Research and Development of CRAMTRA 1.0 Code for Consequence Assessment From Radioactive Material Transport

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wang Renze ◽  
Zhang Jiangang ◽  
Li Guoqiang ◽  
Zhuang Dajie ◽  
Sun Hongchao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Radioactive Material ◽  
Material Transport ◽  
Western Countries ◽  
Consequence Assessment

Code for consequence assessment (CA) from radioactive material transport (RMT) is an important tool for RMT CA. Since 1980s relevant codes have been introduced from western countries to China, however, there isn’t a code with independent intellectual property rights of China. Design, programming and test of CRAMTRA 1.0 code for RMT CA was introduced in this paper, the results show that CRAMTRA 1.0 has reliable quality and fine practicability.

A Critical Discourse Analysis of Intellectual Property Rights Within NAFTA 1.0: Implications for NAFTA 2.0 and for Democratic (Health) Governance in Canada

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 278-291 ◽  
Author(s):  
Faisal Ali Mohamed ◽  
Claudia Chaufan
Keyword(s):  
Discourse Analysis ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
Critical Discourse Analysis ◽  
Federal Government ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Critical Discourse ◽  
Compulsory Licensing ◽  
Drug Prices

In 1993, the Canadian federal government ratified the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Prior to ratification, compulsory licensing was eliminated from Canada’s Patent Act and intellectual property rights (IPRs) were strengthened. Compulsory licensing allows competitors to produce drugs under patent without the consent of the patent holder, challenging drug monopolies and lowering prices, whereas IPRs lengthen patent protections, shielding patent holders from competition and increasing prices. We perform a critical discourse analysis of key provisions in Chapter 17 of NAFTA in light of industry claims that pharmaceutical innovation requires important investments in research and development, justifying high drug prices. We note that since NAFTA, spending in research and development in Canada has decreased and drug prices have increased, becoming a major barrier to equitable access to critically necessary medications. We argue that by modifying the law, the federal government has wronged the Canadian people by discursively appropriating the language of protecting the public good while in practice legitimizing and consolidating private drug development and production, legalizing exorbitant profits, and excluding well-tested publicly financed alternatives. While NAFTA has now been superseded by the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement, our analysis offers important lessons moving forward.

Intellectual Property Protection for Biologics: Why the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Trade Agreement Fails to Deliver

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristina M Lybecker
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights Protection ◽  
Data Exclusivity ◽  
Property Rights Protection

Biopharmaceutical research and development is overwhelmingly focused in the U.S. becasue here it is incentivized and encouraged through a robust intellectual property rights protection environment.  Across the board, the United States provides the most comprehensive, effective intellectual property rights protections for biopharmaceuticals.  As a result, the industry locates here, researches here, and thrives here.  With an acknowledgement of the importance of intellectual property rights as well as the wider benefits of biopharmaceutical research and development, it's tremendously disappointing that the recently negotiated Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Trade Agreement fails to deliver sufficient IP protections for biologics.  This article explores the importance of a rigorous intellectual property environemtn for the biopharmaceutical industry through an examination of the importance of data exclusivity provisions.  Such protection is critical as the number, complexity and cost of clinical trials increases.  Technology inevitably evolves faster than the legal architecture that surrounds it.  As technology evolves, making the development of new biologic vaccines and therapies possible, society's commitment to incentivize innovation and protect it must be enshrined in the intellectual property protections of agreements such as the TPP.

The Impact of Globalization on Agricultural Biotechnology in Iran: A Model for Regional Intellectual Property Rights

2003 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-53
Author(s):  
Peter Phillips ◽  
Morteza Haghiri
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Agricultural Practices ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Increasing Demand ◽  
Biotechnology Sector ◽  
The Impact

AbstractThe increasing population of developing countries, which creates an increasing demand for food, is severely challenging traditional agricultural practices. Recent scientific developments have introduced biotechnology techniques to agriculture. To increase the benefits from implementing biotechnology, countries need both to continuously invest in research and development in their biotechnology sector and to implement a series of complementary policies. Establishing and enforcing the intellectual property rights of plant breeders are among of these policies. The successful institution of plant breeders' rights is influenced by market institutions and the legal system, which together comprise the environmental structure of the economy. Since property rights are not well established in most developing and developed countries, individual research and innovations cannot be protected from intellectual property piracy. As a result, there is little incentive to continue investment in research and development in biotechnology in those markets. This paper proposes a model of regional intellectual property rights for developing countries where individual intellectual property rights are not enforceable.

Are human capital, intellectual property rights, and research and development expenditures really important for total factor productivity? An empirical analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (6) ◽  
pp. 756-774 ◽  
Author(s):  
Misbah Habib ◽  
Jawad Abbas ◽  
Rahat Noman
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Human Capital ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Research And Development ◽  
Total Factor Productivity ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Factor Productivity ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Impact

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impact of human capital (HC), intellectual property rights (IPRs) and research and development (R&D) expenditures on total factor productivity (TFP), which leads to economic growth. Design/methodology/approach The panel data technique is used on a sample of 16 countries categorized into two groups, namely Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) and Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries and, in order to make a comparison for the time period of 2007–2015, the researchers used a fixed effect model as an estimation method for regression. Findings The results indicate that HC, IPRs and R&D expenditures appear to be statistically significant and are strong factors in determining changes in TFP and exhibit positive results in all sample sets. Moreover, IPRs alone do not accelerate growth in an economy, especially taking the case of emerging nations. Originality/value Considering the importance of CEE and BRIC countries, and inadequate research on these regions with respect to current study’s variables and techniques, the present research provides valuable insights about the importance of HC, IPR and R&D activities and their impact on TFP, which leads to economic growth. IPRs create a fertile environment for R&D activities, knowledge creation and economic development. Distinct nations can attain better economic status via HC, R&D activities, innovation, trade and FDI, although the relative significance of these channels is likely to differ across countries depending on their developmental levels.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document