Home Page
01.24.2008 (previous | next)
OECD Countries Pull Further Ahead

The OECD released new research on emerging national innovation practices in member countries. I found several salient points-

More and more OECD governments are giving firms tax breaks to drive innovation while cutting their direct (federal) spending on business R&D and are also encouraging public research organisations to commercialise their inventions, according to a new OECD report.

Tax breaks OECD governments recognize the importance of private sector investment in innovating activity. Commercial entities are in the best position to gauge technological areas sustainable by business supply-consumer demand market dynamics. Tax breaks give businesses further incentive to undertake basic R&D for innovations spanning years ahead rather than merely focusing on applied R&D or tweaking existing inventions.

Cutting back federal business R&D By shifting reliance for business R&D onto commercial entities, OECD nations' observe the argument by many economists, such as Michael Porter, that innovation is the providence of the business sector and not government. Historically, nations that fostered private commercial activity experienced greater economic growth and innovation than those unsupportive of private enterprise. Even when governments played central roles in developing new technologies, such as DARPA funding of early Internet technologies, successful policies encouraged for-profit business participation.

Commercializing public research Increasing innovation through commercialization of public research is consistent with the ex-post economic justification for patents and technology transfer policies such as the Bayh-Dole Act (and its foreign counterparts). Innovation in public R&D best serves society through commercialization by getting out of the lab and into useful application.

posted by Noel Le @ 10:08 AM | International

Link to this Entry | Printer-Friendly | Email a Comment | Post a Comment(0)









 
IPcentral WebLog

Blog Main

IPcentral Blogosphere Archives

Search the Blog

Recent Posts
  - File-Sharing, LimeWire, Identity Thieves, and 9-Year-Old Girls: Solutions Are Needed
- Patents and R&D Spending
- Public Nonsense about File-Sharing, Identity Theft and Inadvertent Sharing
- File Sharing, CNET and Slashdot: Getting the Story Wrong—Again (Part 2)
- File-Sharing, CNET and Slashdot: Getting the Story Wrong—Again (Part 1)
- Harm to Innovation
- IPRs in BRIC Economies
- Commercial Benchmarks in Open Source
- The Reality of FOSS
- Defining Developments in the FOSS Movement
Archives by Month
  - March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
  - (see all)
Archives by Subject
  - Academia
- Access: Commons, Fair Use, Orphan Works, Public Domain
- Accounting
- Analog Holes
- Antitrust
- Art
- Aspen
- Big Tent
- Biotech
- Books
- Comments from Readers
- Counterfeit
- Digital Americas
- Digital Europe
- Digital Europe 2006
- DMCA
- DRM & Watermarks, etc.
- Economics, Game Theory & Public Choice
- Enforcement & Remedies
- Free Culture Movement
- Games
- General
- Infrastructure
- International
- Internet: P2P, Search Engines...
- Legislation and Legislators
- Liberty and IP
- Markets: Business, Investment & Innovation
- Media: Video, Music...
- Patents
- Pharma
- Physical Property
- Prices, Terms, and Licensing
- Privacy and Security
- Radio
- Software
- Spectrum & Wireless
- Standards
- Supreme Court
- Tax-Funded IP
- Telecom
- Theft of Service
- Universities
Links
 

Site Feed

  - Atom
- RSS 1.0
- RSS 2.0
We welcome comments by email - look for a link to the author's email address in the byline of each post. Please let us know if we may publish your remarks.


 
Home Page