Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
U.S. trade representative (UStr) placed thailand on its Special 301 report watch
list citing 'a weakening of respect for patents' (Irvine 2007). at the same time,
countries themselves often trade away these capabilities in the trIPS agreement as
a precondition for accessing rich country markets, foreign aid, or investment. the
most prevalent form of this push for trIPS-plus intellectual property is in bilateral
and regional free trade agreements that extend patent periods beyond 20 years, limit
compulsory licensing, prohibit parallel imports, and generally make it more difficult
for generic drugs to enter the market on patent expiration (Forman 2006). More than
60 countries, many of which are developing countries, are now bound by these kinds
of trIPS-plus standards.
Yet until the early 2000s, enabling access to affordable medicines received little
or weak attention in international efforts to address global health challenges. this
is evident in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) devised in 2000, which
include three health-related goals to reduce child mortality, to improve maternal
health, and to combat HIv/aIDS, malaria, and other diseases. access to medicines
is not included as a primary goal but rather as a subsidiary target under Goal 8,
which aims to develop a global partnership for development. Its inclusion is as a
resolution to 'encourage the pharmaceutical industry to make essential drugs more
widely available and affordable by all who need them in developing countries'
(United nations General assembly 2000, para. 20). this approach is notable for its
failure to identify governmental capacities to reduce drug prices through measures
such as compulsory licensing and parallel importation. certainly encouragement of
the industry to reduce prices could encompass a broad range of actions, including
governmental threats of compulsory licensing. nonetheless, the soft approach of
this resolution and its failure to identify the responsibilities of governments and
international organisations explicitly regarding medicines access likely reflect the
prevailing international opinion at the time that compulsory licensing was a highly
contentious strategy of indeterminate legality and a corresponding unwillingness
to invoke the considerable opposition of the pharmaceutical industry and the U.S.
government.
the lack of global governance on this issue came to prominent attention with the
issue of AIDS medicines in developing countries. In 1996, the efficacy of art for
HIv/aIDS was revolutionised with the introduction of protease inhibitors, which, in
combination with existing drugs, dramatically reduce HIv levels in the blood. the
use of these therapies in europe and north america has greatly decreased aIDS-
related deaths and almost eliminated maternal transmission of the virus, transforming
HIv infection from a progressive life-threatening illness to a treatable and chronic
condition. Yet concurrent with these medical advances in the west, infection rates in
sub-Saharan african countries were exploding and millions of africans were dying
each year from untreated aIDS. at approximately US$15 000 a year per person,
drug prices presented the primary stumbling block to broader access in sub-Saharan
africa. Given these prices, the prevailing global consensus was that it was simply
not cost effective to fund aIDS treatment: even the wHo and UnaIDS argued that
funds should be allocated to HIv/aIDS prevention rather than treatment (wHo and
