In modern society, complementary relationships between knowledge are the leading factors of knowledge pricing mechanism.
The price of intellectual property rights is a very difficult economic issue. According to Posmore, the US government has always given 100% protection for all intellectual property rights, ie, the owner of intellectual property has 100% of the benefits, then the US per capita income is approximately only 1990 It is equivalent to the level of 1870. This is equivalent to a decrease of US per capita annual income to 1/9 or even 1/17 in 1990. At the same time, according to the data of Posmore, innovators can share the benefits of their innovation, approximately less than 1/5 of all innovative benefits.
From the important papers published from Solo 1956, until today, regardless of how to conservative estimation methods, the parties to the arguments have recognized that 1/3 of the growth of US labor productivity should be attributed to innovation. Some scholars who have taken radical estimation methods believe that more than 2/3 of American per capita income should be attributed to innovation and technical progress.
If in the long run, the most important driving force of economic growth is an innovation and technological progress, then the economic analysis of intellectual property needs an explanation framework to coordinate the following two aspects seem to mutual conflict: one aspect, about " The economically principles of efficiency tell us that clear deflation property rights can convert external effects of personal behavior to internal effects - Obviously, he undertakes his behavior only when a person's behavior has no formal air. All costs and all income, so economists believe that a social economic activity will reach the Pareto efficiency boundary.
On the other hand, research on the model of the capitalist free market in the United States shows that innovative gains from innovation is lower than 1/5 of all benefits produced by innovation. This means that most of the benefits of knowledge and innovation are overflow - using Romer's language description, this spillical main form is to increase personal income of members who do not participate in innovation. In other words, the free market, typical, such as the US social and economic system, allows innovative benefits to 4/5 spills to the public, and seems to be based on such a system, in 100 years, increase the per capita income level of 8 ~ 16 times .
All microscopic economics is nothing more than "price theory", which is the view of economists of Chicago, such as Friedman and Zhang Wuyi. The core content of the price theory is a pricing mechanism, that is, what the price is determined and what is determined. If "transaction" is the basic unit of free market economic activity, then "Ai and Worth Frango" is the basic tool for economists analyzing trading activities. I will go to the most critical content, let us assume that the transactions have seriously treated the ownership and freedom will of the two sides, then, as long as the negotiation cost is low enough, the transaction can reach a transaction of Pareto's improvement - the essence of this transaction The property rights owned by the parties have higher value after the transaction.
Property rights have higher value before the transaction is more valuable before the transaction, which is a market participant where property rights are raised from a higher bid market participant.
The so-called "intellectual property", aunt does not quote legal school literature on intellectual property rights, as the name suggests, is "rights" defined by specific "knowledge" as "property". The three terms "knowledge", "property", "rights", which have occurred here, have also caused great debate.
The so-called economic analysis of intellectual property, according to the views of economists in Chicago, nothing more than the use of price theory to intellectual property. Chicago School Outstanding Price Theoretist Zhang Wu Chang professor has spent a few months to study the pricing mechanism of US patents, and then he admitted in an article, it is deeply unpersurred, and it will give up.
However, after several years of literature reading and knowledge theory, I realized that the more steady-state path is to grasp from the philosophy level, and some abstract propositions are obtained with abstract description tools such as Mathematics, then , Start from the specific intellectual property issues, step by step, and promote economic research in this field. The superiority of abstract descriptions is that researchers can avoid the complex details included in "knowledge", "property", "rights", "only pay attention to" knowledge ", and these basic characteristics may result in" The consequences of property and "rights". To discuss what is "knowledge", a knowledge, according to the standard price theory, its price first relies on the utility of it to bring potential demand; what is the price of potential suppliers? Transfer it; third dependent on alternative relationships or complementary relationships between other knowledge and the intensity of these relationships; in the end, it relies on the level of competition between the demand part and the level of competition. Readers can also refer to Marshall's four laws on "derived demand" proposed in "Economics Principles" to list more comprehensive prices than the above factors.
According to my philosophical inspection of knowledge, in modern society, the complementary relationship between various knowledge is the leading factor in knowledge pricing mechanism. The complement between various knowledge can be manifested in one person's knowledge, that is, the complementaryness of time. For example, primary school knowledge, middle school knowledge, university knowledge, continuous and complement each other, that is, Becker's so-called "accumulation effect". Knowledge complementarity is more manifested between many different knowledge traditions, as a group of blind people in touching an elephant, each particular perspective, has complementarity for other perspectives, the so-called "conversation" Each.
I will continue to discuss knowledge pricing in the next article, as well as the moderate protection of intellectual property rights.
