Intellectual property products as intangible components of the national wealth of Ukraine

Economic Annals-ХХI: Volume 135, Issue 11-12(1), Pages: 19-22

Citation information:
Bobukh, I. (2013). Intellectual property products as intangible components of the national wealth of Ukraine. Economic Annals-XXI, 11-12(1), 19-22. https://ea21journal.world/index.php/ea-v135-05/

Iryna Bobukh
D.Sc. (Economics),
PhD (Economics),
Senior Research Officer,
Institute for Economics and Forecasting of the National Academy of Sciences
26 Panasa Myrnoho St., Kyiv, 01011, Ukraine
irina_bobukh@ukr.net

Intellectual property products as intangible components of the national wealth of Ukraine

Abstract. The growing tension on many parameters of Ukrainian socio-economic system development can cause structural shifts or even bifurcation changes. One of the key attractors of a new economic system may well become intellectual property products, which are an important intangible part of the national wealth. The purpose of this study is to justify the ways of improving intellectual property products representation as of the part of the intangible national wealth in general and of Ukraine in particular on the basis of international comparative analysis of their formation and methodology of economic evaluation.

In appliance with the System of National Accounts principles, intangible fixed assets are evaluated using an expenditure approach, but in reality, the expenditure method often does not reflect the true value of the asset because benefits from innovative intangibles could greatly exceed the cost of their creation. That’s why the most expedient method to count the real value of intangible fixed assets is to capitalize the future benefits from their use or possession. The list of intellectual property products should be grown by including new innovative elements and separating them from existing ones. Since goodwill, market assets, contracts, leases and licenses are created as a result of the company management activity and marketing services, they should be named as «produced» assets in lieu of «non-produced».

Except intellectual property products and non-produced assets, the intangible part of the national wealth should include other important components, among which – human, social and information potential. Social potential initially could be considered as a quasi intangible asset because of the partial compliance to its attributes. Due to its peculiarities, information potential should be represented as a supplemental index reflecting specific linkages between other intangibles in the national wealth ranking.

Keywords: Intellectual Property Products; Intangibles; National Wealth; System of National Accounts

JEL Classification: E10

References

1. EC, OECD, IMF, UN, WB (2009). System of National Accounts 2008. New York: United Nations.
2. Commission of the EC, OECD, IMF, UN, WB (1993). System of National Accounts 1993. Brussels, Luxembourg, New York, Paris, Washington D.C.
3. The State Statistics Service of Ukraine (2013). National Accounts of Ukraine for 2011. Кyiv: Statistical Publication (in Ukr.).
4. OECD (2013). OECD Statistical Extracts.
   Retrieved from http://www.stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?queryid=9185#
5. OECD (2011). New sources of growth: intangible assets.
   Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/sti/inno/46349020.pdf
6. BDO (2013). ASPE at a Glance. Intangible Assets.
   Retrieved from https://www.bdo.ca/en/Library/Services/assurance-and-accounting/Documents/ASPE-at-a-Glance/ASPE-at-a-Glance-Intangible-Assets.pdf
7. The Parliament of Ukraine (2010). Tax Code of Ukraine.
   Retrieved from http://zakon4.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2755-17/print1361286005994645 (in Ukr.)
8. The Parliament of Ukraine (2006). On state regulation of activities in the sphere of technology transfer (The Law of Ukraine).
   Retrieved from http://zakon0.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/143-16/print1375188397670485 (in Ukr.)

Received 16.09.2013