Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Latin American Consortium on Biotechnology IP E. Richard Gold Director, Centre for Intellectual Property Policy Outline • • • • Origin Problematic Areas of activity Future Origin • Formed in 2005 at Montreal IPMG workshop with policy-makers from the Americas • Initial participation from Argentina, Brazil, Cuba and Peru with Venezuela joining later • Will hold 2nd meeting after this workshop Problematic • Latin America and the Caribbean enjoy several advantages – Biodiversity – Possess strong research centres – Peaceful and friendly relations between countries – Share common approaches to biosafety, biodiversity and IP Problematic • The region lacks, however, important inputs – Lack skills and capacity in managing IP – Financial resources necessary to develop innovation and seek and maintain IP protection internationally Problematic • IP both over and under-protected – Under protected in that opportunities to develop local industry and solve local problems are missed – Over-protected in that cooperate less than even countries with longer history of strong IP protection Areas of activity • Initial members of consortium felt that priority for regional cooperation should be on biotechnological innovation rather than issues of traditional knowledge • Focus on non-legislative, informal cooperation Areas of activity • Two central missions to consortium – Capacity-building in IP and IP management in the region – Creation of model agreements to facilitate inter-institutional and regional research cooperation • Prepared Agreement between the various institutional partners and seeking more Future • Identify governmental science and technology policy institutions to join • Identify regional academic researchers and partners • Complete audit of existing capacity building initiatives in the region and identify opportunities for regional courses Future • Complete audit of national IP laws • Prepare model agreements that take into account the differences within the region to facilitate research • Obtain funding to undertake work • Identify manager to move project forward Need for PDV vaccine • 1992: WHO sets goal to integrate Hep B vaccination in all vaccine programs by 1997 • By 2001, 126 countries (~66%) have Hep B vaccine programs • The main reason is cost ($1.50-$2.70) • Demand ~500 M doses / yr WHO 2002. WHO Vaccine Preventable Diseases Monitoring System: 2002 Global Summary. Document No. WHO/V&B02.20 Vaccine Funding Gap http://www.vaccinealliance.org/site_repository/resources/fundinggap_0204.pdf Chronic Hepatitis B INDIA • ~1 B people • 20 – 70,000,000 chronically infected • Biotechnology capacity • Appropriate regulations http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/hepatitis/slideset/hep_b/slide_9.htm Arizona BioDesign & ProVacs http://www.azbio.org/centers/vaccines.html • • • • • 1990 Strep mutans sAG produced in tobacco 1992 Hep B subunit sAG in tobacco via A.t. 1995-2000 oral immunogenicity demonstrated for PDVs 1999 Phase 1 clinical trials 2004 Phase 2 clinical trials Charles Arntzen Question What strategy for deploying this technology ought be adopted to ensure that PDVs can be used in India in a manner which is sustainable from a business standpoint, mindful of intellectual property issues, compliant with existing regulations, while ensuring the highest level of access to Indian citizens? Production Regulation Regulatory Categories Production Considerations Intellectual Property Seeds and Genetic Materials Cultivation Manufacturing Product Approval IPMG Platform APS 1 Production Rate_Production Rate_Sales Sales Production Rate_Production Rate_Sales Rate_Investment RD_Invesmtent Rate_Expenditures Influence diagram APS 2 Case studies Sales Rate_Investment GDP RD_Invesmtent Rate_Expenditures Rate_GDP GDP Rate_GDP Data collection RD_Invesmtent Rate_Investment Rate_Expenditures Domain map Sales Production Rate_Production Rate_Sales Rate_Project Rate_Scientific_To_Technical Scientific_Knowledge Technical_Knowledge GDP Rate_GDP APS 3 Rate_Products_Or_Processes Production Rate_Production Rate_Sales Delay_Expiration Sales Rate_Investment Delay_Innovation Innovations RD_Invesmtent Rate_Expenditures Licenses Rate_Licenses Patents Delay_Patents_Pool Rate_Patents Rate_Expiration Delay_Protection Data collection Simulation model Patents_Pool Rate_Patents_Pool GDP Rate_GDP Value of IP, exclusioanry value Stability of political infra Quality of risk analysis, media activity Exclusionary value Scope reg diversity Risk management IP box Patent eligible invention Scientific infra, innovation Integrity of living things Stability of political infrastructure Distributive justice Sovereignty International human rights St abilit y of politi c al i nfr ast r uct ur e Sal es, r ev enues, wealt h di st ri buti on, wealt h Revenues, public opinion awarness Patent value, exclusionary value, value IP Sales, revenue, public op awareness Innovation Exclusionary value, award of patent Innovation, technology transfer org management Nont ariff barri er t ot r ade Educ ati on/t r ai ni ng/ degr ee Media activiy Multil at er al tr adeI P agr ee ment s St abili t y of politi cal i nfr astr uct ur e Licensing, formal diff of knowledge, education/training/degree Wealt h Innovation, technology transfer org, early $, basic $ I nnov ati on Knowledge management I nnov ati on Economic efficiency Revenues Business capabilities, licensing Sal es, r ev enues, wealt h, f i nv ot her, f i nv T S IMPG Influence Diagram Hypothetical Scenarios HYP 1 US US PPP production India US Firm distribution HYP 2 US US PPP production India Indian Firm distribution HYP 3 US US PPP Tech Trans India Indian Firm Prod/Dist Valuation Table Data Model Level-Rate Diagrams PDV Influence Diagram + B1 + Mortality rate + Infant mortality rate Infant population Birth rate - - Mortality rate due to chronic infection R1 B2 + + + + Non-infant population - + - + R3 - Desired production adjustment B5 B9 + + Production Mortality rate due to acute infection Infected population B6 + Chronic cases - B3 + B4 + - Acute cases + B7 - B10 B8 - B11 Recovey rate after acute infection + Concentration wash Market potential Formulation B14 B13 B16 Produced PDV + - Adopters Concentration loss - B15 - - B17 mechanical loss - + + + B12 + - R2 B19 + Mechanical process Virus carriers + - + Formulation loss + Desired cost adjustment Sales of vaccines PDV stock + + + + B20 + - B18 PDV cost per dose Total PDV cost + + Sales of imitative vaccines Sales of innovative vaccine + + + Total cost of vaccination B21 - 20 10 20 13 20 16 20 19 20 22 20 25 20 28 20 31 20 34 20 37 20 40 20 43 20 46 20 49 Production (ha) PDV Production (ha) 4 3,5 3 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 0 Year Hyp 1 Hyp 2 Hyp 3 3 500 000 3 000 000 2 500 000 2 000 000 1 500 000 1 000 000 500 000 0 20 10 20 13 20 16 20 19 20 22 20 25 20 28 20 31 20 34 20 37 20 40 20 43 20 46 20 49 Number of children Infant Infection (yr) Year statu quo hyp 1 hyp 2 hyp 3 250 000 200 000 150 000 100 000 50 000 0 20 10 20 13 20 16 20 19 20 22 20 25 20 28 20 31 20 34 20 37 20 40 20 43 20 46 20 49 Number of children HepB Mortality in Infants Year statu quo hyp 1 hyp 2 hyp 3 Non-Infant Infection (yr) 5 000 000 4 000 000 3 000 000 2 000 000 1 000 000 0 20 10 20 13 20 16 20 19 20 22 20 25 20 28 20 31 20 34 20 37 20 40 20 43 20 46 20 49 Number of people 6 000 000 Year statu quo hyp 1 hyp 2 hyp 3 HepB Mortality Non-Infant 40 000 30 000 20 000 10 000 0 20 10 20 13 20 16 20 19 20 22 20 25 20 28 20 31 20 34 20 37 20 40 20 43 20 46 20 49 Number of people 50 000 Year statu quo hyp 1 hyp 2 hyp 3 Vaccination Costs (yr) 20000000 10000000 5000000 0 20 10 20 13 20 16 20 19 20 22 20 25 20 28 20 31 20 34 20 37 20 40 20 43 20 46 20 49 $ 15000000 Year Hyp 1 Hyp 2 Hyp 3 Total Vaccination Costs 600 000 000 500 000 000 400 000 000 300 000 000 200 000 000 100 000 000 0 hyp 1 hyp 2 hyp 3 PDV Cost Comparison Hypothesis 1 22 597 450 15 946 922 Hypothesis 2 21 664 161 15 257 325 Hypothesis 3 9 765 744 4 293 776 Conclusions • Preliminary results indicate that the model is a valuable analytical tool which can be used dynamically to make predictions about the effects of regulatory burden on PDV diffusion • Demonstrates the tractability of the IMPG approach • Validates the modelling process • Offers concrete input into potential alternative policy strategies adapted to PDV and comparable technologies