nep-ipr New Economics Papers
on Intellectual Property Rights
Issue of 2015‒01‒03
four papers chosen by
Giovanni Ramello
Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale “Amedeo Avogadro”

  1. Of Time and Space: Technological Spillovers among Patents and Unpatented Innovations during Early U.S. Industrialization By B. Zorina Khan
  2. The policy dilemma of the unitary patent By Jérôme Danguy; Bruno van Pottelsberghe
  3. The contribution of academic research to innovation and growth By Reinhilde Veugelers
  4. Socio-cultural sphere: governance in new economy and impact on city branding By Vadim Pashkus; Natalia Pashkus; Anna Bulina

  1. By: B. Zorina Khan
    Abstract: The paper explores the role of institutional mechanisms in generating technological knowledge spillovers. The estimation is over panel datasets of patent grants, and unpatented innovations that were submitted for prizes at the annual industrial fairs of the American Institute of New York, during the era of early industrial expansion. The first section tests the hypothesis of spatial autocorrelation in patenting and in the exhibited innovations. In keeping with the contract theory of patents, the procedure identifies high and statistically significant spatial autocorrelation in the sample of inventions that were patented, indicating the prevalence of geographical spillovers. By contrast, prize innovations were much less likely to be spatially dependent. The second part of the paper investigates whether unpatented innovations in a county were affected by patenting in contiguous or adjacent counties, and the analysis indicates that such spatial effects were large and significant. These results are consistent with the argument that patents enhance the diffusion of information for both patented and unpatented innovations, whereas prizes are less effective in generating external benefits from knowledge spillovers. I hypothesize that the difference partly owes to the design of patent institutions, which explicitly incorporate mechanisms for systematic recording, access, and dispersion of technical information.
    JEL: N11 O31 O33 O34
    Date: 2014–12
  2. By: Jérôme Danguy; Bruno van Pottelsberghe
    Abstract: This paper provides new evidence about the budgetary consequences â?? for patent offices â?? of the coexistence of the forthcoming Unitary Patent (UP) with the current European Patent (EP). Simulation results illustrate a dilemma between (1) high UP renewal fees to ensure enough financial income for all national patent offices (NPOs) and (2) low UP renewal fees to make the UP system affordable, with very few NPOs losing on financial revenues. The simulations help to understand the positions of several patent offices, and underline an alternative way to proceed with the negotiations while reducing financial risks for the whole system.
    Date: 2014–11
  3. By: Reinhilde Veugelers
    Abstract: To better understand how academic research can contribute to innovative growth and to assess how Europe is and could be doing in this respect, we review the analysis and evidence of business science links and Europe’s record on this. The evidence and analysis shows that the link between science and industry is neither direct nor obvious. When looking at the evidence for Europe, there is a general lagging behind relative to the US, particularly on academic patenting and university spin-offs. Patenting and licensing is only two of a number of pathways for the transfer of knowledge from universities to industry, and perhaps not even the best forms. Student & researchers’ mobility from academe to industry is a critical mechanism to transfer knowledge from the university to industry, particularly when the knowledge to be transferred is hard to codify and is embodied in human capital as is the case for science-based knowledge. Although this is an area of great importance to the study of the innovation process, only recently research has started to attempt to trace researchers’ intersectoral mobility When looking for ways to improve the transfers from science to innovation, most of the attention in the academic literature and policy is on finding the critical success factors on the science side. Most of this analysis looks at academic patenting and faculty spin-offs and comes from best US practices. These include proper intellectual property right regimes, where Bayh-Dole type of reforms which allocate property rights to the university, are considered to have cleared the path towards tech transfer in the US. Other best practices include having in place incentive schemes for tech transfers, with a fair share for researchers in royaltees and spin-offs and having in place a dedicated technology transfer office, which critical scale, expertise and experience in mediating technology transfer. But perhaps the most important success factor for tech transfer identified is the quality of the research faculty and their created ideas. Overall, the most salient policy recommendations that stems from the analysis is that policy makers looking for ways to improve the contribution of universities to innovation based growth, should take a long-term perspective for developing an industry-science eco-system, avoiding the temptation of quick “success stories”. A particular dangerous policy practice is a target focusing only on the commercialization of university technologies through academic patenting and spin-offs, ignoring the broader contribution to economic development with other pathways, most notably the research based training and mobility of human capital from universities. Policy makers should be more “innovative” in their search for effective policy interventions, venturing beyond the classic spin-off and incubator programs. At the same time, they should be more serious about evaluating their new and existing instruments. To progress, policy makers should support more systematic data collection and analysis on the various pathways for universities’ contribution to economic prosperity.
    Keywords: Academic research, Clusters, Innovation, Innovation policy, New technologies, Patents, Research
    JEL: O31 O38
    Date: 2014–12
  4. By: Vadim Pashkus; Natalia Pashkus; Anna Bulina
    Abstract: The article analyzes the problems of socio-cultural sphere in the new economy, as well as the impact of socio-cultural sphere on the brand of St.Petersburg, paper also discusses possibility of evaluation of changes in brand strength due to socio-cultural impact. The proposed method of estimation of the strength of the brand is universal enough, but due to a pronounced specificity of various segments of the public sector it requires specifying when evaluating consumer interest in services for various types of organizations. In this paper, brand evaluation can not be based on the financial performance of organizations; we are not interested on the characteristics of brand equity, but on indicators of consumer preferences and the associated strength of the brand on the market. The proposed method can be adapted to different segments of the public sector (and their impact on brand site) that require adaptation indicators of demand and availability of the services of these organizations. It requires considering not only the classical estimation of the brand, calculated using the method of BCG (including adaptation of its indicators for socio-cultural sphere), and together with the emotional evaluation of brand strength by Keller used to calculate the integral market power of the brand. Priority of emotional components is defined by specific traits of Russian market in general and the cultural market, in particular. The competitiveness of the regional institutions of socio-cultural sector and the strength of their brand directly affects the competitiveness of the region as such. The paper raises questions of so called "star" status and orientation on brands in risk conditions. Brand allows city to start the process of urban regeneration, become the basis of its development strategy, and to revive the use of vacant spaces as well. Branded cities attract not only tourists but also entrepreneurs in various industries, people who want to live interesting, in an unique location and have access to the benefits of modern goods, unique heritage, objects and experiences. Brand adds a certain 'flavour' to the city. It can be promoted; it can attract the most qualified workers not only with competitive salary and benefit packages, but with a good place for work and for pleasures as well.
    Keywords: Socio-cultural sphere; new economy; cultural institutions; brand of St. Petersburg; strength of the brand (by Keller)brand of the territory; Y & R method
    JEL: L3 R11 Z1
    Date: 2014–11

This nep-ipr issue is ©2015 by Giovanni Ramello. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.