The Effects of Trade Agreements on Imports of Biologics: Evidence from Chile

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle Trachtenberg ◽  
Warren A. Kaplan ◽  
Veronika J. Wirtz ◽  
Kevin P. Gallagher
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Universal Access ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Unit Value ◽  
Volume Unit

AbstractThis paper develops new indicators that measure the strength of intellectual property rights (IPR) provisions in Chile’s free trade agreements (FTAs). We use these new indicators to examine the extent to which FTAs with strong IPR provisions impact the volume, unit value and overall value of imported biologic medicines into Chile. We find that FTAs with more stringent IPR provisions increase both the volume and the unit value of imported biologics, suggesting greater availability of imported biologics at a higher price. Further research, however, is necessary to determine whether the increases in volume and unit prices of imports lead to greater universal access to biologics or greater inequity in access to these medicines.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership’s patent linkage: Unfriending or befriending the right to biologics?

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 61-68
Author(s):  
Zeleke Temesgen Boru
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The World ◽  
The Right ◽  
Patent Linkage

The World Trade Organization brought Intellectual Property Rights into the multilateral trading system. The adoption of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which formed part of the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, established a minimum level of protection with respect to various forms of Intellectual Property Rights. However, in the aftermath of its adoption, several Free Trade Agreements, which include Intellectual Property Rights provisions of different potency, have come into existence. These Free Trade Agreements have given rise to what is commonly known as TRIPS-plus IP provisions. The provisions may renege on States’ obligation to promote access to biologics, medicines which are derived from proteins through biotechnological process. In this light, one recent Free Trade Agreement is the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, which requires its Parties to implement a number of TRIPS-plus obligations, including data exclusivity and patent linkage. Against the aforementioned backdrop, this article focuses on patent linkage and explores whether the provision allows the Trans-Pacific Partnership Parties to utilize TRIPS flexibilities to promote the right to biologics. In doing so, the article provides potential responses to the question, does patent linkage deter the realization of the right to biologic? With the purpose to do so, while the first section provides a concise introduction into the agreement, the second section discusses the TRIPS standard on patent. While the third part demonstrates the nature of obligations enshrined in the Trans-Pacific Partnership’s rule on patent linkage, the fourth section investigates the obligations’ implication on the right to biologics. The last section provides the conclusion.

scholarly journals Free Trade Agreements With The United States: 8 Lessons For Prospective Parties From Australia’s Experience

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 395-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen R. Tully
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Free Trade Agreement ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreement ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States

Abstract This article identifies 8 key lessons for those States contemplating a free trade agreement with the United States (U.S.) arising from Australia’s experience. The standards of intellectual property protection under the Australia-U.S. Free Trade Agreement and their impact on pharmaceutical prices in Australia are a particular focus. Prospective parties must first conduct a national interest self-assessment which reviews the desired strength of intellectual property protection under national law and their preference for using flexibilities available to them under the existing international intellectual property rights framework. The United States negotiates free trade agreements in light of previous ones, negotiating outcomes obtained in other fora and the decisions of international trade tribunals. Negotiations typically occur behind closed doors, which is a process having adverse implications for transparent decision-making, public consultation periods and contributions from interested non-governmental actors. A concluded agreement will build on prior treaties and influence the course of future international arrangements. But the impact of a United States free trade agreement is not always clear, including because of a lack of reliable data, and the extent of national legal change is a contested issue given existing reform agendas and external influences. The United States seek to redesign national health care systems in its own image and had little success in Australia’s case. National legal systems need not be harmonised: although there can be some convergence in intellectual property rights regimes, significant differences may also remain. Negotiators must reconcile competing cultures, philosophies and perspectives between States for a free trade agreement to be worthwhile.

Trips and Later Inter-Se Agreements

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henning Grosse Ruse-Khan
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Ip Protection

This chapter focusses on how ‘Free Trade Agreements’ (FTAs) fit within the existing multilateral framework, primarily with the Trade Related Aspects of International Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement which most FTAs take as basis and benchmark from which the contracting parties modify rules among another (inter-se). In this context, the most prominent issue is the effect the continuous strengthening of the standards of intellectual property (IP) protection and enforcement has on the optional provisions and flexibilities of the TRIPS Agreement. The chapter examines whether and how the TRIPS addresses such further increases in protection and enforcement. It also looks at conflict clauses in FTAs and how they perceive their relation with the multilateral IP rules, especially the TRIPS Agreement. The principal question here is whether rule-relations within the international IP system are still primarily determined by harmonious interpretation — or if conflict resolution rather functions by choosing one rule over another.

scholarly journals Influence of the Regulatory Framework for Pharmaceuticals in Public Health. Analysis from Colombia's ratification of the Agreement on Intellectual Property Rights Trade-Related (TRIPS) and the Free Trade Agreements with the United States and the European Union

Aquichan ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-127
Author(s):  
Fernando Augusto Jiménez-Valderrama ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Free Trade ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Free Trade Agreements ◽  
Trade Agreements ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union

Este artículo tiene por objetivo estudiar la relación entre la disponibilidad, los precios de los medicamentos y los intereses de salud pública. Para ello hemos utilizado una metodología de análisis de los intereses económicos implicados y también un método sistemático de tratamiento de la legislación nacional, comunitaria andina e internacional vigente. Igualmente hemos acudido a metodologías de derecho comparado entre nuestro ordenamiento jurídico nacional con los de otros países de mundo occidental. Existe un estrecho vínculo entre la disponibilidad y los precios de los medicamentos y los intereses de salud pública. Nuestro actual sistema legal reconoce a los inventores de nuevos medicamentos como un “monopolio” para negociar en el mercado farmacéutico. Para proteger los intereses públicos nuestra regulación establece algunos límites a los derechos de los inventores. Los derechos de propiedad se limitan en el tiempo y bajo algunas circunstancias es obligatorio autorizar a otros a usar la patente bajo un contrato de licenciamiento. La Organización Mundial del Comercio ha establecido (Decisión del Consejo de la OMC, Ronda Doha 2003) otros límites a estos derechos en caso de condiciones excepcionales. Nuestra Constitución Nacional otorga prevalencia a los intereses públicos sobre los privados. Es un deber de los gobiernos establecer un sistema justo en el cual los inventores puedan obtener una recompensa económica por sus creaciones y la sociedad pueda satisfacer sus necesidades de salud.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document