Advertisement

Nationalizing Efavirenz: Compulsory Licence, Collective Invention and Neo-Developmentalism in Brazil

  • Maurice CassierEmail author
  • Marilena Correa
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter examines the legal, technological and industrial trajectory of an antiretroviral drug, efavirenz, which has been distributed free of charge to HIV/Aids patients by the Brazilian Ministry of Health since the early 2000s. In May 2007 a presidential decree suspended the exclusive rights of the patent owner, Merck, to the exploitation of the molecule in Brazil, and authorized the production of a generic version by local laboratories. This compulsory license by the Brazilian state is also intended to perpetuate the policy of universal access to treatment, with a view to combatting the Aids epidemic and boosting the country’s pharmaceutical industry. Nationalization of efavirenz has given rise to experimentation with collective production in the form of an industrial consortium and inaugurated a policy of partnerships between public and private pharmaceutical laboratories.

Bibliography

  1. Allen, R. (1983). Collective invention. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 4, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arrow, K. (1962). The economic implications of learning by doing. The Review of Economic Studies, 29(3), 155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cassier, M. (1998). Le partage des connaissances dans les réseaux scientifiques: l’invention des règles de bonne conduite par les chercheurs. Revue Française de Sociologie, 4, 701–720.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cassier M., & Correa, M. (2003). Patents, innovation and public health: Brazilian public-sector Laboratories’ experience in copying AIDS drugs. In Economics of AIDS and access to HIV/AIDS care in developing countries: Issues and challenge (pp. 89–107). Paris: ANRS.Google Scholar
  5. Cassier, & Correa. (2008). Scaling up and reverse engineering: Acquisition of industrial knowledge by copying drugs in Brazil. In B. Coriat (Ed.), The political economy of HIV/AIDS in developing countries (pp. 130–149). Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, MA, USA.Google Scholar
  6. Chaves, G., Viera, M., & Reis, R. (2008). Access to medicines and intellectual property in Brazil: Reflections and strategies of civil society. Sur.Revista Internacional de Direitos Humanos, 5(8), 170–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. D’Almeida, C., Hasenclever, L., Krikorian, G., Orsi, F., Cassandra, S., & Coriat, B. (2008). New antiretroviral treatments and post-2005 TRIPS constraints: First moves towards IP flexibilization in developing countries. In B. Coriat (Ed.), The political economy of HIV/AIDS in developing countries (pp. 25–51), Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, MA, USA. Google Scholar
  8. Etkovitz, H., & Brisolla, S. N. (1999). Failure and success: The fate of industrial policy in Latin America and South East Asia. Research Policy, 28, 337–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Flynn, M. (2007, August 1–4). Brazil’s use of compulsory licenses for AIDS medicines, Paper presented on the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Boston, USA, 1–20.Google Scholar
  10. Furtado, C. (1981). Commentaires. In E. Arghiri (Ed.), Technologie appropriée ou technologie sous-développée (pp. 127–134). Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  11. Furtado, C. (2000). Options for the future. CEPAL Review, 70, 7–11.Google Scholar
  12. Hoirisch, C. (2010, March). Licença compulsória para medicamentos como política pública: O caso do anti-retroviral efavirenz. Master thesis, Fundaçao Getulio Vargas, 184 pages.Google Scholar
  13. Nunn, A. S., Fonseca, E. M., Bastos, F. I., Gruskin, S., & Salomon, J. A. (2007). Evolution of antiretroviral drug costs in Brazil in the context of free and universal access to Aids treatment. Plos Medicine, 4(11), 1804–1817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pinheiro, E. D. S., Antunes, O. A. C., & Fortunak Joseph, M. D. (2008). A survey of the syntheses of active pharmaceutical ingredients for antiretroviral drug combinations critical to access in emerging nations. Antiviral Research, 79(3), 143–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Possas, C. (2008). Compulsory licensing in the real world: The case of ARV drugs in Brazil. In B. Coriat (Ed.), The political economy of HIV/AIDS in developing countries (pp. 150–166). London: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  16. Rosenberg, S. (2014). Asserting the primacy of health over patent rights: A comparative study of the processes that led to the use of compulsory licensing in Thailand and Brazil. Developing World Bioethics, 14(2), 83–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Von Hippel, E. (1987). Cooperation between rivals: Informal know how trading. Research Policy, 16, 291–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CNRSVillejuifFrance
  2. 2.Social Medicine InstituteRio de Janeiro State UniversityRio de JaneiroBrazil

Personalised recommendations