美国IP政策的扩张策略与发展中国家知识产权保护——基于“外压内应”机制的实证分析

The Expansion Strategy of American IP Policy and Intellectual Property Protection in Developing Countries--Empirical Analysis Based on“External Pressure-Internal Response”Mechanism

本文根据1995—2015年美国知识产权(IP)保护的扩张策略和121个发展中国家知识产权保护水平提升的典型事实,将公共政策扩散理论、技术差距理论与新区域主义“市场换规则”的讨价还价机理相结合,构建了非对称格局下美国IP政策扩张至发展中国家的“外压内应”机制,并以此为框架建立回归模型,评估导致发展中国家知识产权保护水平提升的内外因作用效果。从外压效力来看,除了强制手段之外,美国扩张策略均对发展中国家知识产权保护产生了显著的正向影响,且具有稳健性。从前后分期来看,美国对发展中国家施压的强制方式,如特别301条款、GSP附加条件等单边胁迫手段在2000年前效果显著,但在21世纪已难以发挥主要作用,而契约化的FTA方式能更有效地提升伙伴国的知识产权保护水平。从内部因素看,与外资额增加相比,发展中国家对美出口额的增加更显著地提高了知识产权保护水平。因此,一国掌控规则话语权的前提是市场实力;契约型策略是一国成功输出规则的最佳方式,其他非强制策略有助推作用。

Based on the expansion strategy of American IP policy as well as the typical facts of 121 developing countries'IP protection level upgrade from 1995 to 2015,this paper combined the diffusion theory of public policy and the technology gap theory,along with the new regionalism theory's tradeoff mechanism of“market for rules”,to construct the“External Pressure-Internal Response”mechanism by which outspreading American IP policy affected developing countries under an asymmetric pattern of interest.Using this mechanism to frame regression model,this paper aimed to assess the effect intensity of the internal and external factors which resulted in the escalation of the IP protection level in developing countries.From the perspective of external pressure and effects,except for coercive measures,the expansion strategy of the United States had a significant positive impact on IP protection level in developing countries,and it showed its robustness.By stages,the tough measures the US imposed on the developing countries,such as Special 301 clause and GSP etc.additional conditions,were forcible before 2000,but in 21st century,which no longer played a major role,while contractualized FTA enhanced effectively the level of IP protection of partner countries.Internally,compared with the high inflow of FDI,the increase in export value of the developing countries to the US market had a more significant impact on improving the level of IP protection.To conclude,a powerful market is the prerequisite for a country to control the discourse power of rules;Contractually strategy is the best way to introduce rules successfully and other non-compulsory strategies have a joint driving role.