PAGES

243 – 257

DOI

10.1080/0810902042000255705
©
Peter Drahos. Buddhima Lokuge. Tom Faunce. Martyn Goddard. David Henry.

Contact The Author


All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Issues

Also in this issue:

Pharmaceuticals, intellectual property and free trade: the case of the US–Australia free trade agreement

Peter Drahos. Buddhima Lokuge. Tom Faunce. Martyn Goddard. David Henry.

Australia did poorly in several key areas of the recently completed free trade agreement with the US. It failed to insulate the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) from significant change, and conceded to increased intellectual property standards. The PBS, as a system of effective bargaining with multinational pharmaceutical firms, has been deeply compromised and higher drug prices can be expected over time. The intellectual property chapter strengthens the position of patent owners and undermines the evolution of a competitive generics industry. These developments are part of a broader and internationally coordinated strategy being pursued by pharmaceutical multinationals to globalize and strengthen patent rights and monopoly profits.

Your browser does not support PDFs. Download the PDF.

Download PDF