Introduction: Access to essential medicines: public health and international law

Pogge, Thomas; Rimmer, Matthew; Rubenstein, Kim

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511750786.003

Cited by 12 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several alternative proposals for rewarding intellectual labor in an era of globalization have been put forth. These include the creation of streamlined compulsory licensing and parallel importing mechanisms, 88 tierbased IPRs, 89 advanced market commitments, 90 prize funds, 91 health impact funds, 92 patent pools, 93 generic open licenses, 94 and south-south regional partnerships in discovery-based industries. 95 The unique ethical challenges posed by IPRs in an era of globalization suggest that one or more of these proposals may provide a more ethically justifiable alternative.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ethics of Intellectual Property Rights in an Era of Globalization

Shah¹,

Warsh²,

Kesselheim³

2013

J. Law. Med. Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the 1980s, developed countries, led by the United States and the countries of the European Union, have sought to incorporate intellectual property rights provisions into global trade agreements. These countries successfully negotiated the World Trade Organization's 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which required developing countries to adopt intellectual property provisions comparable to developed countries. In this manuscript, we review the policy controversy surrounding TRIPS and examine the two main ethical arguments articulated in its support--a theory of natural rights and a utilitarian argument. We contend that these theories provide insufficient bases for an intellectual property rights regime that compromises access to essential medicines in the developing world. While the policy community has engaged in active debate around the policy effects of TRIPS, scholars have not thoroughly considered the full ethical underpinnings of those policy arguments. We believe that a more robust understanding of the ethical implications of the agreement should inform policy discussions in the future.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Ethics of Intellectual Property Rights in an Era of Globalization

Shah¹,

Warsh²,

Kesselheim³

2013

J. Law. Med. Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This price control, therefore, raises issues about its effect in limiting access to affordable drugs required by people in developing countries to fight diseases and infections (Noehrenberg, , pp. 170–175; Pogge, , p. 79). This is more so where one patent holder holds a patent right to an essential life‐saving drug with no therapeutic substitute, leaving consumers without a choice.…”

Section: Part Ii: Patents the Trips Agreement And Access To Essentimentioning

confidence: 99%

A re‐evaluation of the framework for the protection of patents, women’s health in Nigeria and the issue of accessing pharmaceutical innovation in Africa: Designing strategies for medicines

Mike

2019

World Intellectual Property

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study is to make a case for Nigerian women to have access essential medicines in light of patent protection of pharmaceuticals. Consequently, this study argues for an improvement of women's access to medicines within the context of patent law and rights, the available flexibilities in the international IP regime of the Trade Related Aspect of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement and Nigeria's national patent system. Towards this goal, the article makes the point that patent law and its exclusive rights, both the TRIPS Agreement and national law of Nigeria, do not exist in a social welfare vacuum. The legal text of patent law, which confers rights on inventors when enforced, translates to many other things outside the sphere of property rights; indeed, it can be a matter of life and death. It is argued in this regard that patent right could, in effect, interfere with access to medicines and therefore, the right to health and prospects for human development. This study adopts a doctrinal methodology to examine, analyse, and evaluate the issues that have arisen in the context of patent protection of pharmaceuticals and its effect on access medicines. It concludes that while the hindrances to accessibility of essential drugs in Nigeria are multifaceted and demand a multidimensional approach for a lasting solution, the TRIPS flexibilities are significant means for addressing the challenges of affordable access to important health treatments within the context of patent law. However, it is emphasised that utilising the flexibilities will require that Nigeria's patent system is strategically designed to take full advantage of the available exceptions, safeguards, and options.

show abstract

“…An alternative would be to offer innovators a fixed amount of money per QALY. This would remove uncertainty for innovators but impose uncertainty on member states regarding the annual cost of the HIF (Pogge, 2010). Unlike the mandatory prize fund proposed by Love and Hubbard, the voluntary HIF would be targeted at medicines for neglected infectious diseases in particular, while innovations with very high market value would still be distributed under the patent system (Hollis and Pogge, 2008).…”

Section: Are Pull Programmes Suitable For Promoting Research Into Negmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because of the lack of a public health infrastructure in poor countries, patients often receive unsuitable products or suitable products that are not used in the right way (Mrazek and Mossialos, 2003). This ‘last-mile problem’ would be mitigated in a prize system in which companies would have an incentive to ensure that products are used properly by cooperating with governments and non-governmental organisations (Pogge, 2010). …”

Section: Are Pull Programmes Suitable For Promoting Research Into Negmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neglected infectious diseases: Are push and pull incentive mechanisms suitable for promoting drug development research?

Mueller‐Langer

2013

HEPL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Infectious diseases are among the main causes of death and disability in developing countries, and they are a major reason for the health disparity between rich and poor countries. One of the reasons for this public health tragedy is a lack of lifesaving essential medicines, which either do not exist or badly need improvements. In this article, we analyse which of the push and pull mechanisms proposed in the recent literature may serve to promote research into neglected infectious diseases. A combination of push programmes that subsidise research inputs through direct funding and pull programmes that reward research output rather than research input may be the appropriate strategy to stimulate research into neglected diseases. On the one hand, early-stage (basic) research should be supported through push mechanisms, such as research grants or publicly financed research institutions. On the other hand, pull mechanisms, such as prize funds that link reward payments to the health impacts of effective medicines, have the potential to stimulate research into neglected diseases.

show abstract

Introduction: Access to essential medicines: public health and international law

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

The Ethics of Intellectual Property Rights in an Era of Globalization

The Ethics of Intellectual Property Rights in an Era of Globalization

A re‐evaluation of the framework for the protection of patents, women’s health in Nigeria and the issue of accessing pharmaceutical innovation in Africa: Designing strategies for medicines

Neglected infectious diseases: Are push and pull incentive mechanisms suitable for promoting drug development research?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About