Intellectual Property Development And Pledge Financing Research

In the era of knowledge economy,intellectual property rights are playing a more important role in promoting social and economic development.Various of countries implement intellectual property strategies,including strategic layout of intellectual property rights overseas,and seeking lead roles in various scientific and technology fields to maintain advantages in the world market competition.China has implemented an innovation-oriented development strategy in recent years,deepened reform in the management,protection,transformation and financing of intellectual property rights,and put efforts in making China an well-developed country in the field of intellectual property rights,during which time improvements of the quality of intellectual property rights and bring in the economic benefits of intellectual property rights has achieved great development.However,China's intellectual property management,protection,transformation and financing are still immature,which is due to the late start and the imperfection of relevant management systems,especially in the field of intellectual property pledge financing,which just started in recent years.Therefore,it's necessary to learn from the historical and management experience from other countries,which helps to analyze the development quality of intellectual property in China and to discuss the mode of intellectual property pledge financing.After literature review,some inadequacies in the related field of intellectual property are pointed out in this paper.Based on the theory of system science,limited rationality and evolutionary game,the paper discusses intellectual property development and its pledge financing.First of all,we sort out the history of intellectual property systems,emphasizing on the introduction of British patent history and its impact on other countries all over the world,from which China can learn from.Secondly,brief introduction on the advanced experience of developed countries in the field of intellectual property management is given.On the basis of the current development quality of intellectual property in China,this paper makes a comparative analysis of the development status of intellectual property at home and abroad,and has a conclusion that there is a stable and positive trend in the development of China's intellectual property generally during recent years,but problems still exist,such as insufficient innovation ability of intellectual property,insufficient internationalization of intellectual property,and low industrialization rate in universities and scientific research institutions.Moreover,difficulties in intellectual property financing brings low quality in the development of intellectual property,which lead to low quality of intellectual property development in turn.This situation further affects the development of economic activities such as pledged financing of intellectual property.Therefore,on the basis of learning from the advanced intellectual property management experience of developed countries,some suggestions are put forward to improve the development quality of intellectual property in China.Finally,in connection with the current situation of the pilot work of intellectual property pledge financing in China,this paper constructs a three-party evolutionary game model of intellectual property pledge financing involving small and medium-sized technology enterprises(SMEs),banks and guarantee institutions,and analyzes the choices of strategies of these three parties in the process of intellectual property pledge financing.Through numerical simulation and comparison analysis,the paper verifies the validity of the model and discusses the changes of the willingness of the game's three-party selection strategy.The results show that SMEs and banks have a strong willingness to choose a stable strategy.Banks and guarantee institutions tend to have high loan amounts when choosing a stable strategy,but they are cautious about raising loan interest rates.In addition,banks are not sensitive to increasing the cost of investigations and the proportion of profit sharing to guarantee institutions,while guarantee institutions tend to have higher profit sharing.Some specific recommendations are given as well.