ISSN 2663-0583 (Online)
ISSN 2663-0575 (Print)
  • Home
  • Can strict intellectual property laws facilitate the renewal of energy sector growth? The case of Saudi Arabia
"

Can strict intellectual property laws facilitate the renewal of energy sector growth? The case of Saudi Arabia

Summary: 1. Introduction. – 1.1 Patent rationales – 1.2 The inventive step – 1.3 Strict patent law – 1.4 Soft patent law – 1.5 Patent law in Saudi Arabia. – 2. The importance of incentive laws for the renewable energy sector – 2.1 Financial incentives rather than patent laws to develop the renewable energy sector. – 2.1.1 The Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPSs). – 2.1.2 Feed-in Tariff Policy (FIT). – 3. Lessons for Saudi Arabia. – 4. Conclusion.

Full Text:

DOI

HTML Abstract About Author(s) References Reviews

  Background: Saudi Arabia (KSA) is a global leader in producing fossil fuels and has primarily relied on this energy source for its Gross Domestic Product (GDP). However, after the 2014 oil crash, the country established Vision 2030, intending to shift toward a non-oil dependent economy. Through this vision, Saudi Arabia aims to increase generation of electricity from clean energy sources by 30%. This paper examines the effectiveness of strict intellectual property (IP) regulations aiming to develop the renewable energy (RE) sector. 

Methods: In this paper, the author examines the effectiveness of strict intellectual property rights in-depth to develop innovation in the renewable energy sector as mentioned in Saudi Arabia’s 2030 Vision. The paper makes a comparison with countries, such as the EU and China, regarding the extent to which strict intellectual rights have improved innovation. The author uses an inductive research approach that relies on qualitative data since it critically analyses regulations and policies in many countries, such as Saudi Arabia, the EU, and China. 

Results and conclusions: The author finds that financial incentives are more effective than in developing innovation in the renewable energy sector. Most importantly, developing countries benefit from financial incentives to increase innovation since many developed countries have adopted a strict IP law after their markets developed. 

Abstract

 Background: Saudi Arabia (KSA) is a global leader in producing fossil fuels and has primarily relied on this energy source for its Gross Domestic Product (GDP). However, after the 2014 oil crash, the country established Vision 2030, intending to shift toward a non-oil dependent economy. Through this vision, Saudi Arabia aims to increase generation of electricity from clean energy sources by 30%. This paper examines the effectiveness of strict intellectual property (IP) regulations aiming to develop the renewable energy (RE) sector. 

Methods: In this paper, the author examines the effectiveness of strict intellectual property rights in-depth to develop innovation in the renewable energy sector as mentioned in Saudi Arabia’s 2030 Vision. The paper makes a comparison with countries, such as the EU and China, regarding the extent to which strict intellectual rights have improved innovation. The author uses an inductive research approach that relies on qualitative data since it critically analyses regulations and policies in many countries, such as Saudi Arabia, the EU, and China. 

Results and conclusions: The author finds that financial incentives are more effective than in developing innovation in the renewable energy sector. Most importantly, developing countries benefit from financial incentives to increase innovation since many developed countries have adopted a strict IP law after their markets developed. 

About Authors

 

Saad Nasser AlQahtani 

Assistant Professor at Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, Law Department, Al-Kharj, Saudi Arabia. saa.alqahtani@psau.edu.sa
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2182-954X

Corresponding author, responsible for research and writing the text. Competing interests: Any competing interests were included by author. Disclaimer: The author declares that his opinion and views expressed in this manuscript are free of any impact of any organizations. 


Acknowledgment: The author extend their appreciation to Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University for funding this research work through the project number (PSAU/2022/02/22402).

Managing editor – Mag Polina Siedova. English Editor – Nicole Robinson.

Copyright: © 2023 Saad Nasser AlQahtani. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. 

 

References

 

  1. Alsodais S, ‘Science, Technology & Innovation in Saudi Arabia’ (WIPO, September 2013) <https:// www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2013/05/article_0006.html> accessed 10 May 2023.
  2. AlZaid NHA, Saudi Arabia and Intellectual Property: Learning from China’s Approach (KFCRIS 2021).
  3. Azam M, Intellectual Property and Public Health in the Developing World (Open Book Publishers 2016) doi: 10.11647/OBP.0093.
  4. Barbose G and others, ‘A Retrospective Analysis of Benefits and Impacts of US Renewable Portfolio Standards’ (2016) 96 Energy Policy 645, doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.06.035.
  5. Boswell C, ‘The Double Life of Targets in Public Policy: Disciplining and Signalling in UK Asylum Policy’ (2015) 93 (2) Public Administration 490, doi: 10.1111/padm.12134.
  6. Chang MC, Hu JL and Han TF, ‘An Analysis of a Feed-in Tariff in Taiwan’s Electricity Market’ (2013) 44 (1) International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems 916, doi: 10.1016/j. ijepes.2012.08.038.
  7. Cheung KY and Lin P, Spillover Effects of FDI on Innovation in China: Evidence from Provincial Data (2004) 15 (1) China Economic Review 25, doi: 10.1016/S1043-951X(03)00027-0.
  8. Daley B and Preston H, ‘Aviation and Climate Change: Assessment of Policy Options’ in Gossling S and Upham P (eds), Climate Change and Aviation: Issues, Challenges and Solutions (Routledge 2012) ch 16, 347, doi: 10.4324/9781849770774.
  9. Dijkgraaf E, Dorp TP van and Maasland E, ‘On the Effectiveness of Feed-In Tariffs in the Development of Solar Photovoltaics’ (2018) 39 (1) The Energy Journal 81, doi: 10.5547/01956574.39.1.edij.
  10. Dutta S, Lanvin B and Wunsch-Vincent S (eds), Global Innovation Index 2020: Who Will Finance Innovation? (Cornell University; INSEAD; WIPO 2020) doi: 10.34667/tind.42316.
  11. Gao S and others, ‘Dynamic Evolution of the Operating Efficiency of Development Zones in China’ (2021) 13 (18) Sustainability 10395, doi: 10.3390/su131810395.
  12. Jaffe A, Newell RG and Stavins RN, ‘A Tale of Two Market Failures: Technology and Environmental Policy’ (2005) 54 (2-3) Ecological Economics 164, doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.12.027.
  13. Lee T, ‘Financial Investment for the Development of Renewable Energy Capacity’ (2021) 32 (6) Energy & Environment 1103, doi: 10.1177/0958305X19882403.
  14. Lepeule J and others, ‘Chronic Exposure to Fine Particles and Mortality: An Extended Follow-up of the Harvard Six Cities Study from 1974 to 2009’ (2012) 120 (7) Environ Health Perspect 965, doi: 10.1289/ehp.1104660.
  15. Lim SS and others,‘A Comparative Risk Assessment of Burden of Disease and Injury Attributable to 67 Risk Factors and Risk Factor Clusters in 21 Regions, 1990−2010: A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010’ (2012) 380 The Lancet 2224, doi: 10.1016/S0140- 6736(12)61766-8.
  16. Lüthi S and Prässler T, ‘Analyzing Policy Support Instruments and Regulatory Risk Factors for Wind Energy Deployment—A Developers’ Perspective’ (2011) 39 (9) Energy Policy 4876, doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2011.06.029.
  17. Mahesh A and Jasmin KSS, ‘Role of Renewable Energy Investment in India: An Alternative to CO2 Mitigation’ (2013) 26 Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 414, doi: 10.1016/j. rser.2013.05.069.
  18. Mathews J and others, ‘Mobilizing Private Finance to Drive an Energy Industrial Revolution’ (2010) 38 (7) Energy Policy 3263, doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2010.02.030.
  19. Mitchell C and Connor P, ‘Renewable Energy Policy in the UK 1990-2003’ (2004) 32 (17) Energy Policy 1935, doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2004.03.016.
  20. Owen A, ‘Renewable Energy: Externality Costs as Market Barriers’ (2006) 34 (5) Energy Policy 632, doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2005.11.017.
  21. Park JD, The Special Economic Zones of China and Their Impact on Its Economic Development (Praeger 1997).
  22. Rader N and Norgaard R, ‘Efficiency and Sustainability in Restructured Electricity Markets: The Renewables Portfolio Standard’ (1996) 9 (6) The Electricity Journal 37, doi: 10.1016/S1040- 6190(96)80262-4.
  23. Sánchez SMF, Segovia MAF and López LCR, ‘Impact of Public Policies on the Technological Innovation in the Renewable Energy Sector’ (2020) 10 (2) International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy 139.
  24. Shrimali G and Kniefel J, ‘Are Government Policies Effective in Promoting Deployment of Renewable Electricity Resources?’ (2011) 39 (9) Energy Policy 4726, doi: 10.1016/j. enpol.2011.06.055.
  25. Solomon BD and Zhou S, ‘Renewable Portfolio Standards: Do Voluntary Goals vs Mandatory Standards Make a Difference?’ (2021) 38 (2) Review of Policy Research 146, doi: 10.1111/ ropr.12424.
  26. Toby D Couture and others, A Policymaker’s Guide to Feed-in Tariff Policy Design: Technical Report NREL/TP-6A2-44849 July 2010 (NREL; Golden co 2010) doi: 10.2172/1219187.
  27. Tomain JP and Cudahy RD, Energy Law in a Nutshell (3rd edn, West Academic Pub 2016).
  28. Torremans P, Holyoak & Torremans: Intellectual Property Law (8th edn, OUP 2016).
  29. Weismantle K, ‘Building a Better Solar Energy Framework’ (2014) 26 St Thomas Law Review 221.
  30. Wiesenthal T and others, ‘A Model-Based Assessment of the Impact of Revitalised R&D investments on the European Power Sector’ (2012) 16 (1) Renewable and Sustainable Energy
    Reviews 105, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2011.07.139.

33. Yueh L, ‘Patent Laws and Innovation in China’ (2009) 29 (4) International Review of Law and 

31. Wiser R, Hamrin J and Wingate M, ‘Renewable Energy Policy Options for China: A Comparison 

of Renewable Portfolio Standards, Feed-in Tariffs, and Tendering Policies’ (Solutions, June 2002) <https://resource-solutions.org/document/renewable-energy-policy-
options-for-china-a-comparison-of-renewable-portfolio-standards-feed-in-tariffs-and- 

tendering-policies> accessed 10 May 2023.

32. Yin H and Powers N, ‘Do State Renewable Portfolio Standards Promote In-State Renewable Generation?’ (2010) 38 (2) Energy Policy 1140, doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.10.067. Economics 304, doi: 10.1016/j.irle.2009.06.001. 

Reviews for article

Add a Review

Reviews are moderated and will be published after verification!
All comments not related to reviews of the article will be deleted!

 

Keywords

  • Intellectual property (IP), renewable energy (RE), feed-in tariff (FIT), renewable portfolio standard (RPS).

Publication history

  •  Submitted on 28 May 2023 / Revised 7 Jun 2023 Approved 20 Jun 2023 / Published: 1 Aug 2023 


How to cite it?

  •  S A AlQahtani ‘Can strict intellectual property laws facilitate the renewal of energy sector growth? The case of Saudi Arabia’ 2023 3 (20) Access to Justice in Eastern Europe 132-146. https://doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-6.3-a000309