India’s status as a top world supplier of generic medicines could be threatened by a free trade agreement its government is negotiating with the European Union (EU), according to this study. A draft of the proposed agreement put forward by EU officials recommends that it should incorporate a wide range of intellectual property issues. But at least two of the provisions in the draft could hamper access to affordable medicines for developing countries. One provision could require India to forbid the manufacture of generic versions of patented drugs for up to five years after the patents in question expire. Another provision would offer protection to test data submitted for the approval of branded medicines for a certain length of time (the precise duration has not yet been specified by EU officials). In effect, this would bar makers of generic drugs from using that data. The study notes that the EU recommendations go beyond the scope of the World Trade Organisation’s Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement.
Health equity in economic and trade policies
In February 2011, experts gathered at the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) to rewrite the negotiating document on intellectual property rights and traditional knowledge. The new document caused disagreements over common language in most articles, in particular, Article 1 on the subject matter of protection of traditional knowledge, which includes the definition of traditional knowledge (TK), the criteria for eligibility and on secret TK. To accommodate different opinions, several options were listed in the draft document. In Article 1, one of the options mentions the fact that, among eligibility criteria, protection should extend to TK not widely known outside that community, which could imply that some TK already in the public domain would not be considered as eligible. A representative of the Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism argued that the language in Article 1 might be misconstrued as intellectual property language and it was important that Article 1 really reflect the integrity of TK in its cultural context as a dynamic form of knowledge transmitted from generation to generation to serve the interest of the community. Article 2 only contains two brackets signifying lack of agreement, one of which is around the word ‘nations’ as beneficiaries of protection. Some countries would like the protection to include indigenous peoples, local communities and nations. The representative of the Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism said beneficiaries should be TK holders themselves, and not nations. A developed country source agreed, noting that indigenous peoples and local communities are holders of TK and should be beneficiaries and managers of their rights, but that nations could not be beneficiaries of the instrument being elaborated as this would confuse intellectual property rights with public heritage protection.
The African Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) exposes how the two cyclones that battered Mozambique and parts of Malawi and Zimbabwe in March and April 2019 must be understood against the backdrop of the political and economic drivers of ecological degradation. These include development loans and aid, rapacious natural resource extraction and social and cultural displacement. The authors examine the interconnections between climate change, deforestation, agricultural expansion and resource extractivism, as drivers of social and political instability and food insecurity in these countries, while enriching a small political elite. The paper unpacks how the national and international disaster response to the cyclones inadequately addressed the scale of the overlapping crises that the cyclones revealed, calling for approaches that go beyond narrow disaster management to one based on equity and justice in local economies and in relationships with the global economy.
In this UNRISD paper, the author reviews research on the employment impacts of neoliberalism, specifically on women’s employment. She considers a number of aspects that are central to employment issues: the slowdown in economic growth and the decline in the responsiveness of employment to growth; the impact of trade and investment liberalisation, informalisation and inflation targeting on employment; the consequences of increasingly frequent economic crises; and the public sector. The author contends that the Washington consensus’ macroeconomic policy conventions – liberalisation, privatisation and macro stability – have become so globally entrenched that they are rarely questioned by the academic and policy establishment. To this effect, she points to numerous, wide gaps in research into the employment impacts of neoliberal macroeconomic development policy.
‘Neoliberalism’, has guided the globalisation of economic activity and become the conventional wisdom in international agencies and institutions (such as the IMF, World Bank, World Trade Organisation and the technical agencies of the United Nations, including the WHO). Reproduced in the ‘Washington Consensus’ in the United States and the ‘Brussels Consensus’ in the European Union, this ideology has guided policies widely accepted as the only ones possible and advisable. This book assembles a series of articles that challenge that ideology. Written by well-known scholars, these articles question each of the tenets of neoliberal doctrine, showing how the policies guided by this ideology have adversely affected human development in the countries where they have been implemented.
This book critically analyses the conventional wisdom in the political, economic, and academic establishments of neoliberalism and globalisation as good for people's health and quality of life.
The World Trade Organisation (WTO) has as its primary goal the liberalisation of world trade. Given the expected accompanying expansion of trade and the enormous potential of such improved trade and investment flows for stimulating economic growth and development, it becomes clear that the activities of the WTO are of central relevance to the implementation of the goals of NEPAD.Recent events in both NEPAD programmes and WTO activities give particular cause to focus on the close linkages between the WTO and NEPAD.
The Medicines Patent Pool and the World Health Organization, Afrigen Biologics Limited, the Biologicals and Vaccines Institute of Southern Africa (Biovac), the South African Medical Research Council and Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention have signed a letter of intent to bring together partners to establish the South African mRNA technology transfer hub to enable greater and more diversified vaccines manufacturing capability, to respond to the current COVID-19 pandemic and future pandemics.
A recent European Union (EU) regulation on customs enforcement of intellectual property rights (N° 608/2013) has raised concerns among civil society actors who find that the regulation might not be an improvement over its previous version under which seizure of legal generic medicines in transit occurred a few years ago, leading to a World Trade Organisation dispute. Civil society organisation, Act-Up Paris has said the new regulation does not solve the problem as it continues to allow the seizing of goods over a simple suspicion of ‘intellectual property’ infringement without checking beforehand whether these goods are headed to the European territory or just in transit. The group argue that the EU did not take into account the December 2011 Court of Justice of the European Communities’ decision which stated that goods coming from a third-party State could not be described as ‘counterfeit goods’ or ‘pirated goods’ just by entering the customs territory of the EU. The in-transit medicines are not intended for commercialisation in EU territory and thus intellectual property status according to the national law of EU countries should be irrelevant. The EU is standing by its new regulation.
A recent World Bank report, The Changing Wealth of Nations 2018, offers evidence of how much poorer Africa is becoming thanks to rampant minerals, oil and gas extraction. Yet the author notes that World Bank policies and practices remain oriented to enforcing foreign loan repayments and transnational corporate profit repatriation. Central to its “natural capital accounting,” the Bank uses an “Adjusted Net Savings” (ANS) measure for changes in economic, ecological and educational wealth. The Bank asks, “How does sub-Saharan Africa compare to other regions? Not favourably.” The ANS decline for sub-Saharan Africa was worst from 2001-09 and 2013-15. The author observes that there are two ways to address transnational corporate (TNC) capture of African wealth: bottom-up through direct action blocking extraction, or top-down through reforms. He critiques the latter, such as in the African Union’s 2009 Alternative Mining Vision (AMV) position that foreign resource investors with capital, skills and expertise are critical to development, which ignores these evident trends on the continent.