The Communication of the European Commission about a “Single Market for Intellectual Property Rights” provides a comprehensive approach of initiatives covering all relevant Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs). All proposed initiatives are justified based on the current knowledge about the economic impacts of IPRs and other intangibles on companies’, but also economies’ competitiveness and growth. Furthermore, the current fragmentation of the markets for IPRs in Europe is certainly a disadvantage for European companies especially related to the United States of America, Japan and, meanwhile, also China. However, the approach is not comprehensive enough to boost innovation in Europe.
Posts Tagged ‘Single Market’
A Single Market for IPR – Necessary, but not Comprehensive Enough to Boost Innovation and Growth in EuropeTuesday, June 7th, 2011
The Communication of the European Commission about a “Single Market for Intellectual Property Rights” provides a comprehensive approach of initiatives covering all relevant Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs). However, the approach is not comprehensive enough to boost innovation in Europe……
In its Communication on “Europe 2020: a strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth” the European Commission underlines that a strong, deep and extended Single Market is vital for growth and job creation. To answer the challenges set to achieve the Europe 2020 goals, a Single Market with well functioning open markets and empowered consumers is essential.
With the same view, CEN and CENELEC believe that standardization has a major role to play in assisting to reach a well functioning Single Market. In the past European standardization has already contributed in essential ways to remove technical barriers for businesses, to promote the spread of new technologies and to foster innovation.
CEN and CENELEC will continue supporting the consolidation of the European single market as detailed through the 50 proposals of the Single Market Act. Our standards are adopted identically by the 31 member countries of CEN and CENELEC, withdrawing national conflicting standards and therefore ensuring one standard for Europe.
The extension of the European legislation, i.e. the New Approach, on the European standardisation system to extend it to services was overdue reflecting the crucial and – despite the economic crises – still increasing relevance of the service sector for the economic development of the European economy.
Due to the different modes of service trade, European standards for services do not only promote the traditional trade of services, but also the other forms like foreign direct investments in service companies. This removal of barriers will increase the competition in service markets. However, the full potential of service standards for the promotion of trade, competition and employment will only be exploited if a sufficient number of service standards are available.
Looking at the title of today’s forum, one wonders if standardizing the single market is something of an oxymoron? While on one hand the standardization process will enable greater interoperability and reduce barriers to trade, on the other, markets are ever evolving beasts and, as fast as we try to make standards, new technologies and new services will continue to evolve, making the old standards obsolete.
Within the context of Standardising the single market, we have twelve projects for the 2012 Single Market” – one of which is to Strengthen Standardisation.
The overall goals can be summarised as:
1) Free movement of Goods: Product interoperability, safety, quality
2) Services: inclusive services, ensuring growth
3) Standards – accessible, inclusion of SMEs
But behind these overarching goals, there are deeper issues.
Let us focus on the issue within the topic “Twelve projects for the 2012 Single Market” of European services standards as distinct from the impact of the effectiveness, efficiency and inclusiveness of the European standards system on that question.
While of course to separate these issues removes the very interesting political and philosophical debate whether it is wise or not to revise the European standardisation system to extend it to services based upon the performance of the European standards system to deliver relevant services standards to the market. My rationale is that the best predictor of future performance is past performance. Those who believe that the European standards model largely oriented to products has performed well in the past will see benefits to its extension to services in the future. And those who believe other standards models have better served markets in the past will reach negative conclusions.