Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback Edited Legal Collections Data

Inkster, Ian --- "Intellectual Property, Information and Divergences in Economic Development – Institutional Patterns and Outcomes circa 1421–2000" [2009] ELECD 501; in Castle, David (ed), "The Role of Intellectual Property Rights in Biotechnology Innovation" (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2009)

Book Title: The Role of Intellectual Property Rights in Biotechnology Innovation

Editor(s): Castle, David

Publisher: Edward Elgar Publishing

ISBN (hard cover): 9781847209801

Section: Chapter 17

Section Title: Intellectual Property, Information and Divergences in Economic Development – Institutional Patterns and Outcomes circa 1421–2000

Author(s): Inkster, Ian

Number of pages: 24

Extract:

17. Intellectual property, information
and divergences in economic
development ­ institutional
patterns and outcomes
circa 1421­2000
Ian Inkster

INTRODUCTION: MAIN THEMES AND CLAIMS

Allowing for small faults with estimation, there are probably about four
million patents in the world. Of these, about 1 per cent are owned in the
third world, a proportion reached first around 1913 and maintained ever
since. In contrast, the third world today produces around 20 per cent
of world income and 25 per cent of world trade.1 So, as illustrated by
patent ownership, intellectual property represents a greater bias against
late development than other standard measures, and this bias ­ as this
chapter shows ­ is of long standing. The patent system, yet at the heart
of an intellectual property regime that embraces trademarks, utility
models, copyright, inventors' certificates and the like, was introduced to
colonies and subject peoples by a very small group of industrial nations
during the late 19th century. Whilst such dominion undoubtedly insured
something of this long-term bias, we argue here that the prime elements
at work have been variability combined with complexity. An original vari-
ability amongst national systems allowed the successful late entry of such
nations as Germany or Japan. The resulting institutional and cognitive
complexity inhibited industrialization via technology transfers thereafter.
Thus the short 20th century (1918­1971) was a disaster for poor nations.
Subsequent changes in technique towards areas such as biotechnology
and microelectronics opened new windows of opportunity for very late
developers, for new industries did ...