IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/103027.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Analyzing the impact of trade and investment agreements on pharmaceutical policy: provisions, pathways and potential impacts

Author

Listed:
  • Gleeson, Deborah
  • Lexchin, Joel
  • Labonté, Ronald
  • Townsend, Belinda
  • Gagnon, Marc-André
  • Kohler, Jillian
  • Forman, Lisa
  • Shadlen, Kenneth C.

Abstract

Background: Trade and investment agreements negotiated after the World Trade Organization's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) have included increasingly elevated protection of intellectual property rights along with an expanding array of rules impacting many aspects of pharmaceutical policy. Despite the large body of literature on intellectual property and access to affordable medicines, the ways in which other provisions in trade agreements can affect pharmaceutical policy and, in turn, access to medicines have been little studied. There is a need for an analytical framework covering the full range of provisions, pathways, and potential impacts, on which to base future health and human rights impact assessment and research. A framework exploring the ways in which trade and investment agreements may affect pharmaceutical policy was developed, based on an analysis of four recently negotiated regional trade agreements. First a set of core pharmaceutical policy objectives based on international consensus was identified. A systematic comparative analysis of the publicly available legal texts of the four agreements was undertaken, and the potential impacts of the provisions in these agreements on the core pharmaceutical policy objectives were traced through an analysis of possible pathways. Results: An analytical framework is presented, linking ten types of provisions in the four trade agreements to potential impacts on four core pharmaceutical policy objectives (access and affordability; safety, efficacy, and quality; rational use of medicines; and local production capacity and health security) via various pathways. Conclusions: The analytical framework highlights provisions in trade and investment agreements that need to be examined, pathways that should be explored, and potential impacts that should be taken into consideration with respect to pharmaceutical policy. This may serve as a useful checklist or template for health and human rights impact assessments and research on the implications of trade agreements for pharmaceuticals.

Suggested Citation

  • Gleeson, Deborah & Lexchin, Joel & Labonté, Ronald & Townsend, Belinda & Gagnon, Marc-André & Kohler, Jillian & Forman, Lisa & Shadlen, Kenneth C., 2019. "Analyzing the impact of trade and investment agreements on pharmaceutical policy: provisions, pathways and potential impacts," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 103027, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:103027
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/103027/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sell,Susan K., 2003. "Private Power, Public Law," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521819145.
    2. Sell,Susan K., 2003. "Private Power, Public Law," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521525398.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kamonwan Kiewnin & Titaree Boontantrapiwat & Jeerapa Sosom & Mintar Hongtumrong & Anon Khunakorncharatphong & Churnrurtai Kanchanachitra & Cha-aim Pachanee, 2021. "International Trade and Health in Thailand: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Mohammed El Said, 2020. "Radical Approaches During Unusual Circumstances: Intellectual Property Regulation and the COVID-19 Dilemma," Development, Palgrave Macmillan;Society for International Deveopment, vol. 63(2), pages 209-218, December.
    3. Barlow, Pepita & Sanap, Rujuta & Garde, Amandine & Winters, L. Alan & Mabhala, Mzwandile A. & Thow, Anne Marie, 2022. "Reassessing the health impacts of trade and investment agreements: a systematic review of quantitative studies, 2016–20," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113791, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bayer, Patrick & Marcoux, Christopher & Urpelainen, Johannes, 2013. "Leveraging private capital for climate mitigation: Evidence from the Clean Development Mechanism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 14-24.
    2. Anne Roemer-Mahler, 2013. "Business conflict and global politics: The pharmaceutical industry and the global protection of intellectual property rights," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 121-152, February.
    3. Emilie Cloatre & Robert Dingwall, 2013. "“Embedded regulation:” The migration of objects, scripts, and governance," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(3), pages 365-386, September.
    4. Suma Athreye & Lucia Piscitello & Kenneth C. Shadlen, 2020. "Twenty-five years since TRIPS: Patent policy and international business," Journal of International Business Policy, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(4), pages 315-328, December.
    5. Iain M. Cockburn & Jean O. Lanjouw & Mark Schankerman, 2016. "Patents and the Global Diffusion of New Drugs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(1), pages 136-164, January.
    6. Daniel Berliner & Aseem Prakash, 2012. "From norms to programs: The United Nations Global Compact and global governance," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(2), pages 149-166, June.
    7. Francesca Spigarelli & Hao Way, 2012. "The rising Chinese pharmaceutical industry: local champions vs global players," Working Papers 1206, c.MET-05 - Centro Interuniversitario di Economia Applicata alle Politiche per L'industria, lo Sviluppo locale e l'Internazionalizzazione.
    8. Madison Cartwright, 2021. "Business conflict and international law: The political economy of copyright in the United States," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 152-167, January.
    9. Suzuki, Mao, 2020. "Profits before patients? Analyzing donors’ economic motives for foreign aid in the health sector," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    10. Jean‐Frédéric Morin & Madison Cartwright, 2020. "The US and EU’s Intellectual Property Initiatives in Asia: Competition, Coordination or Replication?," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 11(5), pages 557-568, November.
    11. Tristan Auvray & Cédric Durand & Joel Rabinovich & Cecilia Rikap, 2021. "Corporate financialization’s conservation and transformation: from Mark I to Mark II," Review of Evolutionary Political Economy, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 431-457, December.
    12. Haunss, Sebastian, 2013. "Enforcement vs. access: wrestling with intellectual property on the internet," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 2(2), pages 1-9.
    13. Richard Pomfret & Keith Maskus, 2014. "The New Globalisation of Intellectual Property Rights: What's New This Time?," Australian Economic History Review, Economic History Society of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 54(3), pages 262-284, November.
    14. El-Bialy, Nora, 2010. "The role of institutions within the IPR enforcement: The case of de facto software protection in Egypt," Discussion Papers on Strategy and Innovation 10-02, Philipps-University Marburg, Department of Technology and Innovation Management (TIM).
    15. Leonhard Dobusch & Sigrid Quack, 2013. "Framing standards, mobilizing users: Copyright versus fair use in transnational regulation," Review of International Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 52-88, February.
    16. Park, June & Chung, Eunbin, 2021. "Learning from past pandemic governance: Early response and Public-Private Partnerships in testing of COVID-19 in South Korea," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    17. Blandine Laperche, 2008. "Stratégies d’innovation des firmes des sciences de la vie et appropriation des ressources végétales : processus et enjeux Innovations strategies of firms in life science and appropriation of vegetal r," Working Papers 189, Laboratoire de Recherche sur l'Industrie et l'Innovation. ULCO / Research Unit on Industry and Innovation.
    18. Amandine Bled, 2009. "Business to the rescue: private sector actors and global environmental regimes’ legitimacy," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 153-171, May.
    19. Jandhyala, Srividya, 2015. "International and domestic dynamics of intellectual property protection," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 284-293.
    20. Christopher May, 2006. "Escaping the TRIPs’ Trap: The Political Economy of Free and Open Source Software in Africa," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(1), pages 123-146, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    trade agreements; access to medicines; pharmaceutical policy; phamaceuticals; Trans-Pacific Partnership; Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement on Trnas-Pacific Partnership; Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement; CPTPP; TPP-11; United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement; TRIPS;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L81 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Retail and Wholesale Trade; e-Commerce
    • R14 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Land Use Patterns
    • J01 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - General - - - Labor Economics: General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:103027. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.