PRESS RELEASE15 February 2023
On April 26, 2022, the China Urban Intellectual Property Index Report Research Group released the China Urban Intellectual Property Index Report 2022 (“Urban Intellectual Property Index Report”) in Beijing. According to the Urban Intellectual Property Index Report, the top 10 intellectual property indexes in 2021 are respectively: Beijing, Shenzhen, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Nanjing, Hangzhou, Chengdu, Wuhan, Hefei and Ningbo.
According to Wang Zhengzhi, the leader of the China Urban Intellectual Property Index Report Research Group and partner of Globe-Law, it is easy to find that most of the top 10 cities of urban intellectual property index in 2021 are economically developed cities. In addition, from the perspective of geography, cities in East China have an absolute advantage, as Shanghai, Nanjing, Hangzhou, Hefei and Ningbo are all located in East China, followed by South China where Shenzhen and Guangzhou are located. Only one city respectively in North China, Central China and Southwest China is shortlisted, namely Beijing, Wuhan and Chengdu.
In terms of the four first-grade indicators, namely intellectual property output level, flow level, comprehensive performance and creation potential, Beijing ranks first in output level, first in flow level, third in comprehensive performance and first in creation potential. Beijing leads in several rankings, dominant in intellectual property output, flow and creative potential. Shenzhen ranks second in output level, sixth in flow level, first in comprehensive performance and second in creation potential. Shenzhen has advantages in comprehensive performance of intellectual property. Shanghai ranks fourth in output level, third in flow level, second in comprehensive performance and sixth in creation potential. Shanghai ranks high in flow and comprehensive performance of intellectual property.
According to the Report, East China and South China are "neck and neck" in intellectual property protection, and have significant leading advantages in the seven regions. The seven regions with the total intellectual property index scores from high to low are East China, South China, Central China, North China, Southwest China, Northeast China and Northwest China. Among them, the total urban intellectual property index scores in East China, South China, Central China and North China are all above the average, while those in southwest, northeast and northwest regions are lower than the average.
Moreover, the Report compares four first-grade indicators of intellectual property of cities in the seven regions. In terms of intellectual property output level, cities in South China rank first among the seven regions. In terms of intellectual property flow level, cities in North China rank first among the seven regions. In terms of comprehensive performance of intellectual property, cities in East China rank first among the seven regions. In terms of creation potential of intellectual property, cities in East China rank first among the seven regions.
In addition, it is found in the Report that the four first-tier cities have absolute advantages in intellectual property level among China's cities at and above the sub-provincial level. The intellectual property levels of Beijing, Shenzhen, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Nanjing, Hangzhou, Chengdu and Wuhan are all higher than the average of China's cities at and above the sub-provincial level. Among the five cities specifically designated in the state plan, the intellectual property protection in Shenzhen shows a situation of "one super and many strong aspects". Cities at and above the sub-provincial level have relatively prominent advantages in terms of intellectual property level. Through a comprehensive comparison of the averages of the total intellectual property index scores of cities at and above the sub-provincial level, cities specifically designated in the state plan and provincial capital cities, it can be seen that the intellectual property level of cities at and above the sub-provincial level ranks first among the three types of cities. Cities specifically designated in the state plan have prominent comparative advantages in intellectual property innovation performance. Beijing, Shenzhen and Shanghai have obvious advantages in intellectual property output level, Nanjing has the highest intellectual property output efficiency, Beijing has outstanding technical service advantages, Chengdu ranks first in the intellectual property technology market, Haikou is second to none in the improvement of intellectual property environment, Taiyuan ranks first in the optimization of intellectual property structure, and Wuhan ranks top in the intellectual property business environment and intellectual property protection index.
The Report suggests that, on the one hand, China needs to continuously improve the top-level design of intellectual property. With the goal of high-quality development, China should use market-oriented and legalized means to improve the quality of supply and formulate an intellectual property system that is always in line with the overall strategic goals of the country, so as to promote China's economy to achieve high-quality adjustment and transformation of its development mode and economic structure. On the other hand, China needs to improve the supply quality of the intellectual property system, strengthen the multi-link and whole-chain protection of intellectual property, use multiple means to improve the modern governance ability, coordinate the international cooperation and competition of intellectual property, and maintain the same pace with the world innovation.
Innovation is the first driving force to lead development. In recent years, intellectual property protection, as an important guarantee for innovation, has gradually become a hot topic in the industry with respect to research on urban competitiveness, and the status of intellectual property in urban competitiveness has become increasingly prominent. In this context, China Urban Intellectual Property Index Report 2022 focuses on the urban research objects and investigates the quality of intellectual property development in different regions of China from the urban level. It enriches the relevant researches of government departments at all levels, think tanks, colleges and universities and individuals to observe, understand and study the development of intellectual property in major cities in China, provides research data and relevant materials for exploring the relationship between intellectual property and regional economic development, and fills the gap in the research of urban intellectual property in China.
Attached: Overall ranking of China Urban Intellectual Property Index 2022
According to lawyer Jiang Jinji, assistant to the leader of the China Urban Intellectual Property Index Report Research Group and partner of Globe-Law, the predecessor of the China Urban Intellectual Property Index Report Research Group is the China Intellectual Property Index Report Research Group, which has issued the China Intellectual Property Index Report for 11 consecutive years since 2009-2019. The China Intellectual Property Index Report has been devoted to the research on the development of intellectual property in various regions of China. The Research Group has accumulated a lot of accurate data. Through in-depth mining and research of these "big data", it has provided a window and channel for government departments at all levels, think tanks at home and abroad, colleges and universities and individuals to observe, understand and study the development speed and quality of intellectual property in various regions of China, and offered sufficient data and information for the research on the relationship between intellectual property and economic development. It has become one of the indispensable and important reference materials in the intellectual property circle and economic circle at home and abroad. The change from previous 31 provinces, municipalities and autonomous regions to 35 major cities in China is another innovation of the research group to deeply explore the relationship between intellectual property and economic development.