Chapter One: General Rankings, Research Findings, and In-
Depth Analysis of the 2018 China Intellectual Property Rights
Index Report
Chief Editor: Mr. Wang, Zhengzhi
Assistant Editor: Zheng Qiao Chen (Matthew)
As indicated by the World Bank Report, the already burdened international trade
environment could be further exacerbated by the aggravating and negative impacts of
rounds of unpredictable trade talks and negotiations among major global economic
powers, compounded by the ever-increasing risk of escalating trade restriction
measures. Meanwhile, with China’s continuous growth in the area of advanced
technology, many of China’s advance technology is at an equal footing with leading
countries around the world, with some fields even leading the international industry.
With a more concrete emphasize on independent research and self-development,
China’s policy approach of technological development in the foreseeable future should
be based on a combination of both “open cooperation” and “self-reliance.”
The overall significance of intellectual property thus becomes more apparent
contrasting with such a complicated international background. In April 2018, as
stressed by President Xi, Jinping in his keynote speech in the opening ceremony of the
2018 Annual Session of Boao Forum of Asia, “Strengthen the protection of intellectual
property…is a key component of constructing a more comprehensive IP protection
system. It is also one of the major stimulating factors enhancing China’s economic
competitiveness. As such, the demand for such protection come from not only foreign
entities investing in China, but also domestic Chinese companies in general.” (As
President Xi) also points out, “(the Chinese government) plans to restructure the
1 / 23
National Intellectual Property Administration, PRC1, which will in turn strengthen legal
enforcement of intellectual property protection, increase the extent of enforcement,
significantly raise the cost of IP infringement, and in doing so accomplish the purpose
of legal deterrence (of IP infringement).”
(It is thus foreseeable that) the industry of Intellectual Property will usher in one of
the best periods of development, and it is destined to undertake a greater responsibility
in the socio-economic development of China. One crucial element in the area of
intellectual property development is the construction of a favorable environment, which
can be achieved via introducing friendlier innovative entrepreneurship environment, an
improved business operating environment, and a healthier ecological environment.
Within the 2018 edition of the Intellectual Property Index Report, we included indexes
measuring both business operating environment and ecological environment, the
purpose of which is to evaluate (with empirical data) the developmental status of both
environments within the various provinces of China and understanding the effect of
such status with respect to the development of intellectual property.
I. Overall Rankings of the 2018 China Regional Intellectual Property Rights Index
Report
Within the region of mainland China, the overall top 10 ranking provinces
within the 2018 Index Report (including autonomous regions and municipalities
directly under the Central Government, hereinafter collectively referred to as provinces)
are (from top to bottom): Beijing, Guangdong, Jiangsu, Shanghai, Zhejiang, Shandong,
Anhui, Tianjin, Hubei, and Chongqing.
The provinces (11 provinces) ranked in the middle are: Hunan, Fujian, Shaanxi,
Sichuan, Liaoning, Henan, Guangxi, Jilin, Jiangxi, Hebei, and Heilongjiang.
The 10 provinces ranked in the bottom of the report are: Guizhou, Shanxi,
Gansu, Yunnan, Inner Mongolia, Hainan, Ningxia, Qinghai, Tibet and Xinjiang (Please
refer to Figure 1-1).
Table 1-1 Overall rankings of 2018 China Regional Intellectual Property Rights Index
1 Originally known as the “State Intellectual Property Office (People’s Republic of China)”
2 / 23
Comprehensive Comprehensive Creative
Province Strength Output Level Flow Level Performance Potential
Index Ranking Index Ranking Index Ranking Index Ranking Index Ranking
Beijing 0.593 1 0.634 1 0.594 2 0.649 1 0.497 3
Guangdong 0.536 2 0.425 3 0.661 1 0.532 4 0.525 2
Jiangsu 0.509 3 0.487 2 0.415 4 0.491 6 0.644 1
Shanghai 0.466 4 0.415 4 0.485 3 0.620 2 0.344 6
Zhejiang 0.422 5 0.391 5 0.264 6 0.565 3 0.468 4
Shandong 0.321 6 0.213 11 0.297 5 0.368 13 0.405 5
Anhui 0.286 7 0.348 6 0.170 12 0.364 14 0.262 9
Tianjin 0.282 8 0.215 10 0.161 15 0.494 5 0.258 10
Hubei 0.279 9 0.203 12 0.204 7 0.391 9 0.318 7
Chongqing 0.251 10 0.160 15 0.170 11 0.467 7 0.206 15
Hunan 0.251 11 0.153 16 0.166 13 0.412 8 0.272 8
Fujian 0.246 12 0.177 13 0.173 9 0.390 10 0.246 11
Shaanxi 0.243 13 0.215 9 0.172 10 0.372 11 0.213 14
Sichuan 0.230 14 0.230 8 0.163 14 0.307 20 0.218 13
Liaoning 0.225 15 0.153 17 0.193 8 0.370 12 0.183 16
Henan 0.209 16 0.135 19 0.135 17 0.329 17 0.236 12
Guangxi 0.206 17 0.290 7 0.082 22 0.297 22 0.157 21
Jilin 0.177 18 0.088 25 0.136 16 0.351 15 0.133 24
Jiangxi 0.169 19 0.104 20 0.091 21 0.316 19 0.165 19
Hebei 0.164 20 0.088 24 0.112 18 0.280 24 0.174 17
Heilongjiang 0.161 21 0.164 14 0.092 20 0.245 27 0.142 23
Guizhou 0.156 22 0.148 18 0.045 26 0.262 25 0.170 18
Shanxi 0.149 23 0.077 28 0.067 24 0.330 16 0.124 28
Gansu 0.144 24 0.081 26 0.106 19 0.227 29 0.162 20
Yunnan 0.138 25 0.102 21 0.079 23 0.230 28 0.142 22
Inner
Mongolia 0.133 26 0.038 31 0.044 27 0.325 18 0.125 26
Hainan 0.131 27 0.077 27 0.017 30 0.307 21 0.124 27
Ningxia 0.126 28 0.097 23 0.041 28 0.260 26 0.105 29
Qinghai 0.114 29 0.102 22 0.059 25 0.208 31 0.087 31
Tibet 0.113 30 0.059 30 0.014 31 0.290 23 0.090 30
Xinjiang 0.113 31 0.076 29 0.040 29 0.210 30 0.127 25
II. 2018 China Regional Intellectual Property Rights Index Report: Major Finding
The China Regional Intellectual Property Rights Index Report was initially
prepared starting from 2009, covering all 31 provinces in mainland China with the
exception of Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan. With years of accumulation of
3 / 23
empirical data, we were able to construct a comprehensive database that is capable of
profoundly analyze intellectual property status among the various regions of China
(provinces). We approach our analysis by contrasting time (vertically) and geographical
space (horizontally), and it is our finding that:
1. The top 10 provinces enjoy a stable long-term development, and Beijing remains
in the 1st place for 9 consecutive years
Since 2010, rankings of the top 10 provinces enjoy a comparatively stable long-
term development. Provinces such as Beijing, Jiangsu, Shanghai, Guangdong,
Zhejiang, Tianjin, and Shandong were ranked among the top 10 placements each year,
with Beijing sitting at the 1st place for nine consecutive years. Fujian and Chongqing
have each fallen out of the top 10 once and twice, respectively (Chongqing ranked 12th
in the Index Report 2011, Fujian ranked 11th and 12th in the index report 2017 and
2018, respectively). The province of Liaoning has not been ranked in the top 10 since
2015. The province of Anhui has been continuously ranked among the top 10 since
2015, while the province of Hunan and the province of Hubei has each been ranked
among the top 10 once and twice, respectively. Please refer to Chart 1-2 for a detailed
ranking.
Analyzing the Top 10 provinces of the 2018 Intellectual Property Index Report, it
is not difficult to find that most of the provinces are relatively economically developed.
Looking at the data from a geographic perspective, seven of these provinces are from
the eastern region, with only Anhui and Hubei from the middle region, and Chongqing
from the western region of China. In addition, from a regional perspective, the Bohai
Bay Economic Circle (Rim) includes provinces such as Beijing, Tanjing, and Shandong.
The Yangtze River Delta Economic Circle (Rim) includes provinces such as Jiangsu,
Shanghai, Zhejiang, and Anhui. The Pearl River Delta economic circle includes the
province of Guangdong.
Table 1-2 Top 10 China regional intellectual property rights index over the years
4 / 23
Ranking 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
1 Bei-
jing
Bei-
jing
Bei-
jing
Bei-
jing
Bei-
jing
Bei-
jing
Bei-
jing
Bei-
jing
Bei-
jing
2 Shang-
hai
Shang-
hai
Shang-
hai
Shang-
hai
Jiang-
su
Jiang-
su
Jiang-
su
Jiang-
su
Guang
-dong
3 Guang
-dong
Guang
-dong
Guang
-dong
Jiang-
su
Shang-
hai
Shang-
hai
Shang-
hai
Guang
-dong
Jiang-
su
4 Jiang-
su
Jiang-
su
Jiang-
su
Guang
-dong
Guang
-dong
Guang
-dong
Guang
-dong
Shang-
hai
Shang-
hai
5 Zhe-
jiang
Zhe-
jiang
Zhe-
jiang
Zhe-
jiang
Zhe-
jiang
Zhe-
jiang
Zhe-
jiang
Zhe-
jiang
Zhe-
jiang
6 Tianjin Shan-
dong
Shan-
dong
Shan-
dong
Tianjin Tianjin Shan-
dong
Shan-
dong
Shan-
dong
7 Shan-
dong
Tianjin Tianjin Tianjin Shan-
dong
Shan-
dong
Tianjin Tianjin Anhui
8 Liao-
ning
Fujian Liao-
ning
Liao-
ning
Liao-
ning
Fujian Chong
- qing
Chong
- qing
Tianjin
9 Chong
- qing
Liao-
ning
Fujian Fujian Fujian Chong
- qing
Fujian Anhui Hubei
10 Fujian Hunan Chong
- qing
Chong
- qing
Chong
- qing
Anhui Anhui Hunan Chong
- qing
2. The degree of IP developmental differentiation in various regions has not yet
diminished, but the differentiational gap between the top 10 provinces is steadily
lessening
Overall the IP score each province receives differ substantially, with the trend line
declining abruptly at the beginning, which eventually steadily smooths out. We
adopted the (index) of coefficient of variation2 to calculate the rate of dispersion in the
IP Index Report.
Comparing the coefficient of variation for the most recent three fiscal periods, with
0.55 of 2016, 0.56 of 2017, and 0.54 of 2018, it is our finding that the overall
differentiational gap of intellectual property development remains high. This finding
can be demonstrated by the fact that the overall median score we obtained from the
2018 Index Report is roughly about 0.209, which is substantially lower than the 0.593
achieve by Beijing, less than a third of Beijing’s index score.
2 The calculation formula of coefficient of variation: C•V = (standard deviations SD/ MEAN) × 100%.
5 / 23
As indicated by the 2018 Index Report, the (average) coefficient of variation of the
top 10 provinces is 0.319; the coefficient of variation of the middle 10 provinces is
0.167; whereas the coefficient of variation of the last 10 provinces is 0.117. As the
ranking decreases with each province, the (gap of) coefficient of variation gradually
declines less dramatically. This (sharp) decline in turn demonstrates the fact that
comparing to more economically advanced provinces such as Beijing, Guangdong,
Jiangsu, Shanghai, and Zhejiang, the intellectual property development rate of other
provinces is relatively slower. At the same time, by simply comparing to the 2017
Intellectual Property Index Report, we concluded that the gap of coefficient of variation
among the top 10 provinces is narrowing down as well, indicating that the leading
advantages maintained by Beijing is also consistently declining (Please refer to Figure
1-1).
Figure 1-1 A comparison between 2017 and 2018 of the China Regional Intellectual
Property Rights Index
3. Regional distribution of intellectual property rights in China resembles a pattern
that is comparable to that of a “central agglomeration, and terrace diffusion.” (the
level of intellectual property development radiates outward from few highly developed
regions and spreads out evenly towards the outer regions of China.) 6 / 23
Over the years, the overall regional distribution of intellectual property
(development) is noticeable and quite consistent. The distribution somewhat
demonstrates a pattern that is “higher in the eastern region and gradually declines
towards the western region,” the level of IP development radiates from the higher
“eastern coastal area” of China towards the “central region of China,” the central
hinterland so to speak. The level of IP development then gradually moderates and
spreads outwards from the “central region” to the “western regions” of China. As
such, the (IP development rate of) the three major regions of China resemble a graphical
pattern that is similar to the shape of “terrace farming,” altitude declines as the land
gradually spreads out. A majority of the top 10 provinces in the Index Report are from
the eastern regions of China, the 10 provinces ranked lowest mainly are from the central
and western region of China. Looking at the issue from a historical background, the
development of intellectual property right correlates strongly with the degree/level of
industrialization. Renowned economists such as Dr. Douglas C. North believes that
the development of property rights systems, including intellectual property, is a
prerequisite for expansion of the industrial revolution. The regional distribution of
China’s IP index thus corresponds to its regional economic development level.
Meanwhile, simply by comparing the data collected over the years, we have also
concluded that the level of development of intellectual property in China also resembles
the regional distribution pattern of “central agglomeration.” That is, the three center-
hub of China’s intellectual property right development are Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, the
Yangtze River Delta, and the Pearl River Delta. Spreading and diffusion of
technology is thus a crucial mechanisms of regional IP development. The Yangtze
River Delta, with Shanghai sitting at the center, is one of the most effective regions in
terms of technological diffusion. (Please refer to Figure 1-2)
7 / 23
Figure 1-2 Figure of regional distribution of China regional intellectual property rights
index
4. As a result of the strategical policies implemented specifically for the Greater Bay
Area (including Guangdong, Hong Kong, and Macau), the average level of IP
development of southern China has overall improved with the province of
Guangdong leading at the forefront
The greater southern China region is mainly consisted of the Guangdong province,
the Guangxi province, and the Hainan province. Within this greater region, benefiting
from policies specially implemented for the Greater Bay Area, the IP index score
achieve by the province of Guangdong increased from 0.482 to 0.536, placing itself in
the second place from the third in 2017. The gap between the province of Guangdong
and Beijing is continuously and gradually diminishing. Comparing current data with
that of the 2017, placement of the Guangxi Province and the Hainan Province remains
unchanged. Driven by the excellent performance of the Guangdong province, the
average level of intellectual property right index in the greater southern China enjoyed
an overall improvement.
Intellectual property is the driving force for the future of the Greater Bay Area. As
of 2016, the total GDP of the Greater Bay Area already surpassed the Bay Area of San 8 / 23
Francisco. Cultural and financial innovation of Hong Kong is still leading the way;
technological innovation of Shenzhen is still by far the most progressive; whereas the
potential for innovation of the Guangdong province is destined to be momentous. As
of today, the three said cities participate together in a joint operation cooperating on
issues of intellectual property. As such, The Guangdong, Hong Kong, and Macau
Copyright Registration Hall at the Shenzhen Wantong Building is the first copyright
registration hall established by the China Copyright Protection Center in the greater
southern region of China. As a result of the steps taken by the Greater Bay Area on
the construction of intellectual property and the establishment of the “demonstration
zone” with respect to the regional intellectual property development, relevant resources
can be more effectively allocated, which will in turn stimulate development of cross
industry cooperation. It is thus reasonably foreseeable that such progress will radiates
outward towards the province of Guangxi and Hainan, and eventually stimulate the
entire greater southern China area.
5. The Province of Guangdong leads in the quality of patent, and (as indicated by the
empirical data) the quality of patent from the eastern region of China is relatively
higher comparing to that of the central and western region
The 10 Provinces ranked with top patent quality are: Guangdong, Beijing, Zhejiang,
Jiangsu, Shanghai, Shandong, Fujian, Tianjin, Hubei and Hunan. As such, the 10
Provinces that ranked at the bottom in this respect are: Yunnan, Jilin, Heilongjiang,
Inner Mongolia, Hainan, Gansu, Tibet, Qinghai, Ningxia and Guangxi. This
demonstrates a pattern that the patent quality index score is relative higher in the eastern
region of China, and the patent quality index score is relatively lower in the northern
and central western regions.
Table 1-3 Patents quality index ranking
Province Patents Quality
Province Patents Quality
Index Ranking Index Ranking
Guangdong 0.665 1 Jiangxi 0.136 17
Beijing 0.562 2 Xinjiang 0.136 18
9 / 23
Zhejiang 0.557 3 Shaanxi 0.124 19
Jiangsu 0.460 4 Chongqing 0.121 20
Shanghai 0.303 5 Shanxi 0.117 21
Shandong 0.228 6 Yunnan 0.116 22
Fujian 0.207 7 Jilin 0.112 23
Tianjin 0.199 8 Heilongjiang 0.110 24
Hubei 0.177 9 Inner 0.101 25
Mongolia
Hunan 0.169 10 Hainan 0.100 26
Sichuan 0.169 11 Gansu 0.081 27
Henan 0.156 12 Tibet 0.080 28
Guizhou 0.155 13 Qinghai 0.072 29
Hebei 0.149 14 Ningxia 0.044 30
Anhui 0.147 15 Guangxi 0.029 31
Liaoning 0.138 16
6. Difference between the level of intellectual property output and the quality of
patents in some provinces varies significantly
From regional distribution of the quality of patent we are able to identify a
phenomenon, that is, the ranking of patent quality generally corresponds to the overall
ranking of economic development, yet there are exceptions. Comparing the level of
output of intellectual property (with patent quality) among the provinces that ranked
top 10 in the patent quality index, Shandong, Hubei, Fujian, and Hunan are placed 11th,
12th, 13th, and 16th, respectively, in terms of intellectual property output. The Guangxi
Zhuang Autonomous Region, thou ranked 7th in the average output level of intellectual
property, is placed only at 31st on the patent quality index. The province of Shanxi,
thou ranked 9th in terms of intellectual property output, is placed at 19th on the quality
of patent index ranking. Also, on the IP output index, the province of Anhui ranked
6th, the province of Guizhou ranked 18th, and the province of Qinghai ranked 22nd, yet,
on the quality of patent index, those provinces ranked only 15th, 23rd, and 29th,
respectively. On the other hand, the province of Hebei, which is ranked only 24th on
the IP output index, is unexpectedly ranked 14th on the patent quality index.
7. Improvements made by some western provinces were significant, yet some eastern
provinces showed various types of stagnation
10 / 23
The 10 provinces with the highest overall IP improvement index score in China are:
Jiangxi, Yunnan, Fujian, Tibet, Hebei, Sichuan, Jilin, Guizhou, Henan, and Hunan.
The provinces ranked on the bottom are: Qinghai, Shandong, Jiangsu, Inner Mongolia,
Xinjiang, Tianjin, Shanxi, Shaanxi, Liaoning, and Heilongjiang. Analyzing this issue
from a historical perspective, it is not difficult to find that provinces from the central
and western region are consistently ranked top 10. This demonstrates the pattern that
even though central and western provinces had a relatively late start in development,
they maintain robust and substantial potential in the near future, and the gap in between
these central western provinces and more developed provinces from the eastern region
is consistently diminishing. Meanwhile, these empirical data also reveals another
phenomenon, that is, provinces within the same greater region gradually differentiates
among each other. Some provinces from the western region progresses rapidly,
whereas others remain in stagnation, with some provinces even declines in the ranking.
There is manifestation of stagnation from provinces of eastern regions as well. For
example, the overall improvement index rate of provinces such as Jiangsu and Tianjin
remain behind in the ranking. As such, it is our finding that the IP improvement index
score correlates relatively precisely with the IP output index score, and it is still the case
that within these two aspects, the central western provinces are ranked higher than the
eastern provinces.
8. The scale of patent and trademark (registration) manifests unique regional pattern,
and such pattern strongly correlates with the rate of economic development
The index score indicates that the scale of patent and trademark (registration and
application) of a region strongly correlates with the level of economic development of
that region. An economically well-developed region in general has a higher output of
commercial products from business/commercial entities, thus the higher rate of patent
applications. As such, since market competition of such developed regions are
generally fierce/intense, awareness of commercial brand and protection of intellectual
property (within the market) is also more comprehensive. Provinces that ranked top
10 in terms of the scale of patent registration are: Beijing, Guangdong, Zhejiang, 11 / 23
Jiangsu, Tianjin, Shanghai, Fujian, Anhui, Shandong, and Chongqing. Provinces
ranked at the bottom on this respect are: Hebei, Jilin, Guizhou, Xinjiang, Shanxi,
Qinghai, Yunnan, Hainan, Inner Mongolia, and Tibet. With respect to the scale of
trademark registration, provinces that ranked top 10 are: Beijing, Shanghai, Guangdong,
Zhejiang, Fujian, Jiangsu, Tianjin, Chongqing, Shandong, and Shaanxi, this data is
identical to that of the 2017 Index Report. The 10 provinces ranked at the bottom in
terms of the scale of trademark registration are: Hebei, Jilin, Jiangxi, Inner Mongolia,
Heilongjiang, Qinghai, Guizhou, Shanxi, Guangxi, and Gansu. From a holistic
overview, regional characteristics of the scale of patent and trademark registration are
quite revealing. Majority of provinces ranked in the top 10 come from more
economically developed areas of the eastern region, with only the province of
Chongqing, Anhui, and Shaanxi coming from the central region of China. The scale
of patent and trademark registration somewhat indicates the vitality of intellectual
property in relation to economy, and it is not difficult to find that economically well-
developed regions performers better in terms of the scale of patent and trademark
registration.
9. The level of intellectual property development of central and western region of
China is limited by factors such as business operation environment and ecological
environment
The 10 provinces with the lowest proportion of total foreign investment in GDP are
mainly from the central and western region of China, including: Xinjiang, Gansu,
Heilongjiang, Hunan, Tibet, Guizhou, Henan, Yunnan, Inner Mongolia, and Guangxi.
With only the exception of Guangxi (15.91%) and Inner Mongolia (15.10%), the
remaining eight provinces all received foreign invest with a percentage of lower than
15%. Especially noticeable is the province of Xinjiang (6.68%), which has a foreign
investment ratio of less than 7 percent. At the same time, the 10 provinces that
maintain the highest macro tax burden are Tibet, Qinghai, Gansu, Heilongjiang, Guanxi,
Henan, Jilin, Hunan, Hebei, and Shaanxi. Of the ten provinces, 6 of them also scored
lowest in terms of foreign investment ratio. In addition, the Report also measured 12 / 23
ecological environmental index, calculated by power consumption per unit of GDP,
sulfur dioxide emission per unit of GDP, wastewater discharges per unit of GDP, and
general solid waste discharge per unit of GDP. Based on the measurements, the power
consumption and wastewater discharge rate of the central and western regions are
substantially higher than other areas/regions. Thus, the overall business operational
environment of the central and western region is still relatively less developed than
other areas. The level of green environmental development of the central and western
region is still relatively lower than other areas. These factors severally limits the
structure of innovative environment of the central and western region of China, and
thereby limits the development of intellectual property of such areas/regions as well.
III. 2018 China Regional Intellectual Property Right Index Report: Data
Analysis
1. Top 10 of the 2018 China Regional Intellectual Property Rights Index
Provinces ranked in the top 10 places on the IP Index Report are, in descending
order: Beijing, Guangdong, Jiangsu, Shanghai, Zhejiang, Shandong, Anhui, Tianjin,
Hubei, and Chongqing (Please refer to Figure 1-4). This ranking result resembles the
data collected from the 2017 Index Report.
Table 1-4 Top 10 of 2018 China Regional Intellectual Property Rights Index
Output Flow Comprehensive Creative
Level Level Performance Potential
Comprehensive
Province Strength
Index Ranking Index Ranking Index Ranking Index Ranking Index Ranking
Beijing 0.593 1 0.634 1 0.594 2 0.649 1 0.497 3
Guangdong 0.536 2 0.425 3 0.661 1 0.532 4 0.525 2
Jiangsu 0.509 3 0.487 2 0.415 4 0.491 6 0.644 1
Shanghai 0.466 4 0.415 4 0.485 3 0.620 2 0.344 6
Zhejiang 0.422 5 0.391 5 0.264 6 0.565 3 0.468 4
Shandong 0.321 6 0.213 11 0.297 5 0.368 13 0.405 5
Anhui 0.286 7 0.348 6 0.170 12 0.364 14 0.262 9
Tianjin 0.282 8 0.215 10 0.161 15 0.494 5 0.258 10
Hubei 0.279 9 0.203 12 0.204 7 0.391 9 0.318 7
Chongqing 0.251 10 0.160 15 0.170 11 0.467 7 0.206 15
13 / 23
Overall the City of Beijing maintains its lead in the IP Index Report. Even though
the index score it received in 2018 is slightly lower than that of the 2017, it is still
ranked first among all 31 provinces. Of the four sub-indexes (category) analyzed in
the Index Report, Beijing is ranked 1st in two of these categories. More specifically,
Beijing is ranked 1st in both the intellectual property output index and the overall
performance (comprehensive performance) index; it is ranked 2nd in the flow level
index; and it is ranked in the 3rd place with respect to intellectual property creative
potential index. Beijing is the Capital City of China, numerous (top ranked)
universities and scientific research institutions directly affiliated with the central
government are located in Beijing. Thus, the city of Beijing enjoys a unique
advantage with respect to the development of intellectual property. With years of
cultivation, the District of Zhong Guan Cun (in Beijing) has already became a symbol
of innovation in China. Currently the City of Beijing is endeavoring with full force to
construct a national technological innovation center that is capable of global influence,
which highly emphasizes on progress of intellectual property. It is thus reasonably
foreseeable that the development of IP in Beijing will continue to expand and strengthen
in the near future.
The province of Guangdong overall ranked 2nd in the 2018 Index Report, it
advanced from the 3rd place in 2017 to the 2nd place in 2018, surpassing the province of
Jiangsu. More specifically, with respect to the four sub-indexes (categories), the
province of Guangdong ranks 3rd in the IP output level index, 1st in the level of flow
index, 4th in the comprehensive performance index, and 2nd in the creative potential
index. Previously the province of Guangdong was under intense pressure during the
period of economic transition. Yet based on data collected from the past two years, it
became apparent that the policy implemented for the Greater Bay Area is beginning to
benefit the province of Guangdong. More specifically, Hong Kong is leading in areas
such as cultural and financial innovation; technological innovation of Shenzhen is
ranked top in the nation; and the potential for innovation in the City of Guangzhou is
also substantial. As of today, these three cities participate together in a joint effort
cooperating on issues relating to intellectual property, and the cooperation is 14 / 23
continuously becoming more effective.
The province of Jiangsu ranked 3rd in 2018. From the fourth place in 2009, the
province of Jiangsu gradually advances on the index, and is consistently been ranked
in the 2nd place since 2014. Comparing with Beijing, which is still sitting at the first
place, there is still a considerable gap between Jiangsu and Beijing. Within a
foreseeable short term, it is still difficult for Jiangsu to advance to the level of Beijing.
Of the four sub-indexes, Jiangsu is placed 2nd in the level of IP output, 4th in the level
of flow index, 6th in the overall comprehensive performance index, and 1st in the index
of potential for innovation. These findings resemble that of the findings from 2017.
Of the four sub-indexes, the province of Jiangsu scored lowest in the category of
comprehensive performance. Different from Beijing, the development of intellectual
property of Jiangsu mainly relies on industries and (commercial) enterprises, thus from
a policy perspective, incentives and subsidies should continuously be provide to
enterprises (within the region) for further development of intellectual property.
The City of Shanghai ranked 4th in the 2018 Report Index. In terms of ranking,
Shanghai has been closely following Beijing since 2014, and dropped to 4th from the
second place in 2017, surpassed by only Jiangsu and Guangdong. With respect to the
four sub-indexes, the City of Shanghai is ranked 4th in terms of intellectual property
output index, 3rd in the level of flow index, 2nd in overall comprehensive performance,
and 6th in innovative potential index. Looking at the sub-indexes, the City of Shanghai
should be cautious for lack of innovative potential. In accordance to the national
“Thirteenth Five-Year Plan,” the City of Shanghai plans to construct a technological
innovation center that is capable of global influence. For this purpose, the city needs
to further strengthen progress made on intellectual property by building an international
transaction center for intellectual property, and a regional talent center for intellectual
property.
The province of Zhejiang is consistently remaining in the 5th place for many years,
its ranking is relatively steady. With respect to the four sub-indexes, the province of
Zhejiang ranked 5th in the intellectual property output index, 6th in the flow level index,
3rd in overall comprehensive performance, and 4th in the creative potential index. The 15 / 23
overall performance of the province is relatively stable.
The province of Shandong ranked 6th in the 2018 Report Index, its ranking has been
fluctuating between 6th and 7th for the past few years. With respect to the four sub-
indexes, Shandong is ranked 11th in the intellectual property output index, fifth in the
level of flow index, 13th in the overall comprehensive index, and 5th in the innovative
potential index. Comparing these rankings, Shandong scores relatively higher in the
level of flow and creative potential indexes. This indicates that the scale and scope of
enterprises from Shandong to self-import and utilize intellectual property is relatively
greater and more effective. Shandong also retains a substantial potential for
innovation. However, the province of Shandong is still limited with respect to
independent research and development, and the efficiency of enterprises in utilizing and
using intellectual property still needs to be improved.
The province of Anhui ranked 7th in the 2018 Report Index. Since 2015, the
Anhui province has been steadily placed among the top 10, it made further advancement
in the year of 2018. With respect to the four sub-indexes, the province of Anhui ranks
sixth in the intellectual property output index, 12th in the level of flow index, 14th in the
overall comprehensive performance index, and 9th in the innovative potential index.
The level of intellectual property output of Anhui is significantly higher than the other
three sub-indexes.
The City of Tianjin ranked 8th in the 2018 Report Index, moving down by one spot
from the 2017 Report Index. With respect to the four sub-indexes, Tianjin is ranked
10th in the intellectual property output index, 15th in the level of flow index, 5th in the
overall comprehensive performance index, and 10th in the creative potential index.
The IP output level and flow level of Tianjin is somewhat less satisfactory; however,
the overall performance is still adequate. The City of Tianjin should utilize
opportunities from the newly implemented policy for the “Beijing, Tianjin, and Hebei
Region,” as well as the establishment of the new “Xiongan” District, thereby enhance
its IP output level.
The province of Hubei ranked 9th in the 2018 Report Index, advancing one
placement from the 2017 Report Index. With respect to the four sub-indexes, Hubei 16 / 23
ranks 12th in the intellectual property output index, 7th in the level of flow index, 9th in
the overall comprehensive performance index, and 7th in the innovative potential index.
The level of IP output of Hubei is substantially lower comparing to the other three sub-
indexes.
The province of Chongqing secured the last placement in the top 10 ranking, which
remains the same as the 2017 Report Index. It is also the only province coming from
the eastern region of China. With respect to the four sub-indexes, Chongqing is
ranked 15th in the intellectual property output index, 11th in the level of flow index, 7th
in the overall comprehensive performance index, and 15th in the creative potential index.
The level of IP flow and overall comprehensive performance are relatively satisfactory.
Yet the province should focus more in areas such as the intellectual property output
level and potential for innovation, which is significantly lower than other provinces
from the top 10 ranking. Addressing this matter, the province of Chongqing should
increase investments in areas such as technological research, scientific and
technological personnel training, and importation of intellectual property.
Chongqing should also establish and construct relevant institutions and mechanisms to
overcome the relative disadvantages of its geographical location, to defeat its
geographical disadvantages with “policy advantages” so to speak.
2. Ranking of various greater regions: The Eastern China Region, Greater
Southern China Region, and the Greater Northern China Region are ranked top
three
The overall (IP development) level of the eastern region, southern region, northern
region and the central region of China leads above the national level. Further, the
southwest region, northeast region, and northwest region of China falls below the
national level. The precise ranking of all regions is as follow: the greater eastern
region, the greater southern region, the greater northern region, the greater central
region, the greater south eastern region, the north eastern region, and the northern west
region. Comparing with the Report Index from 2017, the Greater Southern Region
surpasses the greater northern region, and is currently ranked in the second place.
(Please refer to Figure 1-3 and 1-5 for details)
17 / 23
South China 0.291
North China 0.264
Central China 0.246
National Average 0.243
Southwest 0.214
Northeast 0.188
Northwest 0.148
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
Figure 1-3 Contrast of the average level of regional intellectual property rights index and
national average level
Table 1-5 Regional intellectual property rights index situation
Intellectual property Regional Region Best city in the region
rights index ranking
East China 0.346 1 Jiangsu
South China 0.291 2 Guangdong
North China 0.264 3 Beijing
Central China 0.246 4 Hubei
Southwest 0.214 5 Chongqing
Northeast 0.188 6 Liaoning
Northwest 0.148 7 Shaanxi
National average 0.243
The Greater Eastern Region: the overall strength and capability of this
region is amongst the most robust, motivated by the significant performance of
Jiangsu and Shanghai
The Greater Eastern Region is constituted of 6 provinces and a municipality
directly under the Central Government, they are: the province of Jiangsu, Zhejiang,
Anhui, Fujian, Jiangxi, Shandong, and the City of Shanghai. It is one of the most
densely populated areas in China. The overall IP index score of the Greater Eastern
Region in 2018 is 0.346, which is significantly higher than the national average. 18 / 23
Among the national top 10 ranking, five provinces come from the greater eastern
region, they are: Jiangsu, Shanghai, Zhejiang, Shandong, and Anhui; the Fujian
province is ranked 12th; with only the province of Jiangxi ranked lower in the national
ranking. Most notably, Jiangsu and Shanghai received an intellectual property index
score of 0.509 and 0.466, respectively, which strongly demonstrate the powerful
radiating effects of the two areas.
The greater eastern region of China has historically been one of the most
economically developed regions, abundant in all types of natural resources and it is also
a cultural center hub. The region enjoyed a speedy international trade development as
a result of the Open-door policy since the early 1980s, it is also becoming one of the
most economically and IP developed regions of China via the help of importation of
technology, training of domestic professionals, and self-reliance on research and
development of technology. (Please refer to Figure 1-6)
Table 1-6 Intellectual property rights index and ranking table in east China
Province Intellectual property
rights index
Ranking within the
region National ranking
Jiangsu 0.509 1 3
Shanghai 0.466 2 4
Zhejiang 0.422 3 5
Shandong 0.321 4 6
Anhui 0.286 5 7
Fujian 0.246 6 12
Jiangxi 0.169 7 19
East China 0.346
National average 0.243
The Greater Southern Region of China: the province of Guangdong surpasses
other areas, the policy advantages of the Greater Bay Area is becoming
increasingly substantial
The greater southern region of China includes the province of Guangdong,
Guangxi, and Hainan. Within the region, IP index of the province of Guangdong
increased from 0.482 to 0.536 as a result of the policy advantages implemented for the
19 / 23
Greater Bay Area, as mentioned earlier. The province of Guangdong also advanced
to the second place from 2017’s third place, thereby continuously diminishing its gap
with the City of Beijing. Comparing the data collected from 2017, the ranking of
Guangxi and Hainan remains rather stable, and the outstanding performance of
Guangdong in turn stimulated the level of intellectual property development of the
entire greater southern region. Via the establishment and construction of the Greater
Bay Area, and through the regional demonstration zone3 for collaborative development
of intellectual property, relevant resources in innovation will be more effectively
allocated in terms of stimulating a joint development of the industry. The effect of
Guangdong’s outstanding performance is destined to radiate outwards towards the
province of Guangxi and Hainan in the near future, which will in turn stimulate the
development of the entire greater southern region. (Please refer to Figure 1-7)
Table 1-7 Intellectual property rights index and ranking table in south China
Province Intellectual property
rights index
Ranking within the
region National ranking
Guangdong 0.536 1 2
Guangxi 0.206 2 17
Hainan 0.131 3 27
South China 0.291
National average 0.243
The Greater Northern Region of China: the overall strength of intellectual
property is robust, and the synergy effect of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei is reinforcing
The greater northern region of China consists of three provinces and two
municipalities directly under the central government, they are: the province of Hebei,
Shanxi, Inner Mongolia, the city of Beijing, and the City of Tianjin. This is also one
of the more densely populated regions of China. The average intellectual property
index score of this region is 0.264, which is slightly higher than the national average,
yet it falls behind of the greater eastern and southern region of China. Comparing the
data at hand with that of the 2017, even though the greater northern region falls behind
20 / 23
3
the greater southern region, it is still the third ranking region of China. In addition,
the synergy effect of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei remains relatively constant and stable.
The City of Beijing is the center-core of intellectual property development in the
greater northern region, sitting at the 1st place of the national intellectual property index
ranking. The City of Tianjin follows closely behind and is ranked at 2nd place within
the region. With the policy implementation of several major scientific and
technological projects as a result of the “13th Five-Year Plan Period,” the City of Tianjin
retains substantial potential in the area of intellectual property development.
One of the major issues burdening the greater northern region of China has always
been uneven development. Intellectual property development of provinces other than
the City of Beijing and Tianjin falls far behind. The province of Hebei, Shanxi, and
Inner Mongolia are ranked respectively at 20th, 23rd, and 26th, a slight improvement
comparing with 2017. With the further deepening of the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei
cooperation, and the establishment of the new Xiongan District, the prospect of
intellectual property development in the greater northern China is promising. (Please
refer to Figure 1-8 for details.)
Table 1-8 Intellectual property rights index and ranking table in north China
Province Intellectual property
rights index
Ranking within the
region National ranking
Beijing 0.593 1 1
Tianjin 0.282 2 8
Hebei 0.164 3 20
Shanxi 0.149 4 23
Inner Mongolia 0.133 5 26
North China 0.264
National average 0.243
The Greater central region of China: within the region, the level of intellectual
property development among various provinces are relatively equal, and the
province of Hubei leads in the ranking
21 / 23
The greater central region of China consists of three provinces, they are: the
province of Henan, Hubei, and Hunan. Development of intellectual property within
the region is relatively balanced and is on par with the national average level. Within
the region, the province of Hubei is ranked 1st, with an intellectual property index score
of 0.279; it is ranked 9th in the national ranking. The province of Hunan is ranked 2nd
within the region, with an intellectual property index score of 0.251; it is ranked 11th in
the national ranking. The province of Henan falls behind in the third place within the
region, it scored 0.209 on the intellectual property index, and it is ranked 16th in the
national ranking. (Please refer to Figure 1-9 for details)
Table 1-9 Intellectual property rights index and ranking table in central China
Province Intellectual property
rights index
Ranking within the
region National ranking
Hubei 0.279 1 9
Hunan 0.251 2 11
Henan 0.209 3 16
Central China 0.246
National average 0.243
The North East Region of China: the overall performance of the region is less
satisfactory, yet its overall ranking advanced slightly
The northeast region of China consists of the Liaoning province, Jilin province,
and the Heilongjiang province. The overall rate of IP development within the region
is below the national average. Within the region, the IP index score of Liaoning is
0.225 and leads in the region, it is ranked 15th in the national ranking. The intellectual
property index score of Jilin and Heilongjiang are respectively 18th and 21st. Index
score of the latter two provinces advanced slightly comparing to that of the 2017
ranking. (Please refer to Figure 1-10 for more detail)
Table 1-10 Intellectual property rights index and ranking table in northeast
Province Intellectual property
rights index
Ranking within the
region National ranking
22 / 23
Liaoning 0.225 1 15
Jilin 0.177 2 18
Heilongjiang 0.161 3 21
Northeast 0.188
National average 0.243
The Southwest and the Northwest region of China: overall performance of
Chongqing, Shaanxi, and Sichuan is outstanding, yet the overall level of all other
provinces within the region is less satisfactory
The southwest and the northwest region of China is consisted of 10 provinces.
The economic foundation of the two regions is relatively weaker. The rate of
intellectual property development substantially falls behind the national average level.
There are some exceptions however, for example, Chongqing, Shaanxi, and Sichuan
respectively ranked 10th, 13th, and 14th on the national ranking. (Please refer to Figure
1-11)
Table 1-10 Intellectual property rights index and ranking table in southwest and northwest
Province Intellectual property
rights index
Ranking within the
region National ranking
Chongqing 0.251 1 10
Sichuan 0.230 2 14
Guizhou 0.156 3 22
Yunnan 0.138 4 25
Tibet 0.113 5 30
Southwest 0.214
Province Intellectual property
rights index
Ranking within the
region National ranking
Shaanxi 0.243 1 13
Gansu 0.144 2 24
Ningxia 0.126 3 28
Qinghai 0.114 4 29
Xinjiang 0.113 5 31
Northwest 0.148
National average 0.243
23 / 23