The TRIPS agreement has been argued to have contributed substantially to the international diffusion of knowledge and technology. Others have argued that it is a way to benefit the developed countries at the expense of lesser developed countries by ring-fencing important technologies.
Look at the summary of the TRIPS agreement in reading (1). Then look at the two readings, (2) and (3). Now, look back at the Cohen and Levinthal (1989) theory and the “inverted U” theory of the relation of competition and innovation put forward by Aghion et al (2005).
Taking this theory into account and thinking about the TRIPS agreement, do you agree that TRIPS has been a positive force for global innovation? Is the same true for both developed and developing countries?
To answer, you may divide up into groups, arguing different positions and presenting the TRIPS agreement in some detail. You should also read more widely than these starter references: see if you can find other contrasting views!
Starter references are below, alongside the readings assigned for the module:
Type of service-Academic paper writing
Type of assignment-Essay
Pages / words-10 / 2750
Number of sources-5
Language style-UK English