Skip to main content

Implications of International Harmonization of IPR on Growth and Competitiveness Among the Developing Nations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
FDI, Technology and Innovation
  • 521 Accesses

Abstract

Enhancement of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and its implication on developing countries are discussed enormously during the last few decades. The main argument is that even after the mandate of Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), it is not clear whether the developing countries are benefiting from the higher levels of IPR. On the assumption that international harmonization of IPR could make all nations better off, especially lower-income countries, we considered 99 countries from various income groups to test the hypothesis. The present study considers appreciation in the competitiveness of a country as an outcome of enhanced IPR, which encourages innovation in the first stage and competitiveness in the later stage. The study employs new indices, Global Competitiveness Index and IPR Index, respectively, for competition and IPR. We find that the role of IPR is different in different countries for promoting innovation and enhancing competitiveness and growth.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Features which are exclusively aligned to firms like: firm’s rivalry, running out of business and zero sum view of competition are not functional for the ‘location’.

  2. 2.

    See Table 6 in Appendix.

  3. 3.

    The exclusion factor will be (Current innovation value × Innovation weight in the current year)/100.

  4. 4.

    Many can argue that a comparison of pre-IPR era with post-IPR era will get better understanding of the issue that we are considering. The paucity of data is, however, hindering us to carry out the work.

  5. 5.

    See Table 7 in Appendix.

  6. 6.

    Since GCI is a composite index of many variables that are supposed to be there as explanatory variables, we have considered only three as independent variables.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sunil Kumar Ambrammal .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 6 and 7.

Table 6 Successive paradigm shifts in manufacturing
Table 7 List of countries according to their classification

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Ambrammal, S.K. (2020). Implications of International Harmonization of IPR on Growth and Competitiveness Among the Developing Nations. In: Siddharthan, N., Narayanan, K. (eds) FDI, Technology and Innovation. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3611-3_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics