The Impact of TRIPS on Developing Countries
Discuss about the National and Local Governments and Producers.
The contemporary business and legal world have been experiencing an emergence of various intellectual property rights. The World Trade Organization’s Trade related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights is one of the radical intellectual property rights (Hoekman and Mavroidis 2015). There are two different opinions about the implementation and effect of TRIPS on the business services. The General Agreement on Tariffs and had developed the TRIPS agreement in 1994. The agreement came into action on 1st of January of 1995 (McGovern 2016). The agreement was to ensure intellectual property rights’ minimum substantive standard. TRIPS objectives were to reduce the distortions in international trade and implement procedures that would ensure enforcement of intellectual property rights in order to make the trade effective. WTO members ensure that the various aspects of intellectual property rights like trademarks, integrated circuits, industrial designs, trademarks, and trade secrets are protected through TRIPS.
The supporters believe that the TRIPS will help to enhance foreign direct investments, trade and global innovation. However others do not share the same view by arguing that TRIPS will hinder the business development. The agreement has a controversial effect on the health sector. By following this property right the pharmaceuticals, patients and health sector will suffer in the developing countries. This property right demands patents from all pharmaceuticals as in developing countries the practice of using less expensive versions of medicines are taken by thousands of patients. Therefore in the developing countries TRIPS will face various challenges, like from failing the agreement to be enforced to ignoring the requirements to follow the agreement. Many researchers have examined its applicability in the developing countries, as they believe that if the law pressurize the developing countries to follow the same rule the countries will resist the agreement to get materialized and the objectives will entirely fail in those regions (Cimoli et al. 2014). The developing countries claim that the TRIPS agreement is biased and favors the developed countries (Yu 2015). On the one hand it determines benefit for the transnational corporations and ignores the concerns of the developing countries and it is potential to cause harm for them. Various costs have been imposed on the developing countries especially on agricultural inputs, foreign technologies and expensive drugs. Above that the rights fail to ensure any gain in the longer run in investment or trades. However the developed countries on the other hand argue that by the agreement there will be and increased opportunity for the developing countries to attract more investments. TRIPS will also ensure the concerns of creativity and innovation of local talents and businesses.
Challenges Faced by Developing Countries
The commission built by the UK government conducted a detailed research named “Integrating intellectual property rights and development policy” on the impact of intellectual property rights on the developing countries (Armstrong and Schonwetter 2016). It covered various aspects of the IPRs in the developing countries like agriculture, health, genetic resource, copyright, internet and patents. The result demonstrated that the present form of the intellectual property rights fail to meet the needs of the poor countries. It highlighted that TRIPS actually imposes high cost on most developing countries.
Oxfam, Third World Network or ‘Medecins Sans Frontieres’ works as interest groups working to protect the public rights (Scherer 2013). They have accused TRIPS of enhancing the public health and agricultural issues in the developing countries. These public groups and the government of most developing countries are working on establishing a strong demand for the agreement to be revised. The developing countries have been approaching the WTO for implementing few changes in the agreement.
For example Kenya has given a request proposal to the World Trade Organization that they TRIPS must exclude the patenting animals, plants and micro organisms from the agreement (Munyi 2015). The plant and animal patent is optional officially but followed by Japan, Europe and united States. Other Latin American Countries like Bolivia, Peru have suggested that WTO should revise the IPR regulations regarding protecting the traditional knowledge of their countries and must ensure their development priorities.
In developing countries a report by the World Bank demonstrated that the developed countries collected 20 billion dollars from the developing countries in technology importing (Shin, Lee and Park 2016). McCalman highlighted in his report that TRIPS is beneficial for a handful of developed countries like few European countries and United States of America (Shugurov 2015). Developing countries like Brazil, South Korea or India will suffer primarily because of their dependency on technology imports from developed countries. However the commission claims it benefit in the longer run, but McCalman concluded that the profit will only be shared by those specific developed nations.
Implementation of TRIPS in the developing countries has resulted in loss of the business profits. Taking the example of Thailand, it is related to the medicines. This reflects a compromise with the health needs of the patients. Viewing it from the other perspective, this business loss in the developing countries pushes them further below the economy (Durand and Fournier 2017). Moreover, this loss provides the developed countries with more competitive advantage, aggravating the intensity of competition between the brands in terms of the legal specifications. This loss, if equated with the illegal activities results in the exposure to illegal activities, which spoils the reputation of the brands, making the market position vulnerable.
Proposals for Change
If the example of India is taken, TRIPS relates to the preservation of the authenticity in the location of the intellectual properties. This preservation is of utmost importance in terms of securing the identity of the citizens. Violation in this direction reflects identity crisis for the humans, making their plight “stranded in the island”. Herein the basic rights, which the citizens possess attains a backseat, which questions their existence (Vita 2013). In such a situation, the criminals are awarded with various punishments, which puts their citizenship at stake. In view of these punishments, the aspect intellectual gets contradicted in terms of the matured behavior, which the law official needs to expose for creating an impression among the general public.
HIV AIDS is an infectious disease and a major concern for the general public. Herein the example of Tanzania is considered, which is nullified in terms of the generalization of the issue. Herein lays the immature attitude of the law officials in terms of issuing proper warnings regarding the undertaking of preventive measures (Esparza 2014). Herein, the implementation strategies get a question mark in terms of the safety and security of the general public. The implementation of the medicinal plant is an effective issue, however, lack of oriental approach towards the implementation nullifies it in terms of ensuring the wellbeing of the patients.
After the review of TRIPS in the countries like India, Thailand and Tanzania, the negative aspect is highlighted. This implies the lack of understanding needed by the law officials for the averting the instances of illegal activities and scandals. Moreover, these issues questions the roles and responsibilities iof the personnel in terms of ensuring the safety of the general public, which is a shameful act (Esparza 2014). Delving deep into the aspect, being a law personnel and failing to safeguard the rights of the person stains the reputation of the law parameter in the society. In response to this, it can be said that flexible steps are needed for enhancing the security of the public. The need of the hour is to sit in meetings with the agency partners in terms of making concrete security plans. As a sequential step, evaluation is needed in terms of assessing its effectiveness in terms of the identified and specified requirements. This assessment would help the personnel to make estimates regarding implementing firm strategies in terms of the security of the public domain (Esparza 2014).
Examples of TRIPS Impact on Developing Countries
One of the other recommendations is training for the employees, which would enhance their skills, expertise and knowledge about the effective means of maximizing the risk mitigation strategies. Strategic approach in this direction would enhance the awareness of the law officials in terms of risks and their mitigation. Within this, one of efficient steps would be to hire more security officers and give them posting in separate districts. Ensuring security in separate districts would help the higher authorities to monitor the security of the world (Esparza 2014). This monitoring is needed for reviewing the performance of the volunteers and appraising them. Violation in this regards would compel the personnel to indulge in scandalous instances. Countering this, creating concrete plans prior to the initiation of the tasks would help the personnel to systematize the activities. This systematizations omits the negativity of TRIPS and ensures the security aspect for the public. This omition acts as an escape for the people from the suffocative and claustrophobic existence, which questions their present mode of life. In other words, ensuring security for the people means providing freedom and adding meaning to their existence.
Reference
Armstrong, C. and Schonwetter, T., 2016. Conceptualising knowledge governance for development.
Cimoli, M., Dosi, G., Maskus, K.E., Okediji, R.L., Reichman, J.H. and Stiglitz, J.E., 2014. The role of intellectual property rights in developing countries: Some conclusions. Intellectual property rights: Legal and economic challenges for development, pp.503-513.
Di Vita, G., 2013. The TRIPs agreement and technological innovation. Journal of Policy Modeling, 35(6), pp.964-977.
Durand, C. and Fournier, S., 2017. Can Geographical Indications Modernize Indonesian and Vietnamese Agriculture? Analyzing the Role of National and Local Governments and Producers’ Strategies. World Development, 98, pp.93-104.
Esparza, J., 2014. Indian Patent Law: Working within the Trips Agreement Flexibilities to Provide Pharmaceutical Patent Protection While Protecting Public Health. J. Transnat’l L. & Pol’y, 24, p.205.
Hoekman, B.M. and Mavroidis, P.C., 2015. World Trade Organization (WTO): Law, Economics, and Politics. Routledge.
McGovern, E., 2016. International trade regulation (Vol. 2). Globefield Press.
Munyi, P., 2015. Plant variety protection regime in relation to relevant international obligations: Implications for smallholder farmers in Kenya. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 18(1-2), pp.65-85.
Scherer, F.M., 2013. Patents, Monopoly Power, and the Pricing of Pharmaceuticals in Low?Income Nations. The Handbook of Global Science, Technology, and Innovation, pp.443-457.
Shin, W., Lee, K. and Park, W.G., 2016. When an Importer’s Protection of IPR Interacts with an Exporter’s Level of Technology: Comparing the Impacts on the Exports of the North and South. The World Economy, 39(6), pp.772-802.
Shugurov, M.V., 2015. TRIPS Agreement, International Technology Transfer and Least Developed Countries.
Yu, P.K., 2015. TRIPS Wars: Developing Countries Strike Back.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
