Search results

Several countries, such as South Africa and India, believe that intellectual property rights (IPRs), including patents, impede the efficient increase in vaccine production to inoculate the global population as they scramble to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic. Their proposal at the World Trade Organization (WTO) to waive these pharmaceutical patents has been met with resistance from a few developed countries, who believe that the abrogation of IPRs is unnecessary, even during a pandemic. The purpose of this paper is to discuss the impact of a potential waiver of medical patents at the WTO versus the status quo of IPR laws in the global economy.

This study examines key arguments from economic and moral standpoints regarding the provisions of the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement and other related international agreements and their validity based on the premise of the internalisation of positive externalities posed by vaccines.

The effectiveness of the TRIPS agreement in securing medical access is weak on account of the ability of profit-making multinationals to secure IP rights and on account of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a multilateral agreement that supports patent evergreening and a period of protection on test data which challenges the access to medicines and the fundamental human right to health.

This study examines international IPRs through the lens of human rights and proposes a new system that balances the two.

A “state-driven” approach suggests that colonists use census categories to rule. However, a “society-driven” approach suggests that this state-driven perspective confers too much power upon states. A third approach views census-taking and official categorization as a product of state–society interaction that depends upon: (a) the population's lay categories, (b) information intellectuals' ability to take up and transform these lay categories, and (c) the balance of power between social and state actors. We evaluate the above positions by analyzing official records, key texts, travelogues, and statistical memoirs from three key periods in India: Indus Valley civilization through classical Gupta rule (ca. 3300 BCE–700 CE), the “medieval” period (ca. 700–1700 CE), and East India Company (EIC) rule (1757–1857 CE), using historical narrative. We show that information gathering early in the first period was society driven; however, over time, a strong interactive pattern emerged. Scribes (information intellectuals) increased their social status and power (thus, shifting the balance of power) by drawing on caste categories (lay categories) and incorporating them into official information gathering. This intensification of interactive information gathering allowed the Mughals, the EIC, and finally British direct rule officials to collect large quantities of information. Our evidence thus suggests that the intensification of state–society interactions over time laid the groundwork for the success of the direct rule British censuses. It also suggests that any transformative effect of these censuses lay in this interactive pattern, not in the strength of the British colonial state.