Author
Abstract
The ‘TRIPS waiver’ proposal, first submitted by India and South Africa to the WTO TRIPS Council in October 2020, has resulted in diametrically split positions amongst WTO members. But the EU has chosen a middle way. Its three-fold response seeks to provide answers to the concerns raised by the proposal that developing countries may face ‘institutional and legal difficulties’ when using the policy flexibilities provided by the TRIPS Agreement. Thus, the EU wishes to clarify and simplify the authorisation procedure of compulsory licensing, a policy flexibility that could provide affordable generic versions of patented pharmaceutical products. However, an onerous procedure is a long-heard complaint against compulsory licencing. Consequently, the EU’s response is more focused on improving the administrative procedure of compulsory licensing rather than on responding directly to the Covid-19 pandemic. Thus, the effect of the EU’s response to the proposed waiver agreement on the wider battle against the pandemic will be limited, not least because since the beginning of the outbreak, the international community had already rallied itself to combat Covid-19. A recent case in point is that, in February 2022, six African countries received the technology needed to produce mRNA vaccines on the continent. After all, there is no proof that the TRIPS Agreement has undermined efforts in technology transfer, pharmaceutical manufacturing, etc. as the ‘TRIPS waiver’ proposal suggests. Overall, this CEPS Policy Insights paper finds that the EU’s proposed solutions have shifted the focus from Covid-19 vaccines supply to the compulsory licensing procedure. Thus, the merit of the ‘TRIPS waiver’ proposal is no longer about taking moral decisions but rather it’s about technical aspects. The real impact of the EU’s response will most likely benefit future users of compulsory licensing, especially when the next pandemic strikes, whenever that may be.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eps:cepswp:35667. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Margarita Minkova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepssbe.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.