EXIM Matters: Funding technology transfer for vax better than IPR waiver

Experts say merely waiving IPR will not raise vaccine supply unless pharma companies transfer the technology and trade secrets that will enable others to produce the vaccines

Last Wednesday, the Biden administration signalled its intention to support the proposal of India and South Africa at the World Trade Organization (WTO) to waive intellectual property rights (IPR) of the pharmaceutical companies that have developed Covid-19 vaccines. It is, however, far from certain that many manufacturers will make the vaccines without collaborating with the patent holders. 
 
The idea of IPR protection is to let innovators, who invest massive sums of money to develop or invent new products, recover their investments. Not allowing them to do so will discourage such investments and we may eventually lose out on new inventions. So, WTO members signed up the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement in 1995 to protect IPR of innovators. In 2001, the WTO unanimously adopted a resolution to waive IPR in case of public health emergencies.

 
The present effort is to get the consent of all WTO members to waive IPR of Covid-19 vaccine developers. That may be difficult even if one WTO member opposes the proposal. Germany has said it is not in favour of IPR waiver although the European Union said it was willing to discuss it.
 

The idea of IPR waiver is to let anyone manufacture the patented vaccines and sell them to people all over the world and help contain the ill-effects of the virus.  The move has been welcomed by the WTO and the WHO (World Health Organization). As expected, pharmaceutical companies have said the move would stifle innovation.

 
Experts say merely waiving IPR will not necessarily increase vaccine supply unless pharmaceutical companies transfer the technology and trade secrets that will enable others to manufacture the vaccines. It is not easy to reverse engineer the product.
 
Manufacturing a Covid-19 vaccine is a complex, scientific process that involves securing hard-to-find raw materials and scaling them in a way that has never been done before. Factories must be built or retrofitted with special, expensive equipment, and employees must have the manufacturing know-how. Manufacturers also have to contend with the possibility that their investments may lie idle if the demand for vaccines goes down. Also, new variants may reduce the efficacy of the vaccines they produce.

 
A leading vaccine developer and manufacturer, Moderna, has said it will not enforce its IPR but still no firm has started manufacturing clones of its vaccines. Under the 2001 resolution at the WTO, each country can determine whether a public health emergency exists and waive IPR protection. No country has exercised the option, despite vaccine shortages.
 
So, a better option is for the major developed and developing countries to get together and fund the voluntary licensing and technology transfer by innovators. This way the full involvement of the innovators will be assured and increased production of vaccines can go towards meeting the demand, even for vaccines that may be developed in future to deal with new mutants. Merely ridding innovators of their IPR and allowing others to make clones may not help.

 
Email : tncrajagopalan@gmail.com