Titulo:
Economía del conocimiento, crisis financiera y depresión
.
Sumario:
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
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
| id |
metarevistapublica_uexternado_revistadeeconomiainstitucional_17_article_4886 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
ojs |
| spelling |
Economía del conocimiento, crisis financiera y depresión The economy of knowledge, collapse and depression 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. 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. Pagano, Ugo Rossi, Maria Alessandra institutions of the economy increase prosperity patenting global effects instituciones de la economía crecimiento prosperidad patentamiento efectos globales 19 36 Núm. 36 , Año 2017 : Enero-Junio Artículo de revista Journal article 2017-05-22T00:00:00Z 2017-05-22T00:00:00Z 2017-05-22 application/pdf text/html application/xml Universidad Externado de Colombia Revista de Economía Institucional 0124-5996 2346-2450 https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/view/4886 10.18601/01245996.v19n36.03 https://doi.org/10.18601/01245996.v19n36.03 spa https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ 57 74 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. Arrow, K. J. “Technical information and industrial structure”, Industrial and Corporate Change 5, 2, 1996, pp. 645-652. 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. Belloc, F. y U. Pagano. “Knowledge enclosures, forced specialization and investment crisis”, European Journal of Comparative Economics 9, 3, 2012, pp. 445-483. Benkler, Y. “Intellectual property and the organization of information production”, International Review of Law and Economics 22, 2002, pp. 81-107. Bessen, J. E. y M. J. Meurer. Patent failure: How judges, bureaucrats, and lawyers put innovators at risk, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2008. Boldrin, M. y D. K. Levine. Against intellectual monopoly, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2008. Campbell, E. G. et al. “Data withholding in academic genetics: Evidence from a national survey”, jama 287, 4, 2002, pp. 473-480. Cockburn, I.; M. MacGarvie y E. Mueller. “Patent thickets, licensing and innovative performance”, Industrial and Corporate Change 19, 3, 2010, pp. 899-925. 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. Cohendet, P. y F. Meyer-K. “The theoretical and policy implications of knowledge codification”, Research Policy 30, 9, 2001, pp. 1563-1591. Dosi, G. “Sources, procedures and microeconomic effects of innovation”, Journal of Economic Literature 26, 3, 1988, pp. 1120-1171. 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. 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. Franzoni, C. y G. Scellato. “Academic patenting and the consequences for scientific research”, The Australian Economic Review 44, 1, 2011, pp. 95-101. Freeman, C. “The ‘national system of innovation’ in historical perspective”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 19, 1, 1995, pp. 5-24. Geuna, A. y F. Rossi. The university and the economy. Pathways to growth and economic development, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2015. 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. 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. Hart, O. Firms, contracts and f inancial structure, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995. Heller, M. y R. Eisenberg. “Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research”, Science 280, 5364, 1998, pp. 698-701. 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. Lanjouw, J. O. y I. M. Cockburn. “New pills for poor people? Evidence after gatt”, World Development 29, 2, 2001, pp. 265-249. Lemley, M. A. “Property, intellectual property, and free riding”, Texas Law Review 83, 2005, pp. 1031-1069. Lerner, J. “Patenting in the shadow of competitors”, Journal of Law and Economics 38, 2, 1995, pp. 463-490. Levin, R. et al. “Appropriating the returns from industrial r&d”, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 3, 1987. Lissoni, F. et al. “Academic patenting in Europe: New evidence from the keins database”, Research Evaluation 17, 2, 2008, pp. 87-102. Lundvall, B.-Å. “National innovation systems – Analytical concept and development tool”, Industry and innovation 14, 1, 2007, pp. 95-119. Mansfield E. “Patents and innovation: An empirical study”, Management Science 32, 2, 1986, pp. 173-181. Maskus, K. “The new globalization of intellectual property rights: What’s new this time?”, Australian Economic History Review 54, 3, 2014, pp. 262-284. Mazzucato, M. The entrepreneurial State: Debunking public vs. private sector myths, Londres, Anthem Press, 2013. Merges R. y R. Nelson. “On the complex economics of patent scope”, Columbia Law Review 90, 4, 1990, pp. 839-916. Murray, F. et al. “Of mice and academics: Examining the effect of openness on innovation”, nber working paper 14819, 2009. Noel, M. y M. Schankerman. “Strategic patenting and software innovation”, Journal of Industrial Economics 61, 3, 2013, pp. 481-520. Pagano U. “The crisis of intellectual monopoly capitalism”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 38, 6, 2014, pp. 1409-1429. 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. 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. “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. Partha, D. y P. A. David. “Toward a new economics of science”, Research Policy 23, 5, 1994, pp. 487-521. Piketty, T. Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 2014. 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. Rowthorn, R. “A note on Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 38, 5, 2014, pp. 1275-1284. Samuelson, P. “Enriching discourse on public domains”, Duke Law Journal 55, 2006, pp. 783-834. 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. Schumpeter, J. A. Capitalism, socialism, and democracy, Nueva York, Harper and Brothers, 1942. Scotchmer, S. “Standing on the shoulders of giants: Cumulative research and the patent law”, Journal of Economic Perspectives 5, 1, 1991, pp. 29-41. Scotchmer, S. “The political economy of intellectual property treaties”, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 20, 2, 2004, pp. 415-437. 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. 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. Stiglitz J. E. “New theoretical perspectives on the distribution of income and wealth among individuals”, nber working paper 21189, 2015. Stiglitz, J. E. “Knowledge as a global public good”, 1999, Stokes, D. Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation, Washington, Brookings Institution Press, 1997. 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. https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/download/4886/5812 https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/download/4886/5885 https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/download/4886/6884 info:eu-repo/semantics/article http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 http://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ARTREF info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 Text Publication |
| 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 Pagano, Ugo Rossi, Maria Alessandra institutions of the economy increase prosperity patenting global effects instituciones de la economía crecimiento prosperidad patentamiento efectos globales |
| 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 |
Pagano, Ugo Rossi, Maria Alessandra |
| author_facet |
Pagano, Ugo Rossi, Maria Alessandra |
| topic |
institutions of the economy increase prosperity patenting global effects instituciones de la economía crecimiento prosperidad patentamiento efectos globales |
| topic_facet |
institutions of the economy increase prosperity patenting global effects instituciones de la economía crecimiento prosperidad patentamiento efectos globales |
| topicspa_str_mv |
instituciones de la economía crecimiento prosperidad patentamiento efectos globales |
| 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 |
spa |
| format |
Article |
| rights |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2 |
| references |
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. Arrow, K. J. “Technical information and industrial structure”, Industrial and Corporate Change 5, 2, 1996, pp. 645-652. 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. Belloc, F. y U. Pagano. “Knowledge enclosures, forced specialization and investment crisis”, European Journal of Comparative Economics 9, 3, 2012, pp. 445-483. Benkler, Y. “Intellectual property and the organization of information production”, International Review of Law and Economics 22, 2002, pp. 81-107. Bessen, J. E. y M. J. Meurer. Patent failure: How judges, bureaucrats, and lawyers put innovators at risk, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2008. Boldrin, M. y D. K. Levine. Against intellectual monopoly, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2008. Campbell, E. G. et al. “Data withholding in academic genetics: Evidence from a national survey”, jama 287, 4, 2002, pp. 473-480. Cockburn, I.; M. MacGarvie y E. Mueller. “Patent thickets, licensing and innovative performance”, Industrial and Corporate Change 19, 3, 2010, pp. 899-925. 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. Cohendet, P. y F. Meyer-K. “The theoretical and policy implications of knowledge codification”, Research Policy 30, 9, 2001, pp. 1563-1591. Dosi, G. “Sources, procedures and microeconomic effects of innovation”, Journal of Economic Literature 26, 3, 1988, pp. 1120-1171. 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. 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. Franzoni, C. y G. Scellato. “Academic patenting and the consequences for scientific research”, The Australian Economic Review 44, 1, 2011, pp. 95-101. Freeman, C. “The ‘national system of innovation’ in historical perspective”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 19, 1, 1995, pp. 5-24. Geuna, A. y F. Rossi. The university and the economy. Pathways to growth and economic development, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar, 2015. 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. 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. Hart, O. Firms, contracts and f inancial structure, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1995. Heller, M. y R. Eisenberg. “Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research”, Science 280, 5364, 1998, pp. 698-701. 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. Lanjouw, J. O. y I. M. Cockburn. “New pills for poor people? Evidence after gatt”, World Development 29, 2, 2001, pp. 265-249. Lemley, M. A. “Property, intellectual property, and free riding”, Texas Law Review 83, 2005, pp. 1031-1069. Lerner, J. “Patenting in the shadow of competitors”, Journal of Law and Economics 38, 2, 1995, pp. 463-490. Levin, R. et al. “Appropriating the returns from industrial r&d”, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 3, 1987. Lissoni, F. et al. “Academic patenting in Europe: New evidence from the keins database”, Research Evaluation 17, 2, 2008, pp. 87-102. Lundvall, B.-Å. “National innovation systems – Analytical concept and development tool”, Industry and innovation 14, 1, 2007, pp. 95-119. Mansfield E. “Patents and innovation: An empirical study”, Management Science 32, 2, 1986, pp. 173-181. Maskus, K. “The new globalization of intellectual property rights: What’s new this time?”, Australian Economic History Review 54, 3, 2014, pp. 262-284. Mazzucato, M. The entrepreneurial State: Debunking public vs. private sector myths, Londres, Anthem Press, 2013. Merges R. y R. Nelson. “On the complex economics of patent scope”, Columbia Law Review 90, 4, 1990, pp. 839-916. Murray, F. et al. “Of mice and academics: Examining the effect of openness on innovation”, nber working paper 14819, 2009. Noel, M. y M. Schankerman. “Strategic patenting and software innovation”, Journal of Industrial Economics 61, 3, 2013, pp. 481-520. Pagano U. “The crisis of intellectual monopoly capitalism”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 38, 6, 2014, pp. 1409-1429. 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. 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. “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. Partha, D. y P. A. David. “Toward a new economics of science”, Research Policy 23, 5, 1994, pp. 487-521. Piketty, T. Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 2014. 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. Rowthorn, R. “A note on Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century”, Cambridge Journal of Economics 38, 5, 2014, pp. 1275-1284. Samuelson, P. “Enriching discourse on public domains”, Duke Law Journal 55, 2006, pp. 783-834. 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. Schumpeter, J. A. Capitalism, socialism, and democracy, Nueva York, Harper and Brothers, 1942. Scotchmer, S. “Standing on the shoulders of giants: Cumulative research and the patent law”, Journal of Economic Perspectives 5, 1, 1991, pp. 29-41. Scotchmer, S. “The political economy of intellectual property treaties”, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 20, 2, 2004, pp. 415-437. 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. 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. Stiglitz J. E. “New theoretical perspectives on the distribution of income and wealth among individuals”, nber working paper 21189, 2015. Stiglitz, J. E. “Knowledge as a global public good”, 1999, Stokes, D. Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation, Washington, Brookings Institution Press, 1997. 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. |
| 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 |
| url2_str_mv |
https://revistas.uexternado.edu.co/index.php/ecoins/article/download/4886/5812 |
| 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 |
| _version_ |
1811200094735695872 |