바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

  • 한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
  • 2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30
 

logo

  • P-ISSN2287-1608
  • E-ISSN2287-1616
  • KCI

Bilateral Trade Potential of IP Sensitive Products: A Comparative Study of India and China

Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy / Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy, (P)2287-1608; (E)2287-1616
2022, v.11 no.1, pp.69-86
https://doi.org/10.7545/ajip.2022.11.1.069
Ruchi Sharma (Indian Institute of Technology Indore)
Arushi Jain (Goldman Sachs)
Sidheswar Panda (Kalinga Institute of Industrial Technology)

Abstract

This study examines performances and varieties of export of IP sensitive products across emerging countries, namely, India and China by utilizing 6-digit disaggregated product-level export data. Further, this study constructs trade margins — extensive and intensive margins to understand trade potential and different trade patterns, specifically, exporters’ productivity, product diversification, and volume of trade during 2007-2016. This study finds India’s performance is comparable with China at the extensive margin though the gap between India and China is very wide in terms of the total value of exports and the intensive margin. China majorly exports more expensive electronics and manufacturing-related products as opposed to relatively cheaper medicinal and synthetic products, the total value of exports from China to the rest of the world is much higher than that of India. This study suggests that India is exporting IP-sensitive products to lower-income countries sufficiently, but the IP-sensitive exports to higher-income countries are still lagging.

keywords
Exports, IP-sensitive products, Trade margins, Product-level data, Technological innovation

참고문헌

1.

Allred, B.B. and Park, W.G. (2007). Patent rights and innovative activity: evidence from national and firm-level data. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(6), pp.878-900.

2.

Bernard, A.B., Jensen, J.B., Redding, S.J. and Schott, P.K. (2007). Firms in international trade. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(3), pp.105-130.

3.

Bernard, A.B., Jensen, J.B., Redding, S.J. and Schott, P.K. (2009). The margins of US trade. American Economic Review, 99(2), pp.487-93.

4.

Besedeš, T. and Prusa, T.J. (2011). The role of extensive and intensive margins and export growth. Journal of Development Economics, 96(2), 371-379.

5.

Bhat, S. and Narayanan, K. (2009). Technological efforts, firm size and exports in the basic chemical industry in India. Oxford Development Studies, 37(2), 145-169.

6.

Chadha, A. (2009). Product cycles, innovation, and exports: A study of Indian pharmaceuticals. World Development, 37(9), 1478-1483.

7.

Chaney, T. (2008). Distorted gravity: the intensive and extensive margins of international trade. American Economic Review, 98(4), 1707-21.

8.

Chen, Y. and Puttitanun, T. (2005). Intellectual property rights and innovation in developing countries. Journal of development economics, 78(2), 474-493.

9.

Cooper, C. 1991. “Are innovation studies on industrialized economies relevant to technology policy in developing countries?” United Nations University, Institute for New Technologies (No. 50.003 UNI-03).

10.

Dai, M., Liu, H. and Lin, L. (2020). How innovation impacts firms' export survival: Does export mode matter?. The World Economy, 43(1), 81-113.

11.

Dasgupta, A. and Siddharthan, N. (1985). Industrial distribution of Indian exports and joint ventures abroad. Development and Change, 16(1), 159-174.

12.

Delgado, M., Kyle, M. and McGahan, A.M. (2013). Intellectual property protection and the geography of trade. The Journal of Industrial Economics, 61(3), 733-762.

13.

Dutt, P., Mihov, I. and Van Zandt, T. (2013). The effect of WTO on the extensive and the intensive margins of trade. Journal of international Economics, 91(2), 204-219.

14.

Feenstra, R. and Kee, H.L. (2008). Export variety and country productivity: Estimating the monopolistic competition model with endogenous productivity. Journal of international Economics, 74(2), 500-518.

15.

Fernandes, A.M., Freund, C. and Pierola, M.D. (2016). Exporter behavior, country size and stage of development: Evidence from the exporter dynamics database. Journal of Development Economics, 119, 121-137.

16.

Ginarte, J.C. and Park, W.G. (1997). Determinants of patent rights: A cross-national study. Research Policy, 26(3), 283-301.

17.

Gold, B. (1982). Productivity, technological change and international competitiveness. Technovation, 1(3), 203-213.

18.

Guan, J. and Ma, N. (2003). Innovative capability and export performance of Chinese firms. Technovation, 23(9), 737-747.

19.

Helpman, E., Melitz, M. and Rubinstein, Y. (2008). Estimating trade flows: Trading partners and trading volumes. The quarterly journal of economics, 123(2), 441-487.

20.

Hummels, D. and Klenow, P.J. (2005). The variety and quality of a nation's exports. American Economic Review, 95(3), 704-723.

21.

Kanwar, S. and Evenson, R. (2003). Does intellectual property protection spur technological change?. Oxford Economic Papers, 55(2), 235-264.

22.

Kim, Y.K., Lee, K., Park, W.G. and Choo, K. (2012). Appropriate intellectual property protection and economic growth in countries at different levels of development. Research policy, 41(2), pp.358-375.

23.

Krugman, P. (1980). Scale economies, product differentiation, and the pattern of trade. The American Economic Review, 70(5), pp.950-959.

24.

Kumar, N. (1990). Multinational Enterprises in India: Industrial Distribution Characteristics and Performance. Routledge.

25.

Kumar, N. and Siddharthan, N.S. (1994). Technology, firm size and export behaviour in developing countries: the case of Indian enterprises. The Journal of Development Studies, 31(2), 289-309.

26.

Lall, S. (1992). Technological capabilities and industrialization. World Development, 20(2), pp.165-186.

27.

Lall, S. (2000). The Technological structure and performance of developing country manufactured exports, 1985‐98. Oxford development studies, 28(3), 337-369.

28.

Melitz, M.J. (2003). The impact of trade on intra‐industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica, 71(6), 1695-1725.

29.

Panda, S. and Sharma, R. (2020). Does Technological Specialization Spur High-Technology Exports? Evidence From Panel Quantile Regressions. Global Economy Journal, 20(02), 2050013-1- 2050013-19.

30.

Panda, S., Sharma, R. and Park, W.G. (2020). Patent protection, technological efforts, and exports: an empirical investigation. The Journal of Developing Areas, 54(2), 145-162.

31.

Park, W.G. (2008). International patent protection: 1960–2005. Research Policy, 37(4), 761-766.

32.

Posner, M.V. (1961). International trade and technical change. Oxford Economic Papers, 13(3), 323-341.

33.

Sharma, R., Paswan, A.K., Ambrammal, S.K. and Dhanora, M. (2018). Impact of patent policy changes on R&D expenditure by industries in India. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 21(1-2), 52-69.

34.

Srholec, M. (2007). High-tech exports from developing countries: A symptom of technology spurts or statistical illusion?. Review of world economics, 143(2), 227-255.

35.

Tewari, M. and Veeramani, C. (2016). Network Trade and Development: What Do Patterns of Vertically Specialized Trade in ASEAN Tell Us About India’s Place in Asian Production Networks?. Global Economy Journal, 16(2), 349-388.

36.

Veeramani, C., Aerath, L. and Gupta, P. (2018). Intensive and extensive margins of exports: What can India learn from China?. The World Economy, 41(5), 1196-1222.

37.

Vernon, R. (1966). International trade and international investment in the product cycle. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80(2), 190-207.

38.

Willmore, L. (1992). Tansnationals and foreign trade: Evidence from Brazil. The Journal of Development Studies, 28(2), 314-335.

Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy