Skip Navigation

Journal of International Economic Law 2004 7(2):459-482; doi:10.1093/jiel/7.2.459
© 2004 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shaffer, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

RECOGNIZING PUBLIC GOODS IN WTO DISPUTE SETTLEMENT: WHO PARTICIPATES? WHO DECIDES?

THE CASE OF TRIPS AND PHARMACEUTICAL PATENT PROTECTION

Gregory Shaffer1

1 University of Pennsylvania

The question of how to produce ‘global public goods’ in a world of sovereign states with divergent norms and preferences, reflecting differences in economic development levels, is increasingly on the international policy agenda. This question raises issues not only for political decision-making but also for judicial interpretation of existing international agreements. This article analyzes this fundamental question in the context of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) of the World Trade Organization (WTO), with particular emphasis on patent protection for pharmaceutical products. The TRIPS Agreement’s provisions raise concerns over at least three public (or quasi-public) goods in this area: the generation of new knowledge, the provision of public health, and the maintenance of rules fostering open trade and competition. WTO judicial panels charged with resolving disputes regarding patents on medicines must determine whether to defer to national sovereignty, multilateral negotiations, or their own interpretations in balancing among these objectives. Thus, questions of ‘who participates’ and ‘who decides’ will be critical in this determination. The article notes structural weaknesses in the ability of developing countries to participate meaningfully in the WTO judicial process and offers suggestions for making their participation more meaningful so as to protect their interests.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.