The EU lags behind in the knowledge economy. At the same time, competitiveness is increasingly based on the access to, and use of, knowledge - and it has been this way for decades. Linked to this is that proper handling of knowledge-based assets is increasingly crucial. However, the EU could do so much better. Only 20 years ago, three EU Member States were among the top five when it comes to international patent applications. Now, there are three Asian countries among the top five, but only one EU Member State.
Few people doubt that we live in a knowledge economy. Competitiveness is more and more based on the access and use of knowledge, and it has been so for decades. Linked to this is that proper handling of knowledge-based assets is more and more crucial. This is also the reason why the EU Commission in 2020 adopted the Intellectual Property Action Plan. However, the EU could do so much better; it lags behind its competitors in the knowledge economy, and this issue is not yet being properly addressed. Only 20 years ago, three EU Member States were among the top five when it comes to international patent applications. Now, there are three Asian countries among the top five, but only one EU Member State – Germany – remains a member. The Global Innovation Index 2022 had four European Countries in the top five, but only two EU Member States. The top three ranked European countries are Switzerland, Sweden and the United Kingdom. The EU’s Intellectual Property Action Plan includes many initiatives. However, one of the most important - access to education on intellectual property - is not addressed at all.
Many educational programmes lead to professions where the ability to handle knowledge-based assets is vital. This includes courses on design, computer programming and engineering. However, many higher education institutes fail to provide the students with the relevant understanding of what is required when it comes to knowledge-based assets.
To offer an example, many people have to make decisions relating to such assets in their professional role. It is frequently the case that contracts and agreements on knowledge-based assets relate to ideas that lead to innovation and may create a potential market. If the individuals responsible for the innovate ideas and concepts lack the relevant knowledge, they will not know when to ask for help and nor who to approach for guidance. They may also not be able to ask the correct questions to obtain the insights they may need.
The EU’s Intellectual Property Action Plan includes many relevant initiatives, such as SME vouchers and work on knowledge valorisation. However, if the educational systems within the Member States are not updated to match the needs of the knowledge economy, then these initiatives will not help improve the EU’s competitiveness. Therefore, the EU should be alarmed when seeing the findings of the Global Innovation Index and the statistics on international patent applications. Yet despite this, the EU is still failing to address the overall lack of relevant knowledge.
According to a recent report, the IPR Intensive Industries represent 47% of the EU’s current GDP. These industries also represent a large share of EU’s exports. This proportion has been increasing over recent decades.
However, higher education in many Member States has not progressed to in order to reflect these developments. To address this, the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise offers three proposals:
1. The course content must cover more than one intellectual property right. The intellectual property system is complex, and it is not the case that only certain rights are of importance or relevance to different professions. Engineers must know the basics of copyright, while artists must know basics of trademark protection.
2. There is a need to cover the basic issues of agreements on intellectual property. Agreements on intellectual property rights are crucial to every area, from public procurement to cooperation agreements on research collaboration. In order to be able to evaluate the consequences of such agreements, it is not sufficient to only have knowledge of intellectual property rights and of agreements as such. A level of basic understanding of intellectual property agreements in particular is required.
3. The educational perspective must address both your own rights as well as rights of others. There are few innovations today that are handled solely through a single company’s intellectual property rights. In an everyday object such as a smartphone, there are a large number of patented technical solutions and a great deal of copyright-protected software. Added to this are the potential rights that may exist in relation to all apps, such as trademark and design rights.
Without addressing the need to adapt education to the realities of a knowledge economy, efforts to encourage innovation and R&D might not deliver their full potential benefits. In other words, without a widespread understanding of the relevant knowledge, the EU will lose its competitiveness compared with other parts of the world. Is that something we can really afford?