Global Productivity = Technology + IPR
by Ndubuisi Ekekwe
About five hundred years ago, generations that lived apart did not experience any major change in their standard of livings. Global productivity was very low and man was generally poor. Yes, there were empires and kingdoms, but on average the world was on static economic expansion.
But with emergence of mass penetrated technology, things began to change. The industrial revolution was a quintessential moment in modern history. Technology brought productivity and man became richer. Standard of living on average improved. It remains till today that when technology penetrates en mass in any economy, national productivity improves, and living standards advance.
There is another caveat to this argument. Intellectual property right (IPR) is a cardinal part of this productivity. Without it, technology will not improve and innovation is stalled. The old world was an era of absence of IPR and that contributed to a no small measure to the lack of wealth creation. Sure, people invented things in arts, engineering, but there was no wealth created. Lack of IPR prevented meaningful market success in one major way. It prevented the pursuit of innovation since ideas could be stolen and commercialized with no penalty. The return to innovation was very low. That was why the world had many Inventors and few innovators.
Yes, we read about inventors that developed nearly all the engineering principles in use today. They had ideas, bright people and created prototypes. They were celebrated as icons and legends. But many died very poor. They could not transition from inventors to innovators, not because of market issues, but because lack of IPR made it difficult to attract funding since there was no guarantee to success. No funding, no mass commercialization and no human impact. In our contemporary time, the legendary venture capitalists will tell you that if you want to get them involved, you need to have a protected intellectual property.
Two things changed the world: technology and most importantly IPR. Between the two, IPR was more important. Why? Without it, we would still be celebrating inventors with no impact on human lifestyles (just note that I respect inventors; I am one myself since I have filed my own patents).
That brings me to the African challenge. In many parts of the continent, the IPR there is still like the one that existed 500 years ago. It does mean that Africa cannot prosper, if my logic is correct, until they get a practical and working IPR. It does not matter how much aids and loans they get from foreign agencies. Without IPR, nations cannot innovate and without innovation, any economy dies a natural slow death. IPR is the catalyst that drives national technology policy, making it implementable and sustainable. You cannot have a better technology policy than a strong IPR. With strong IPR, inventors could become innovators. Without it, everyone sits on his/her ideas and the nation suffers on productivity.
In essence, Global Productivity = Technology + IPR, and productivity translates into good standard of living. When nations cannot create technology, the LHS of the equation suffers. Also, if they have no IPR, that suffers more. See the reason why Africa is not making progress? It is an illusion when boys and girls in Accra, Lagos, and Nairobi use pirated foreign software, and think they are smart. They never know that it would have been better if their nations have laws to prevent such illegality. With such laws, they have an opportunity of not needing those foreign software by developing their own and selling them locally, profitably. In the absence of the IPR, they cannot do business because immediately they release software in the market; it appears in all shops illegally. After three months, they close their shops! It is a vicious cycle that makes innovation difficult in Africa since no guaranteed return exists. Why invest your hard earned money when there is no law to protect your creations? Why do research? You see why our businesses prefer to import and distribute than create things?
Last year in Lagos, I hosted a workshop for some technology entrepreneurs. Everyone wanted to know how to improve the business climate. I was not interested in the electricity problem. I told them that the biggest problem is lack of IPR in Nigeria. When boys hawk Microsoft Vista for N300 (about $2) openly and no one arrests them, no major creative business can incubate in that land. I told them that without a strong enforceable IPR law, someone will eat into their ideas and they may not succeed, especially if they plan to start making things. My advice to the group was to ask government to enforce existing laws and enact new ones where applicable. I told them it would be difficult for them to have international partners since no one can risk his/her IPR in Nigerian market. Sure, who cares what he says? Alas, one emailed me few days ago explaining how IPR issues prevented him from concluding a partnership with a Chinese firm.
Let me stop now. In conclusion, Africa must strengthen its IPR even as it pursues new technology policies.
Nkpuhe 
THIS IS VERY INTRESTING. I THINK THE PRESENT NATIONAL ASSEMBLY CAN DO JUSTICE TO THIS.
bright young mind. this is another good one.
I disagree, at least with the strong IP laws in the US, since those are more often simply used by large companies with lawyers to bully newcomers rather than really building value. Technology nowadays is allowing us to focus on services and reputation, making distribution cheap; to continue to control the ownership of ideas and their delivery is to undermine the foundation of sharing, which is the foundation of the industry addressed in this article.
As an example, technology is enabling artists to spread their art around the world and make money from performances and other more personal approaches; the RIAA fights this with lawyers, which is their right for existing contracts, but the system has also hamstrung many legitimate, innovative uses due to the heavy-handed approaches supported by government force.
Microsoft spread NOT because of IPR but rather due to effective pricing. And today’s service-oriented networks need freedom of open access, not artificially restrictive “property” rights.
There may be a way to create a rational IP system, but needs to be much more narrow and focused than any system in use today.
Hi Trent,
I agree that IPR could undermine innovation, especially when it is abused by trial lawyers. However, the most innovative products today are those that emanate from protected technologies. There is a motivation that comes from rewarding innovation which IPR offers. In most cases, we think we can live without IPR, thinking that marginal gain from open source technologies could sustain human innovation. I tend to disagree, especially in developing nations where people are afraid to innovate since there is no guarantee to protect them to benefit from their hard works. The world needs a better system that will make IPR work as you noted, nevertheless I do not think that a world of open source innovation will sustain exponential growth in technology innovation. You got it right and I agree with you: “There may be a way to create a rational IP system, but needs to be much more narrow and focused than any system in use today.”
But in Africa, even that focused one may not work because the regulatory system is weak and legal system deficient. If governments can offer something, I will tend to believe that MNCs will gradually begin to involve African firms in product creation where they share trade secrets than as mere distributors.
Please visit my blog again.
Nd
IPR matters to development, yet an IPR system can have many forms. My conjecture is that the current patchwork IPR system hardly serves “smallholders” in the sense intended by Goafrit.
Some form of diagnostic hypothesis is in this paper: “Institutions for pro-growth conduct in the knowledge economy ” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1121643
Designing a functional IPR system that is fit to the context of developing countries is quite a challenge.
At http://www.pragmetaknowledgeclout.be/patent-reform
i describe a multi-stakeholder approach that could be used in the institutional design (includes references on ongoing US patent reform and complaints by inventors) .
At http://www.pragmetaknowledgeclout.be/knowledge-markets I describe a “knowledge provide failure”
Hi Jan, I just read some of your references. Excellent work. I will be getting in touch to see how African Union can use you.
Nd
Wow. This is impressive and one of the best I have read recently from a blog. A masterpiece with lots of insights. I wish you offer a direct simple solution though. U need to undertsnad that what works in other places may not apply in Africa. i will suggest you decouple those confusions. generally, very insightful and deserve an award. understnding this thesis could help an african nation.well done
I read the same article by Dr Ekekwe.
http://www.prosperityunbound.com/blog/2010/04/global-productivitytechnology-irp/comment-page-1/#comment-3615
But here you made a very important example that brought it life to me. The solar boy and the Ipad guy. Both have great ideas; one is still studying in southern Africa with no guranteed wealth; another is making billionaires. In America, a good idea makes wealth; in Africa, it is not that simple.
You concluded: We cannot close the wealth gap if we do not address the (intellectual) property rights gap first!
My question to you and Ekekwe: how can this gap be closed? I work in African agency and no one has any idea on how to solve this problem. Get more lawyers or police. Or ask US NGOs to focus on IPR in Africa. This is good debate and I think there is need for a conference dedicated to this observation on Africa’s problems. Until I read this article, I have always felt that our foreign software pirates were just trying to help themselves and succeed.
Please what can be done over this? It could have a major impact. Suggest in this blog, actions and plans. I will send to Dr Ekekwe also.
Hello Christophe,
I will look into this in coming weeks. I understand the challenge of developing any policy direction in Africa; nonetheless, solving IPR problem in Africa could be as simple as asking Police and law enforcement officers to do their jobs. Just as it is illegal to steal a car, we need to understand that it MUST be illegal also to steal ideas. That piece of software is not smaller than that car which the Police will be ready to protect.
Also, the people must know that a strong IPR will work for them. It helps everyone and in the long term, it is a win-win thing.
During our workshops for AFRIT, we maintain that any PC or system with illegal software will not be allowed in the room. People may feel that you act strange, but that is all we need.
I will get back to this point in future blogs, possibly on Practical Ways to Strengthen IPR culture in Africa. But I will need to do some researches to get my perspectives right. Please come back to my blog, again, and again.
Nd
Dear Nd,
Further to my earlier post, I am interested in finding good answers to your questions, and how to distinguish IPR from knowledge commons.
At http://www.atria.us there is now a forum ( http://www.atria.us/content/scope-0 ) where the matter could be addressed, alongside the Convention on Knowledge Commons.
Kind regards,
Jan
the more i read this article, the more i have a clearer view of this africa’s underdevelopment. do you think we need to call a conference of all attorney generals in africa under AU and get them to work on IPR? I am very concerned and have forwarded this piece to many people and people are talking and asking questions. how can this be done? i will keep you engaged in case we need you to open the discussion, possibly in ethiopia.
Hello King,
I will be speaking at Brown University on October 1-3, 2010 as one of the keynote speakers in A Better World by Design.
http://www.abetterworldbydesign.com/
I hope to share more insights on this and other issues which I am confident will help the world understand how to invent and redesign Africa over what we are doing today. One major element is the assumption that all new ideas must be transferred from abroad to help Africa. I give you examples, Africans had developed indigenous ways of treating snake bites, repairing broken bones, shaping metals, etc before the colonial masters came.. The difference between that herb for snake bite and the one offered by Pfizer is that the latter has an IPR around its product. It does not mean that the former is less potent.
How do you make communities greater by harvesting these ideas, providing them IPR, and getting the world to understand that it is science and medicine and must be paid and recognized for their solutions. It requires laws that will put some constraints on how their ideas are used.
When you hear someone called “Uzoji” in Igboland of Africa; it means the person was born on the road to/from/in farm. No hospital, but local women have the science to deliver the baby in the farm and get the mother and baby alive, without any trained modern nurse. They use herbs. Unfortunately, because that knowledge is not protected, even African govts do not value them.
Get me right, I support modern science and technology. I look forward for an opportunity to speak at AU program. I have done that many things and we seen to be making progress. We need IPR to have a future to compete in the world.
Nd
Dear Nd,
In WIPO’s development agenda there is a project/study on intellectual property and the public domain, intended to deepen analysis of the impact of a “deep and accessible” public domain, and promote related norm-setting activities
http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/ip-and-the-public-domain.pdf , with intermediate result/scoping study available at http://www.wipo.int/ip-development/en/agenda/news/2010/news_0007.html
See also recommendation 18 (Cluster B): 18. To urge the IGC to accelerate the process on the protection of genetic resources, traditional knowledge and folklore, without prejudice to any outcome, including the possible development of an international instrument or instruments.
(at http://www.wipo.int/ip-development/en/agenda/recommendations.html )
with related meetings/resources at: http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/topic.jsp?group_id=22
However, it is not clear to me how much attention these topics get alongside the topics around the IPR owned by corporate giants.
There are however feasible options, though.
In the social architecture of http://www.pragmetaknowledgeclout.be/target-groups, I would consider “sector organisations,” as the legitimate owner/protector/guard of the knowledge; e.g. an “association of Traditional Birth Attendants” (ref. http://www.citeulike.org/user/jago/tag/traditional-birth-attendants ), guarding/owning the knowledge on the herbs and their use in delivery.
The proper addressing of traditional knowledge challenges the mainstream Intellectual Property institutions. Yet there exist options! If these options receive support, then they can be elaborated as part of a developing country answer on the narrow TRIPS agenda!
The title of my talk will be:
The Design of Nations
this article is one of the bests i have read recently on the plight of developing countries. it has got many new ideas and very insightful. wonderful blog
you may wish to make this post a book and expand this idea. this is a very important observation that even mexico and latin america will like to read.
Please check out also: http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2010/07/26/wipo-sees-first-real-progress-on-text-for-protection-of-folklore-in-10-years-2/
Thanks Jan. This link is very important. The opening statement is that of hope. I like it and I just repeated it below:
“Experts meeting last week at the World Intellectual Property Organization made the first real strides in over a decade at developing a concrete rules to protect the cultural expressions and folklore of indigenous and local communities.”
For another example of a sector organization,
see for instance:
This new blog expands some of these comments and those I got from email. Let me thank Jan for his links. It turns out that if WIPO does as planned, I can relocate to my village and open a folklore industry.
Enjoy:
Nd
There are more looming troubles with the IPR regime.
For a viewpoint from India (and more links):
It is still open season for bio-piracy:
http://www.downtoearth.org.in/node/1709
Here a comprehensive viewpoint from Mr. Cheikh Kane (Senegal): http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2010/08/30/the-relationship-between-ip-technology-transfer-and-development/
My talk at Brown University, Oct 2, 2010 on this topic.
Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wished to say that I’ve really enjoyed surfing around your blog posts. After all I’ll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you write again very soon!