Economía del conocimiento, crisis financiera y depresión
Este artículo revisa una rama reciente de investigación que subraya que las actuales instituciones de la economía del conocimiento ponen en peligro la promesa de crecimiento y prosperidad que se atribuye al mayor uso del conocimiento. La privatización excesiva del conocimiento genera círculos viciosos y virtuosos de acumulación de propiedad intelectual e inversión en capital humano que se auto refuerzan y aumentan la desigualdad global. Las actuales instituciones de la economía global también reducen las oportunidades de inversión globales, una de las causas de la actual depresión global. Sin antídotos espontáneos contra esos fenómenos, la política económica y la científica deberían intentar corregir, en forma coordinada y global, el balanc... Ver más
Guardado en:
0124-5996
2346-2450
19
2017-05-22
57
74
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
| id |
7d0ebcb8a552de9bfdfd38b295012c54 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
ojs |
| spelling |
Economía del conocimiento, crisis financiera y depresión Lundvall, B.-Å. “National innovation systems – Analytical concept and development tool”, Industry and innovation 14, 1, 2007, pp. 95-119. Pagano U. y M. A. Rossi. “The crash of the knowledge economy”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 33, 4, 2009, pp. 665-683. Pagano U. y M. A. Rossi. “Incomplete contracts, intellectual property and institutional complementarities”, European Journal of Law and Economics 18, 1, 2004, pp. 55-76. Pagano U. “The crisis of intellectual monopoly capitalism”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 38, 6, 2014, pp. 1409-1429. Noel, M. y M. Schankerman. “Strategic patenting and software innovation”, Journal of Industrial Economics 61, 3, 2013, pp. 481-520. Murray, F. et al. “Of mice and academics: Examining the effect of openness on innovation”, nber working paper 14819, 2009. Merges R. y R. Nelson. “On the complex economics of patent scope”, Columbia Law Review 90, 4, 1990, pp. 839-916. Mazzucato, M. The entrepreneurial State: Debunking public vs. private sector myths, Londres, Anthem Press, 2013. Maskus, K. “The new globalization of intellectual property rights: What’s new this time?”, Australian Economic History Review 54, 3, 2014, pp. 262-284. Mansfield E. “Patents and innovation: An empirical study”, Management Science 32, 2, 1986, pp. 173-181. Lissoni, F. et al. “Academic patenting in Europe: New evidence from the keins database”, Research Evaluation 17, 2, 2008, pp. 87-102. Partha, D. y P. A. David. “Toward a new economics of science”, Research Policy 23, 5, 1994, pp. 487-521. Levin, R. et al. “Appropriating the returns from industrial r&d”, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 3, 1987. Lerner, J. “Patenting in the shadow of competitors”, Journal of Law and Economics 38, 2, 1995, pp. 463-490. Lemley, M. A. “Property, intellectual property, and free riding”, Texas Law Review 83, 2005, pp. 1031-1069. Lanjouw, J. O. y I. M. Cockburn. “New pills for poor people? Evidence after gatt”, World Development 29, 2, 2001, pp. 265-249. Jaffe A. B. y J. Lerner. Innovation and its discontents: How our broken patent system is endangering innovation and progress, and what to do about it, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2004. Heller, M. y R. Eisenberg. “Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research”, Science 280, 5364, 1998, pp. 698-701. Hart, O. Firms, contracts and f inancial structure, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995. Hall, B. H. y R. H. Ziedonis. “The patent paradox revisited: An empirical study of patenting in the U.S. semiconductor industry 1979-1995”, rand Journal of Economics 32, 1, 2001, pp. 101-128. Geuna, A. y L. Nesta. “University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence”, Research Policy 35, 6, 2006, pp. 790-807. Geuna, A. y F. Rossi. The university and the economy. Pathways to growth and economic development, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2015. Pagano U. y M. A. Rossi. “Property rights in the knowledge economy: An explanation of the crisis”, E. Brancaccio y G. Fontana, eds., The global economic crisis, Londres, Routledge, 2011, pp. 284-297. Piketty, T. Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 2014. Franzoni, C. y G. Scellato. “The grace period in international patent law and its effect on the timing of disclosure”, Research Policy 39, 2, 2010, pp. 200-2013. Thursby, J. y M. Thursby. “University licensing”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 23, 4, 2007, pp. 620-639. Text http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ARTREF http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:eu-repo/semantics/article Walsh, J. P.; W. M. Cohen y C. Cho. “Where excludability matters: Material versus intellectual property in academic biomedical research”, Research Policy 36, 8, 2007, pp. 1184-1203. Stokes, D. Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation, Washington, Brookings Institution Press, 1997. Reitzig, M.; J. Henkel y F. Schneider. “Collateral damage for r&d manufacturers: How patent sharks operate in markets for technology”, Industrial and Corporate Change 19, 3, 2010, pp. 947-967. Stiglitz, J. E. “Knowledge as a global public good”, 1999, Stiglitz J. E. “New theoretical perspectives on the distribution of income and wealth among individuals”, nber working paper 21189, 2015. Solow, R. M. “Investment and technical progress”, K. Arrow, S. Karlin y P. Suppes, eds., Mathematical methods in the social sciences [1959], Stanford, Ca., Stanford University Press, 1960, pp. 89-104. Shapiro, C. “Navigating the patent thicket: Cross licenses, patent pools, and standard setting”, A. Jaffe, J. Lerner y S. Stern, eds., Innovation policy and the economy, vol. 1, Cambridge, Mass., mit Press, 2001, pp. 119-150. Scotchmer, S. “The political economy of intellectual property treaties”, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 20, 2, 2004, pp. 415-437. Scotchmer, S. “Standing on the shoulders of giants: Cumulative research and the patent law”, Journal of Economic Perspectives 5, 1, 1991, pp. 29-41. Schumpeter, J. A. Capitalism, socialism, and democracy, Nueva York, Harper and Brothers, 1942. Schumpeter, J. A. The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle [1934], New Brunswick, nj, Transaction Publishers, 1983. Samuelson, P. “Enriching discourse on public domains”, Duke Law Journal 55, 2006, pp. 783-834. Rowthorn, R. “A note on Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 38, 5, 2014, pp. 1275-1284. Freeman, C. “The ‘national system of innovation’ in historical perspective”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 19, 1, 1995, pp. 5-24. Franzoni, C. y G. Scellato. “Academic patenting and the consequences for scientific research”, The Australian Economic Review 44, 1, 2011, pp. 95-101. Duguet, E. e I. Kabla. “Appropriation strategy and the motivations to use the patent system: An econometric analysis at the firm level in French manufacturing” 1998, Annales d’Économie et de Statistique 49-50, 1998, pp. 289-327. 19 Universidad Externado de Colombia application/xml text/html Dosi, G. “Sources, procedures and microeconomic effects of innovation”, Journal of Economic Literature 26, 3, 1988, pp. 1120-1171. Artículo de revista Núm. 36 , Año 2017 : Enero-Junio 36 efectos globales https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/view/4886 patentamiento prosperidad crecimiento instituciones de la economía Rossi, Maria Alessandra Pagano, Ugo Este artículo revisa una rama reciente de investigación que subraya que las actuales instituciones de la economía del conocimiento ponen en peligro la promesa de crecimiento y prosperidad que se atribuye al mayor uso del conocimiento. La privatización excesiva del conocimiento genera círculos viciosos y virtuosos de acumulación de propiedad intelectual e inversión en capital humano que se auto refuerzan y aumentan la desigualdad global. Las actuales instituciones de la economía global también reducen las oportunidades de inversión globales, una de las causas de la actual depresión global. Sin antídotos espontáneos contra esos fenómenos, la política económica y la científica deberían intentar corregir, en forma coordinada y global, el balance entre conocimiento público y privado. Revista de Economía Institucional application/pdf Publication Abramovitz, M. “The welfare interpretation of secular trends in national income and product”, M. Abramovitz et al., eds., The allocation of economic resources: Essays in honor of Bernard Francis Haley, Stanford, Ca., Stanford University Press, 1959. Cohendet, P. y F. Meyer-K. “The theoretical and policy implications of knowledge codification”, Research Policy 30, 9, 2001, pp. 1563-1591. Cohen W.; R. Nelson y J. Walsh. “Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not)”, nber working paper 7552, 2000. Cockburn, I.; M. MacGarvie y E. Mueller. “Patent thickets, licensing and innovative performance”, Industrial and Corporate Change 19, 3, 2010, pp. 899-925. Campbell, E. G. et al. “Data withholding in academic genetics: Evidence from a national survey”, jama 287, 4, 2002, pp. 473-480. Boldrin, M. y D. K. Levine. Against intellectual monopoly, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2008. Benkler, Y. “Intellectual property and the organization of information production”, International Review of Law and Economics 22, 2002, pp. 81-107. Belloc, F. y U. Pagano. “Knowledge enclosures, forced specialization and investment crisis”, European Journal of Comparative Economics 9, 3, 2012, pp. 445-483. Azoulay, P.; W. Ding y T. Stuart. “The impact of academic patenting on the rate, quality and direction of (public) research output”, Journal of Industrial Economics 57, 4, 2009, pp. 637-676. Arrow, K. J. “Technical information and industrial structure”, Industrial and Corporate Change 5, 2, 1996, pp. 645-652. Bessen, J. E. y M. J. Meurer. Patent failure: How judges, bureaucrats, and lawyers put innovators at risk, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2008. Español https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ Journal article patenting The economy of knowledge, collapse and depression This paper reviews a recent strand of research emphasizing how the present institutions of the knowledge economy may be jeopardizing the very promise of growth and prosperity that the increased use of knowledge is generally reported to bring about. The excessive privatization of knowledge generates self-reinforcing vicious and virtuous circles of accumulation of intellectual property and investment in human capital, which increase global inequality. The present institutions of the global economy entail also a reduction of global investment opportunities that is one of the causes of the present global depression. Absent spontaneous antidotes to these phenomena, economic and science policies should aim at redressing the balance between public and private knowledge. Because of the distortion of incentives, stemming from uncompensated knowledge externalities at the international level, these policies should necessarily be coordinated at global level. institutions of the economy global effects increase prosperity 0124-5996 https://doi.org/10.18601/01245996.v19n36.03 https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/download/4886/5885 https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/download/4886/6884 2017-05-22T00:00:00Z https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/download/4886/5812 57 2346-2450 74 2017-05-22 2017-05-22T00:00:00Z 10.18601/01245996.v19n36.03 |
| institution |
UNIVERSIDAD EXTERNADO DE COLOMBIA |
| thumbnail |
https://nuevo.metarevistas.org/UNIVERSIDADEXTERNADODECOLOMBIA/logo.png |
| country_str |
Colombia |
| collection |
Revista de Economía Institucional |
| title |
Economía del conocimiento, crisis financiera y depresión |
| spellingShingle |
Economía del conocimiento, crisis financiera y depresión Rossi, Maria Alessandra Pagano, Ugo efectos globales patentamiento prosperidad crecimiento instituciones de la economía patenting institutions of the economy global effects increase prosperity |
| title_short |
Economía del conocimiento, crisis financiera y depresión |
| title_full |
Economía del conocimiento, crisis financiera y depresión |
| title_fullStr |
Economía del conocimiento, crisis financiera y depresión |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Economía del conocimiento, crisis financiera y depresión |
| title_sort |
economía del conocimiento, crisis financiera y depresión |
| title_eng |
The economy of knowledge, collapse and depression |
| description |
Este artículo revisa una rama reciente de investigación que subraya que las actuales instituciones de la economía del conocimiento ponen en peligro la promesa de crecimiento y prosperidad que se atribuye al mayor uso del conocimiento. La privatización excesiva del conocimiento genera círculos viciosos y virtuosos de acumulación de propiedad intelectual e inversión en capital humano que se auto refuerzan y aumentan la desigualdad global. Las actuales instituciones de la economía global también reducen las oportunidades de inversión globales, una de las causas de la actual depresión global. Sin antídotos espontáneos contra esos fenómenos, la política económica y la científica deberían intentar corregir, en forma coordinada y global, el balance entre conocimiento público y privado.
|
| description_eng |
This paper reviews a recent strand of research emphasizing how the present institutions of the knowledge economy may be jeopardizing the very promise of growth and prosperity that the increased use of knowledge is generally reported to bring about. The excessive privatization of knowledge generates self-reinforcing vicious and virtuous circles of accumulation of intellectual property and investment in human capital, which increase global inequality. The present institutions of the global economy entail also a reduction of global investment opportunities that is one of the causes of the present global depression. Absent spontaneous antidotes to these phenomena, economic and science policies should aim at redressing the balance between public and private knowledge. Because of the distortion of incentives, stemming from uncompensated knowledge externalities at the international level, these policies should necessarily be coordinated at global level.
|
| author |
Rossi, Maria Alessandra Pagano, Ugo |
| author_facet |
Rossi, Maria Alessandra Pagano, Ugo |
| topicspa_str_mv |
efectos globales patentamiento prosperidad crecimiento instituciones de la economía |
| topic |
efectos globales patentamiento prosperidad crecimiento instituciones de la economía patenting institutions of the economy global effects increase prosperity |
| topic_facet |
efectos globales patentamiento prosperidad crecimiento instituciones de la economía patenting institutions of the economy global effects increase prosperity |
| citationvolume |
19 |
| citationissue |
36 |
| citationedition |
Núm. 36 , Año 2017 : Enero-Junio |
| publisher |
Universidad Externado de Colombia |
| ispartofjournal |
Revista de Economía Institucional |
| source |
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/view/4886 |
| language |
Español |
| format |
Article |
| rights |
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ |
| references |
Lundvall, B.-Å. “National innovation systems – Analytical concept and development tool”, Industry and innovation 14, 1, 2007, pp. 95-119. Pagano U. y M. A. Rossi. “The crash of the knowledge economy”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 33, 4, 2009, pp. 665-683. Pagano U. y M. A. Rossi. “Incomplete contracts, intellectual property and institutional complementarities”, European Journal of Law and Economics 18, 1, 2004, pp. 55-76. Pagano U. “The crisis of intellectual monopoly capitalism”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 38, 6, 2014, pp. 1409-1429. Noel, M. y M. Schankerman. “Strategic patenting and software innovation”, Journal of Industrial Economics 61, 3, 2013, pp. 481-520. Murray, F. et al. “Of mice and academics: Examining the effect of openness on innovation”, nber working paper 14819, 2009. Merges R. y R. Nelson. “On the complex economics of patent scope”, Columbia Law Review 90, 4, 1990, pp. 839-916. Mazzucato, M. The entrepreneurial State: Debunking public vs. private sector myths, Londres, Anthem Press, 2013. Maskus, K. “The new globalization of intellectual property rights: What’s new this time?”, Australian Economic History Review 54, 3, 2014, pp. 262-284. Mansfield E. “Patents and innovation: An empirical study”, Management Science 32, 2, 1986, pp. 173-181. Lissoni, F. et al. “Academic patenting in Europe: New evidence from the keins database”, Research Evaluation 17, 2, 2008, pp. 87-102. Partha, D. y P. A. David. “Toward a new economics of science”, Research Policy 23, 5, 1994, pp. 487-521. Levin, R. et al. “Appropriating the returns from industrial r&d”, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 3, 1987. Lerner, J. “Patenting in the shadow of competitors”, Journal of Law and Economics 38, 2, 1995, pp. 463-490. Lemley, M. A. “Property, intellectual property, and free riding”, Texas Law Review 83, 2005, pp. 1031-1069. Lanjouw, J. O. y I. M. Cockburn. “New pills for poor people? Evidence after gatt”, World Development 29, 2, 2001, pp. 265-249. Jaffe A. B. y J. Lerner. Innovation and its discontents: How our broken patent system is endangering innovation and progress, and what to do about it, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2004. Heller, M. y R. Eisenberg. “Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research”, Science 280, 5364, 1998, pp. 698-701. Hart, O. Firms, contracts and f inancial structure, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995. Hall, B. H. y R. H. Ziedonis. “The patent paradox revisited: An empirical study of patenting in the U.S. semiconductor industry 1979-1995”, rand Journal of Economics 32, 1, 2001, pp. 101-128. Geuna, A. y L. Nesta. “University patenting and its effects on academic research: The emerging European evidence”, Research Policy 35, 6, 2006, pp. 790-807. Geuna, A. y F. Rossi. The university and the economy. Pathways to growth and economic development, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2015. Pagano U. y M. A. Rossi. “Property rights in the knowledge economy: An explanation of the crisis”, E. Brancaccio y G. Fontana, eds., The global economic crisis, Londres, Routledge, 2011, pp. 284-297. Piketty, T. Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 2014. Franzoni, C. y G. Scellato. “The grace period in international patent law and its effect on the timing of disclosure”, Research Policy 39, 2, 2010, pp. 200-2013. Thursby, J. y M. Thursby. “University licensing”, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 23, 4, 2007, pp. 620-639. Walsh, J. P.; W. M. Cohen y C. Cho. “Where excludability matters: Material versus intellectual property in academic biomedical research”, Research Policy 36, 8, 2007, pp. 1184-1203. Stokes, D. Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation, Washington, Brookings Institution Press, 1997. Reitzig, M.; J. Henkel y F. Schneider. “Collateral damage for r&d manufacturers: How patent sharks operate in markets for technology”, Industrial and Corporate Change 19, 3, 2010, pp. 947-967. Stiglitz, J. E. “Knowledge as a global public good”, 1999, Stiglitz J. E. “New theoretical perspectives on the distribution of income and wealth among individuals”, nber working paper 21189, 2015. Solow, R. M. “Investment and technical progress”, K. Arrow, S. Karlin y P. Suppes, eds., Mathematical methods in the social sciences [1959], Stanford, Ca., Stanford University Press, 1960, pp. 89-104. Shapiro, C. “Navigating the patent thicket: Cross licenses, patent pools, and standard setting”, A. Jaffe, J. Lerner y S. Stern, eds., Innovation policy and the economy, vol. 1, Cambridge, Mass., mit Press, 2001, pp. 119-150. Scotchmer, S. “The political economy of intellectual property treaties”, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 20, 2, 2004, pp. 415-437. Scotchmer, S. “Standing on the shoulders of giants: Cumulative research and the patent law”, Journal of Economic Perspectives 5, 1, 1991, pp. 29-41. Schumpeter, J. A. Capitalism, socialism, and democracy, Nueva York, Harper and Brothers, 1942. Schumpeter, J. A. The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle [1934], New Brunswick, nj, Transaction Publishers, 1983. Samuelson, P. “Enriching discourse on public domains”, Duke Law Journal 55, 2006, pp. 783-834. Rowthorn, R. “A note on Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 38, 5, 2014, pp. 1275-1284. Freeman, C. “The ‘national system of innovation’ in historical perspective”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 19, 1, 1995, pp. 5-24. Franzoni, C. y G. Scellato. “Academic patenting and the consequences for scientific research”, The Australian Economic Review 44, 1, 2011, pp. 95-101. Duguet, E. e I. Kabla. “Appropriation strategy and the motivations to use the patent system: An econometric analysis at the firm level in French manufacturing” 1998, Annales d’Économie et de Statistique 49-50, 1998, pp. 289-327. Dosi, G. “Sources, procedures and microeconomic effects of innovation”, Journal of Economic Literature 26, 3, 1988, pp. 1120-1171. Abramovitz, M. “The welfare interpretation of secular trends in national income and product”, M. Abramovitz et al., eds., The allocation of economic resources: Essays in honor of Bernard Francis Haley, Stanford, Ca., Stanford University Press, 1959. Cohendet, P. y F. Meyer-K. “The theoretical and policy implications of knowledge codification”, Research Policy 30, 9, 2001, pp. 1563-1591. Cohen W.; R. Nelson y J. Walsh. “Protecting their intellectual assets: Appropriability conditions and why U.S. manufacturing firms patent (or not)”, nber working paper 7552, 2000. Cockburn, I.; M. MacGarvie y E. Mueller. “Patent thickets, licensing and innovative performance”, Industrial and Corporate Change 19, 3, 2010, pp. 899-925. Campbell, E. G. et al. “Data withholding in academic genetics: Evidence from a national survey”, jama 287, 4, 2002, pp. 473-480. Boldrin, M. y D. K. Levine. Against intellectual monopoly, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2008. Benkler, Y. “Intellectual property and the organization of information production”, International Review of Law and Economics 22, 2002, pp. 81-107. Belloc, F. y U. Pagano. “Knowledge enclosures, forced specialization and investment crisis”, European Journal of Comparative Economics 9, 3, 2012, pp. 445-483. Azoulay, P.; W. Ding y T. Stuart. “The impact of academic patenting on the rate, quality and direction of (public) research output”, Journal of Industrial Economics 57, 4, 2009, pp. 637-676. Arrow, K. J. “Technical information and industrial structure”, Industrial and Corporate Change 5, 2, 1996, pp. 645-652. Bessen, J. E. y M. J. Meurer. Patent failure: How judges, bureaucrats, and lawyers put innovators at risk, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2008. |
| type_driver |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
| type_coar |
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 |
| type_version |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
| type_coarversion |
http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 |
| type_content |
Text |
| publishDate |
2017-05-22 |
| date_accessioned |
2017-05-22T00:00:00Z |
| date_available |
2017-05-22T00:00:00Z |
| url |
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/view/4886 |
| url_doi |
https://doi.org/10.18601/01245996.v19n36.03 |
| issn |
0124-5996 |
| eissn |
2346-2450 |
| doi |
10.18601/01245996.v19n36.03 |
| citationstartpage |
57 |
| citationendpage |
74 |
| url3_str_mv |
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/download/4886/5885 |
| url4_str_mv |
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/download/4886/6884 |
| url2_str_mv |
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/download/4886/5812 |
| _version_ |
1797158338088140800 |