Economies covered

  • 2009-2010 Edition dr_dot2009-2010
  • 2007-2008 Edition dr_dot2007-2008
  • 2005-2006 Edition dr_dot2005-2006
  • 2003-2004 Edition dr_dot2003-2004

Click the dot to read the chapters. 

.af Afghanistan dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.au Australia dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.bd Bangladesh dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.bn Brunei Darussalam dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.bt Bhutan dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.cn China dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.hk Hong Kong dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.id Indonesia dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.in India dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.ir Iran dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006
.jp Japan dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.kh Cambodia dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.kp North Korea dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008

.kr South Korea
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.la Lao PDR
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.lk Sri Lanka
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.mm Myanmar
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.mn Mongolia
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.mo Macau
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.mv Maldives
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006
.my Malaysia
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.np Nepal
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.nz New Zealand
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.ph Philippines
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.pk Pakistan
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.sg Singapore
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.th Thaïland
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.tl / .tp Timor-Leste
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.tw Taiwan
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
.vn Vietnam
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006 dr_dot2003-2004
SAARC dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008
ASEAN
dr_dot2009-2010 dr_dot2007-2008 dr_dot2005-2006
APEC dr_dot2009-2010
dr_dot2005-2006

Key policy issues in intellectual property and technology in Asia Pacific

Article Index
Key policy issues in intellectual property and technology in Asia Pacific
Copyright and its impact on access to knowledge and technology
Flexibilities under TRIPS
Non-proprietary models
Strong vs. weak IPR
Bilateral agreements and TRIPS-plus standards
Multilateralism as the way ahead for developing countries
Conclusion
Notes

Strong vs. weak IPR

Demands for more stringent enforcement of IPR are coming in from all quarters, particularly the US content industries, as piracy has increasingly come to be associated with Asia Pacific economies. However, while TRIPS signatories must provide adequate enforcement of IP, it should be acknowledged that many Asia Pacific countries that have reached an admirable stage of economic and technological development have done so even with relatively weak levels of IP enforcement and through a judicious use of imitation. For example, Taiwan and Korea, which experienced massive transformations from the 1960s to the 1980s, used imitation and reverse engineering to overcome the technological divide and create a strong national capacity in ICTs. Similarly, the Indian pharmaceutical industries benefited for many years from the absence of a pharmaceutical product patent and India is at present one the most significant exporters of generic low costs drugs to many parts of the world.

In 1947, 80–90 per cent of the pharmaceutical patents in India were held by multinational companies and more than 90 per cent of these drugs were not even being produced in India. India changed its patent laws to allow only for 'process patents' and not patents for the end product itself. This essentially meant that an Indian pharmaceutical company could make an existing drug through the process of reverse engineering. During this period, Indian pharmaceutical companies were able to reproduce existing drugs rapidly and at a low cost, thereby making them competitive in both foreign and domestic markets. By 1991, Indian firms accounted for 70 per cent of the bulk drugs and 80 per cent of formulations produced in the country. In 1996, six of the top 10 firms by pharmaceutical sales were Indian firms rather than the subsidiaries of foreign multinationals. Domestic firms (Indian-owned firms based in India) produce about 350 of the 500 bulk drugs consumed in the country. There are over 250 large pharmaceutical firms and about 9,000 registered small-scale units while the Indian Drug Manufacturers' Association (IDMA) estimates about 7,000 unregistered small-scale units producing drugs. The generic drug industry has been vital in ensuring that drugs are available at an affordable price.

Thus a 'weak' IP regime may actually promote local industries and help develop self-reliance in the field of technology (Thomas 2006). As the Copy South Group argues, lower levels of copyright enforcement enable greater circulation of knowledge, culture and technology throughout the developing world, while 'stronger protection and enforcement of copyright rules may well reduce access to knowledge required by developing [countries] to support education and research, and access to copyrighted products such as software'. This in turn could have potentially negative consequences on their ability to develop their human resources and technological capacity.

Policymakers must rise to the challenge of striking a balance between copyright and the need to facilitate affordable technological transfer to enable the emergence of a sustainable indigenous technological sector. To do otherwise would mean perpetual dependence on imported technology and know-how.



 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh