 Which Way Ahead?Prabodh Malhotra Chapter 10 in Impact of TRIPS in India, 2010, pp 201-213 from Palgrave Macmillan Abstract: Abstract The primary aim of this chapter is to consider alternatives to improve access to medicines in poor countries. This chapter seeks to add to the current debate on TRIPS and its appropriateness for the pharmaceutical industry. On the one hand, leading economists suggest significant changes to the TRIPS agreement labelled as too stringent and denying access to medicines in developing countries. Equally, there are calls from the big pharma1 not to dismantle or weaken the TRIPS patent regime in any way. Because doing so would be counter-productive, argues the industry. Considering the dichotomy of the views, the level of controversy TRIPS has raised is not surprising. The wide coverage in the literature is a testimony to the significance of the controversy. Of all the intellectual property within TRIPS, the issue of pharmaceutical product patents has been the most controversial one (Alsegârd 2004). However, the TRIPS agreement is a set of rules on which all WTO members agreed. It may not suit the circumstances and interests of every member state; nevertheless, it is an agreed set of rules. Keywords: Poor Country; Differential Price; Monopoly Price; Trip Agreement; Orphan Disease (search for similar items in EconPapers) There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:palchp:978-0-230-29074-7_10 Ordering information: This item can be ordered from Access Statistics for this chapter More chapters in Palgrave Macmillan Books from Palgrave Macmillan |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.