectiveness in actually protecting diversity in access and benefit
-
8/14/2019 tentang IPR
109/117
5imilarly! troug interviews wit companies in different economic sectors! ten Hate
and
3aird ?'@ found tat IP laws can allow for widespread involvement in innovation
systems in developing countries! if policies involve relevant stakeolders in bot te
public
and private sectors ?ten Hate and =ells! '&D 3aird and ten Hate! ''@.
Case studies in Africa provide some evidence of te impact of sui generis systems
in low