A Study On Game Interaction Between Local Government And Enterprise Around Intellectual Property Policy

In the Modern economic society, it has become the point for intellectualproperty policy making that managing intellectual property rights effectively to makesure the coordination of intellectual property rights and economic development,because knowledge-based economy has replaced the industrial economyto become the dominating, and our country is in a critical period of social andeconomic restructuring.Compared to the central government’s Intellectual property policy,anti-government Intellectual property policy should be more targeted and flexible, inorder to be integrated with local economic status and development planning closely.In fact, the intellectual property development levels of our various places areunbalanced, and the local intellectual property policies have large differences.Therefore, in order to improve the universality and to enhance the universal guidingsignificance of this study, we use game theory as research method, including the staticgame of pure strategy and mixed strategy game model, and the dynamic game ofperfect information dynamic game model and the sub-game perfect Nash equilibriumgame model, aiming to conducted a descriptive analysis of the game interactivebehavior between local government and enterprise around intellectual property policy.From the perspective of policy formulation, local government should integratelocal intellectual property policy making and economic development planning.Based on the life cycle theory of industry cluster, local intellectual propertypolicies should be rendered the "strict-loose–strict” form according to the differentstages of local development.From the perspective of policy implementation, the key issues affecting theeffectiveness of the implementation of intellectual property policy is the problem ofasymmetric information between the government and enterprises and the positiveexternalities problem of knowledge innovation among enterprises. To this end, on theone hand, local government should enhance the quality of the pre-screeningand post-assessment of the innovative enterprises; on the other hand, inorder to protect the enthusiasm of enterprises’ technological innovation, localintellectual property policy should maintain a certain intensity to control knowledgespillovers. Therefore, this study shows that the key difference of setting "loose" or"strict" intellectual property policies is the market access conditions, includingintellectual property licensing and transaction costs in the industry, and qualifyingconditions for enterprises to enjoy benefit from intellectual property policy.