Endnotes.

Author:Kogan, Lawrence A.
Position:Part 1 - Bibliography
 
FREE EXCERPT

(1) See, e.g., William New, "UN Researcher Envisions Framework for IP, Innovation and Development", Intellectual Property Watch (9/6/06), at: (intp://www.ipwatch.org/weblog/index.php?p=392&res=1280&print=0). This article proudly reports about a new survey conducted by "Padmashree Gehl Sampath, a researcher at the United Nations University--MERIT in the Netherlands. Basing her findings largely on the controversial April 2006 report issued by the World Health Organization Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and Health (CIPIH), discussed later in this article, this researcher concludes that intellectual property is not essential for innovation. "While intellectual property policy is a key element of innovation policy, 'the focus has been selective, and has placed too much emphasis on one or the other '... The link between intellectual property and innovation is 'very nuanced', she said ... and depends on a variety of factors. Gehl Sampath has been collecting surveys in the developing world, including an extensive one of the pharmaceutical industry in India. There, most of the firms are small to medium-sized, but a few have gained international stature. The big firms have begun to pursue intellectual property fights as they move from unregulated to regulated markets through exports, she said. But at [a September 4] event sponsored by the South Centre, Gehl Sampath said intellectual property rights contributed little to the rise off the Indian pharmaceutical industry, though that might be changing with India's accession to the World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). 'I think the Indian pharmaceutical industry would have proceeded more or less in the same direction without intellectual property protection', she said. But an emphasis on innovation is necessary for firms to move from the status quo, she added. Innovation, the process of acquiring technological knowledge and building on it, requires a variety of market and non-market institutions. It is not science or technology or invention, but rather the application of knowledge, she said. Gehl Sampath said that in general, '1 do not think IP is very important for development'. Intellectual property is only of use to nations once they reach a particular state of development, she said, as history has shown ... Gehl Sampath also said that while patents can create markets for technology, there is little evidence that developing country researchers are on equal footing to those in developed countries. '11" regimes and liberal trade will help to tackle underdevelopment only when the market for information (as facilitated by IPRs) are balanced with other non-market incentives for innovation. For instance, R&D subsidies, tax exemptions, promotions for scientists', she said...Gel Sampath said a difference between intellectual property and innovation is that 1P is dominated by the market failure argument, and that the key source of technological advance, research and development, suffers from the 'twin failures of uncertainty and low appropriability'. This means that policy intervention is necessary to correct low investments into socially useful information, she said" (emphasis added). Ibid. See also Padmashree Gehl Sampath, "India's Product Patent Protection Regime: Less or More of 'Pills For the Poor'?" UNU-MERIT Working Paper Series #2006-019, United Nations University (2006) at: (htm://www.merit.unu.edu/Dublications/wppdf/2006/wp2006-019.pdf); Padmashree Gehl Sampath, "Indian Pharma Within Global Reach?" UNU-MERIT Working Paper Series #2006-031, United Nations University (2006) at: (http://www.merit.unu.edu/publications/wppdf/2006/wp2006-031.pdf).

(2) "The U.S. is the world's largest humanitarian aid donor, providing $3.3 billion in 2003. It also is the world's largest source of bilateral and multilateral support to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other infectious diseases, including $2.4 billion in international HIV/AIDS programs ... Yet the U.S. is often criticized for not providing enough resources for development. The basis for this criticism is the theory that if orgy aid flows increased, developing countries would achieve economic growth and development. Economic analysis and the historical record do not support this reasoning. The United States and other donor nations have spent over $Z3 trillion on bilateral and multilateral development assistance (in 2003 dollars) since 1960 to help poor countries attain economic growth and prosperity--about a fourth of it in sub-Saharan Africa. Few recipients have achieved substantial improvements in per capita income, and in no case has a development success story been clearly attributable to economic assistance. The evidence provided by numerous studies indicates that this failure is due not to insufficient funds, but to the poor policies of recipient countries ... [A]bout half the countries in sub-Saharan Africa experienced negative growth in real per capita incomes despite hundreds of billions of dollars in aid invested over the past two decades. Instead of desperately needed economic growth, sub-Saharan African as a region saw a decline in per capita GDP from $575 in 1980 to $536 in 2004 (in 2000 dollars) ... [W]ithout high, sustained levels of economic growth, sub-Saharan Africa will not close the gap with the developed countries. The poor growth record undermines improvements in human development as well. World Bank estimates indicate that sub-Saharan Africa will require annual growth of 7 percent to halve severe poverty--he of the United Nations' indicators for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)--by 2015 ... With the support of donors and private-sector innovations in medicine, science, and agriculture, sub-Saharan Africa has experienced improvements in literacy, school enrollment, infant mortality, and life expectancy (although it has decreased since its 1990 high of 50 years to 46 years due to AIDS and the higher incidence of other diseases such as malaria). However, in most cases, these improvements have fallen short of advances elsewhere in the developing world because poor economic growth erodes the resources governments and individuals have to invest in improving these indicators. While foreign assistance may be able to finance short-term improvements, these achievements are transitory without economic growth to sustain and improve upon them ... the record discussed above clearly shows that large disbursements of development assistance did not lead to the economic growth in sub-Saharan Africa that many aid advocates envisioned. However, achieving high per capita economic growth is possible even in low-income countries. This fact is illustrated by successful development by countries in East Asia. Per capita GDP in East Asia and the Pacific was lower than in sub-Saharan Africa in 1960 but has since far eclipsed sub-Saharan Africa. How did this happen? Economic studies indicate that sound economic policies, the rule of law, and good governance are the key. Over the past decade, economic studies have concluded that economic freedom, good governance, and the rule of law are key drivers in promoting economic growth and reducing poverty. A 1997 World Bank analysis of foreign aid found that, while assistance positively affects growth in countries with good economic policies (free markets, fiscal discipline, and the rule of law), countries with poor economic policies did not experience sustained economic growth regardless of the amount of foreign assistance received ... Why would economic freedom, globalization, and the rule of law contribute to economic growth? Rigid labor policies, high regulation and bureaucratic red tape, high official taxation, corruption, and trade barriers are obstacles that create a drag on economic growth. The greater the level of government intervention in the economy, the lower the probability that individuals, investors, and businesses will be able to prosper because costs on private economic activity become higher. This leads talented people to leave the country for more advantageous opportunities or to engage in activities that do not contribute to GDP (such as government service) and enrich themselves through rent seeking and corruption. The practical result is that countries with anti-market economic policies and bad governance are more likely to be poor, to be isolated from the international economy, and to find it more difficult to escape that poverty.[The Heritage Foundation has been analyzing the effect of economic freedom on development for many years ... The central product of this research is the index of Economic Freedom, co-published annually by The Heritage Foundation and The Wall Street Journal. The Index analyzes 50 economic indicators in 10 independent factors: trade policy, fiscal burden of government, government intervention in the economy, monetary policy, capital flows and foreign investment, banking and finance, wages and prices, property rights, regulation, and informal market activity. Those 10 factors are graded from 1 to 5, with 1 being the best score and 5 being the worst score. Those scores are then averaged to give an overall score for economic freedom. Countries are designated "free," "mostly free," "mostly unfree," and "repressed" based on these overall scores" (emphasis added). See Brett D. Schaefer, "How Economic Freedom Is Central to Development in Sub-Saharan Africa", Heritage Lecture #922 Heritage Foundation, (2/3/06), at: (htm://www.heritage.org/Research/TradeandForeignAid/h1922.cfm).

(3) "Even though President George W. Bush has pledged to double aid to Africa by 2010 and the Group of Eight industrialized nations agreed to cancel the debt of 18 of the poorest countries in the world, these noble financial commitments are woefully insufficient ... A recent World Bank study has found that micro-enterprise investment for entrepreneurial activities is much more...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP