Intellectual property (IP) is a crucial issue as it directly impacts economic growth. This research analyzed the dynamic governance reconstruction within Indonesia’s Ministry of Law and Human Rights aimed at transforming it into a world-class Intellectual Property Office (IPO). A systematic review of 20 articles was conducted. The results showed that the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) under the Ministry has numerous opportunities to become a world-class IPO. Protecting intellectual works through IP rights enhances inclusiveness, such as ensuring operational freedoms. The Indonesian government is employing dynamic governance methods to contextualize and implement bureaucratic reforms. However, there is resistance to change as old habits conflict with the new order, posing a challenge to bureaucratic reform. Strategies to create a world-class IPO involve improving technology utilization and fostering innovation. The protection of IP rights has widened inclusivity by enabling operational freedoms. Under dynamic governance, the bureaucracy is being restructured to be more context-aware and agile in its execution. Yet, ingrained practices resist reform, creating friction with the new systems being instituted. Initiatives to elevate the DGIP include technological modernization and promoting a more innovative culture. By reviewing these aspects systematically, the research provides insights into the opportunities and challenges in transforming Indonesia’s IP office into a world-class institution capable of driving economic growth through robust IP governance.

1. Audretsch, D. B., & Belitski, M. (2020). The role of R&D and knowledge spillovers in innovation and productivity. European Economic Review, 123, 103391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2020.103391
2. Azarian, M., Yu, H., Shiferaw, A. T., et al. (2023). Do We Perform Systematic Literature Review Right? A Scientific Mapping and Methodological Assessment. Logistics, 7(4), 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics7040089
3. Barbic, F., Hidalgo, A., & Cagliano, R. (2016). Governance dynamics in multi-partner R&D alliances. Baltic Journal of Management, 11(4), 405–429. https://doi.org/10.1108/bjm-09-2015-0173
4. Boland, A., Cherry, G., & Dickson, R. (2017). Doing a Systematic Review: A Student′s Guide. SAGE Publications.
5. Brandl, K., Darendeli, I., & Mudambi, R. (2018). Foreign actors and intellectual property protection regulations in developing countries. Journal of International Business Studies, 50(5), 826–846. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-018-0172-6
6. de Almeida Borges, P., de Araújo, L. P., Lima, L. A., et al. (2020). The triple helix model and intellectual property: The case of the University of Brasilia. World Patent Information, 60, 101945. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2019.101945
7. Dixit, T., Srivastava, S., Sahu, S., et al. (2018). Intellectual Property Evolution and Innovation Ecosystem as Effective Tools in Strengthening Indian Healthcare Sector. Current Science, 114(08), 1639. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v114/i08/1639-1649
8. Eck, N. J. Van, & Waltman, L. (2018). VOSviewer Manual. Available online: http://www.vosviewer.com/getting-started (accessed on 12 August 2024).
9. Fang, L. H., Lerner, J., & Wu, C. (2017). Intellectual Property Rights Protection, Ownership, and Innovation: Evidence from China. The Review of Financial Studies, 30(7), 2446–2477. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhx023
10. Ferdinands, R., Azam, S. M. F., & Khatibi, A. (2023). The work in progress of a developing nation’s Triple Helix and its impact on patent commercialization. The case of Sri Lanka. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 15(4), 839–862. https://doi.org/10.1108/jstpm-06-2022-0095
11. Ferree, K. E., Honig, L., Lust, E., et al. (2022). Land and Legibility: When Do Citizens Expect Secure Property Rights in Weak States? American Political Science Review, 117(1), 42–58. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055422000417
12. Haim Faridian, P., & Neubaum, D. O. (2021). Ambidexterity in the age of asset sharing: Development of dynamic capabilities in open source ecosystems. Technovation, 99, 102125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102125
13. Holgersson, M., Granstrand, O., & Bogers, M. (2018). The evolution of intellectual property strategy in innovation ecosystems: Uncovering complementary and substitute appropriability regimes. Long Range Planning, 51(2), 303–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.08.007
14. Jeddawi, M., Nofli, Arsyad, R., & Teguh, P. (2023). Service Improvement Strategy Directorate General of Intellectual Property Becomes the World Class Intellectual Property Office. Perspektif, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.31289/perspektif.v12i3.9369
15. Jemala, M. (2022). Systemic technology innovation management and analysis of other forms of IP protection. International Journal of Innovation Studies, 6(4), 238–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijis.2022.08.001
16. Jiang, W., Jiang, N., & Ge, L. (2023). How do intellectual property demonstration cities contribute to low-carbon development? Evidence from China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(40), 92007–92026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-28651-1
17. Kurniawan, R. C., Faedlulloh, D., Warganegara, A., et al. (2023). Multilevel dynamic governance in dealing with crisis: the case of handling corona virus disease 19 (COVID-19) in Lampung Province, Indonesia. Cogent Social Sciences, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2222574
18. Lähteenmäki-Uutela, A., Lonkila, A., Huttunen, S., et al. (2021). Legal rights of private property owners vs. sustainability transitions? Journal of Cleaner Production, 323, 129179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129179
19. Macaulay, S. (2020). Private government. Springer.
20. Mengist, W., Soromessa, T., & Legese, G. (2020). Method for conducting systematic literature review and meta-analysis for environmental science research. MethodsX, 7, 100777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2019.100777
21. Meroño, M. C. P., Vigaray, M. D. D. J., & Volcan, L. E. (2020). The gender gap in intellectual property in Latin America and Iberia: the case of patents. International Journal of Intellectual Property Management, 10(4), 345. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijipm.2020.112417
22. Mohamed Shaffril, H. A., Samsuddin, S. F., & Abu Samah, A. (2020). The ABC of systematic literature review: the basic methodological guidance for beginners. Quality & Quantity, 55(4), 1319–1346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-01059-6
23. Natsir, N., Halim, R., & Tahili, M. H. (2023). The effect of dynamic governance on public service innovation through the recruitment of managers of public organizations. Public Policy and Administration, 22(4), 405–417. https://doi.org/10.13165/VPA-23-22-4-02
24. Neves, P. C., Afonso, O., Silva, D., et al. (2021). The link between intellectual property rights, innovation, and growth: A meta-analysis. Economic Modelling, 97, 196–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2021.01.019
25. Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainable Collaboration in Business, Technology, Information, and Innovation (SCBTII 2023). (2023). In: Kusairi S, F. Kapingura M, Hendayani R, & Ahmat N (editors), Advances in Economics, Business and Management Research. Atlantis Press International BV. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-292-7
26. Prud’homme, D., Tong, T. W., & Han, N. (2021). A stakeholder-based view of the evolution of intellectual property institutions. Journal of International Business Studies, 52(4), 773–802. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-021-00412-7
27. Ravšelj, D., & Aristovnik, A. (2020). The Impact of R&D Expenditures on Corporate Performance: Evidence from Slovenian and World R&D Companies. Sustainability, 12(5), 1943. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12051943
28. Ronie, R. U., Hamzah, M. Z., & Rustam, R. (2023). Analysis of the Effect of Intellectual Property Policy with National Economic Growth. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainable Collaboration in Business, Technology, Information, and Innovation (SCBTII 2023), pp. 240–257. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6463-292-7_14
29. Ruangpermpool, S., Igel, B., & Siengthai, S. (2020). Trust and dynamic governance mechanisms in the university-industry R&D alliances. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 11(2), 171–192. https://doi.org/10.1108/jstpm-02-2019-0018
30. Siltaloppi, J., & Ballardini, R. M. (2023). Promoting systemic collaboration for sustainable innovation through intellectual property rights. Journal of Co-Operative Organization and Management, 11(1), 100200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcom.2023.100200
31. Singer, J. W., Berger, B. R., Davidson, N. M., & Penalver, E. M. (2021). Property Law: Rules, Policies, and Practices [Connected eBook with Study Center]. Aspen Publishing.
32. Suominen, A., Deschryvere, M., & Narayan, R. (2023). Uncovering value through exploration of barriers - A perspective on intellectual property rights in a national innovation system. Technovation, 123, 102719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102719
33. Sweet, C. M., & Eterovic Maggio, D. S. (2015). Do Stronger Intellectual Property Rights Increase Innovation? World Development, 66, 665–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2014.08.025
34. Tang, J., & Liu, Q. (2024). R&D tax incentive policy, intellectual property right protection, and corporate innovation in an emerging market. Research in International Business and Finance, 69, 102244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2024.102244
35. Natsir, N., Halim, R., Tahili, M.H. (2023). The effect of dynamic governance on public service innovation through the recruitment of managers of public organizations. Public policy and administration. https://doi.org/10.13165/vpa-23-22-4-02
36. Usman, J., A. Mappasere, F., & Rosdianti Razak, A. (2024). Dynamic Governance and Creative Industrial Resilience Post-Covid-19 Pandemic. KnE Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v9i7.15472
37. Valerio, E., Hilmiati, N., Stella Thei, R., et al. (2024). Innovation for whom? The case of women in cattle farming in Nusa Tenggara Barat, Indonesia. Journal of Rural Studies, 106, 103198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2024.103198
38. Viglioni, M. T. D., Calegario, C. L. L., Viglioni, A. C. D., et al. (2024). Foreign direct investment and environmental degradation: Can intellectual property rights help G20 countries achieve carbon neutrality? Technology in Society, 77, 102501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2024.102501
39. Widowati, L., Setyowati, K., & Suharto, D. G. (2023). Dynamic Governance As Perspective in Indonesian Bureaucracy Reform: Qualitative Analysis of Indonesian Bureaucracy Reform Based on Dynamic Governance. Jurnal Bina Praja, 15(2), 403–415. https://doi.org/10.21787/jbp.15.2023.403-415
40. Zazyki, M. A., da Silva, W. V., de Moura, G. L., et al. (2022). Property rights in informal settlements. Cities, 122, 103540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103540