Intellectual property regimes and wage inequality

Bhattacharya, Sourav; Chakraborty, Pavel; Chatterjee, Chirantan

doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2021.102709

Cited by 21 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 92 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…None of our control variables exhibited correlations that exceeded this threshold, which provides evidence that an omitted variable would not alter our results (e.g., Gamache and McNamara, 2019; Liu et al, In press). Nevertheless, to assess the robustness of our results to endogeneity, we follow a two‐stage least squares procedure used in previous research (e.g., Bhattacharya et al, 2022; Hadani and Schuler, 2013) that mitigates this possibility. In a first stage regression, we used three variables, pay self salary (1 = yes, 0 = no; mean = 0.29, SD = 0.45), previous business experience (1 = yes, 0 = no; mean = 0.21, SD = 0.41), and marital status (1 = yes, 0 = no; mean = 0.45, SD = 0.50), to predict trust.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trusting without a Safety Net: The Peril of Trust in Base of the Pyramid Economies

Pryor

Zahra

Bruton

2022

J Management Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In high-transaction-cost environments, such as the world's poorest base-of-thepyramid economies (BOP), trust helps entrepreneurs form partnerships while conserving resources related to monitoring, contracting, and other transaction costs. However, trust can also expose entrepreneurs to their partners' opportunism. In developed economies, effective and consistent legal systems can protect against such opportunism. But what happens when formal institutions are ineffective and inconsistent, as is common in BOP economies, and how does trust influence entrepreneurs' performance subsequent to forming partnerships? We answer these questions, drawing on a sample of 338 entrepreneurs in the Kingdom of Eswatini (formerly known as Swaziland). We find that entrepreneurs' trust has a negative effect on business operating performance, indicating that, given the legal systems in the BOP context, trusting entrepreneurs bear more fully the brunt of opportunism. However, this negative effect can be mitigated when entrepreneurs register their businesses with the government and pay taxes. We also find that, for entrepreneurs who earn income from other businesses, the negative effect of trust on performance is stronger. We found no moderating effect related to entrepreneurs' education.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trusting without a Safety Net: The Peril of Trust in Base of the Pyramid Economies

Pryor

Zahra

Bruton

2022

J Management Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this imitation and competitive environment, an IPR system is indispensable. Generally, the more robust the IPR system is in a region, the lower the probability of infringement (Fuller 2010; Bhattacharya et al 2022). A robust IPR system incentivizes enterprises to engage in innovation and encourages potential entrepreneurs to participate in technology entrepreneurship.…”

Section: Institutional Background and Research Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

How does intellectual property system affect technology entrepreneurship: evidence from Chinese prefecture‐level cities

Zhao,

2024

Asian-Pac Economic Lit

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Technology entrepreneurship plays a pivotal role in bolstering regional economic vitality, with the intellectual property rights (IPR) system serving as a fundamental safeguard for entrepreneurs' intellectual achievements. Using panel data encompassing 260 prefecture‐level cities in China from 2006 to 2019, we employ the count of registered technology‐based enterprises to construct an indicator of technology entrepreneurship and consider China's IPR policy as a quasi‐natural experiment to examine the impact of the IPR system on technology entrepreneurship. The findings reveal that the pilot policy can significantly stimulate technology entrepreneurship displaying a periodically dynamic promotional effect. This conclusion remains reliable even after undergoing rigorous robustness tests. The mechanism analysis demonstrates that the pilot policy can stimulate technology entrepreneurship by enriching the technological knowledge base and providing financial guarantees. Notably, while the policy's impact on technology entrepreneurship increases with the expansion of the city scale across different scenarios, no discernible regional disparities emerge. This study provides a new perspective on the relationship between the IPR system and entrepreneurship, offering valuable insights into improving the IPR framework in emerging developing countries.

show abstract

“…Regarding the research on intellectual property policy, existing literature mainly focuses on national and regional policies, such as intellectual property law [18][19][20], national intellectual property demonstration cities policy [21,22], intellectual property subsidy policy [23,24], patent priority review policy [25,26], intellectual property pledge financing policy [27][28][29], and non-patent IP policies [30]. And existing literature analyzes the impact of these above intellectual property policies on technological innovation, knowledge dissemination, wage inequality, air pollution, etc.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive intellectual property ability and firm productivity: A quasi-natural experiment based on national intellectual property demonstration advantage firm policy in China

2024

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intellectual property is crucial for the development of firms. At the micro level, firm comprehensive intellectual property ability involves abilities about intellectual property creation, utilization, protection, and management. In order to develop the comprehensive intellectual property ability of firms, the China National Intellectual Property Administration began to implement the national intellectual property demonstration advantage firm (NIPDAF) policy in 2013. Based on this exogenous policy shock, using data from listed companies from 2011 to 2020 as the research sample, the time-varying DID method is used to test the impact of the NIPDAF policy intended to cultivate comprehensive intellectual property ability on firm productivity. The results show that after policy implementation, the total factor productivity of NIPDAFs increased by about 3.3% compared to the control group. This finding is robust after a series of tests. Furthermore, the NIPDAF policy promotes firm productivity through stimulating technology innovation, improving investment efficiency, and enhancing competitive advantage. In addition, the NIPDAF policy has a more significant incentive effect on the total factor productivity of non-state-owned enterprises, firms in the eastern region, and firms in patent intensive industries.

show abstract

Intellectual property regimes and wage inequality

Cited by 21 publications

References 92 publications

Trusting without a Safety Net: The Peril of Trust in Base of the Pyramid Economies

Trusting without a Safety Net: The Peril of Trust in Base of the Pyramid Economies

How does intellectual property system affect technology entrepreneurship: evidence from Chinese prefecture‐level cities

Comprehensive intellectual property ability and firm productivity: A quasi-natural experiment based on national intellectual property demonstration advantage firm policy in China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About