Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation in Africa

International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS) | Volume V, Issue VIII, August 2021 | ISSN 2454–6186

Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation in Africa

Noël Bouopda¹, Gael Fokam², Lionel Douanla^3
1Dschang School of Economics and Management, University of Dschang, Dschang, Cameroon
²Faculty of Economics and Management, University of Dschang, Dschang, Cameroon
³Université de Yaoundé2 Soa, Cameroon

Abstract: The purpose of this study is to assess the effect of intellectual property rights on technological innovation in 24 African countries, 7 of which belong to OAPI, 11 to ARIPO and 6 countries not belonging to any property rigths organization. This study differs from other studies with the use of the World Innovation index instead of the use of inputs and outputs approaches. The number of patents demand deposited by resident and the number of commercial brands is used to capture Intellectual property rights. Using first difference panel data, results show a none significant effect of patents on innovation in Africa and positive and significant effect of commercial brand on innovation. However, the study by Zone shows a positive and significant effect of intellectual property rights on innovation in ARIPO countries.

Key words: Patent, commercial brand, innovation.

1.INTRODUCTION

The incentive for innovation is the main justification for the existence of intellectual property rights. If we look at the questions in counterfactual terms, we could, for example, ask ourselves if technological innovation can be possible without intellectual property rights. Considering the objective of encouraging innovation, Pajak, (2011) proposes several economic mechanisms aimed at encouraging innovation. These include innovation subsidies, increasing the absorption capacity of technologies, creating a conducive environment to innovation, the purchase of patents by the Government to place it in the public domain.
However, these mechanisms seem to be much more complementary than substitutable for the incentive which would provide the advantages of a legal property right over the intellectual. Indeed, Schumpeter (1939) justifies the need for an institutional monopoly on intellectual creations as being the only real means of inciting innovation because of the particular nature of this good. In addition, full involvement of the public authorities without the private sector’s own will could lead to inefficiency in the results obtained and a mismatch between the technology needs of users and the results of research driven by the public authorities.
Empirically, the salient facts seem to show that state choices are in favor of adopting the legal protection of intellectual property rights as a means of encouraging research and innovation through the right to monopoly. Indeed, 36 countries out of 53 in Africa are members of a regional intellectual property organization and the great African powers such as Egypt, Morocco, South Africa, Tunisia and Nigeria have their own national offices in the region. However, the hope-for results seem mixed with regard to the

Read More