Economics & Finance

Share this article:

Economics & Finance

  • Join our comunity:

Pacific Trade Deal’s Outlook Clouded by Patent Disputes

By: , Posted on: August 20, 2015

storm clouds
Storm clouds are gathering in the Pacific, cropped. Clouds via www.shutterstock.com

When the US Congress finally agreed in June to give the president fast-track negotiating authority, many trade supporters hoped that the final obstacle to completion of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) had been breached. This agreement, currently in the final stages of negotiation, would create a massive trading bloc among the United States, Canada and 10 Pacific countries, including Japan.

Two challenges now make that prediction appear overly optimistic. First, there remain a number of serious disagreements that need to be hammered out before any agreement can be concluded. And, second, these disagreements are pushing future negotiations into the election seasons of Canada and the United States, injecting more political uncertainty into TPP discussions.

As a result, pressure is growing to wrap up the talks as soon as possible.

The major sticking points

So what are the sticking points holding back the final conclusion of TPP?

Intellectual property (IP) issues are generally among the most controversial in any trade agreement, and this one is no exception. The United States, home to much of the world’s drug industry, is pushing for longer pharmaceutical patents than many other countries are willing to stomach. And the US is arguing for longer copyright restrictions – as well as stronger punishment for IP violators – than most of its negotiating partners would prefer.

Another controversial issue has been the inclusion of investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) mechanisms in the agreement. These mechanisms would allow private corporations to demand compensation from states, through quasi-judicial international panels, for violations of TPP that directly harm their interests.

The panels would not be able to force states to change their regulatory or financial policies, and TPP is hardly the first agreement to include ISDS. Nevertheless, the threat that an international panel could force states to pay compensation to corporations has generated significant backlash in many countries – just as it did in the US during the debate over fast-track. Australia, for example, is demanding a “carve out” for ISDS on environmental and health policies.

Other disputes center on more traditional trade issues. Japan, which sources many of its car parts from outside of countries included in the TPP agreement, is pushing for looser content restrictions on automobile manufacturing. Canada and Mexico oppose this move, arguing that most of a car’s content should be produced inside the TPP zone in order for it to qualify under the agreement’s more open rules.

And on the agricultural front, Australia is seeking more access to the US sugar market and (with New Zealand) to the Canadian dairy market.

All of these sticking points in the agreement represent only a small proportion of the total issues that have already been resolved. But it is also true that the toughest issues in international diplomacy typically get saved for last.

A glimpse into the life of trade negotiators. Reuters

Election season poses a challenge

Now, to these challenges, we can add the upcoming elections in the United States and Canada.

In the US, there is a good chance that TPP, and trade policy more generally, will become an issue in the 2016 presidential election. That said, the extension of fast-track means that it would take a very serious revolt in Congress for TPP to be rejected.

More serious, perhaps, is the situation in Canada, where elections are coming up in October. The current conservative government, which supports TPP, could be replaced by a more skeptical party. Moreover, during election seasons, existing “caretaker governments” are generally expected to refrain from any new policy initiatives (though the Harper government seems intent on completing TPP).

What, then, will be the future of TPP? Will the negotiations come to a successful conclusion, and will the agreement be ratified by all of the signatories?

These are difficult questions to answer, but all 12 countries have already invested significant political capital in the negotiations. In the United States, for example, TPP is one of the planks of President Barack Obama’s “Asia pivot” strategy. And the looming presence of China pushing many TPP states together should also not be forgotten.

In the end, then, it seems likely that TPP will be concluded and ratified. In what form and with which stipulations remain to be seen.

The author, Charles Hankla, is Associate Professor of Political Science at Georgia State University. This article was originally published in The Conversation under the Creative Commons Attribution NoDerivatives licence. Read the original article here.


If you liked this article, you may be interested in these books. To purchase a print copy at up to 30% off the list price and free shipping, visit the Elsevier Store.

principles of international finance     Innovation Entrepreneurship and the Economy cover

Terra.  Principles of International Finance and Open Economy Macroeconomics:  Theories, Applications, and Policies.  ISBN  9780128022979.

Shah et al. Innovation, Entrepreneurship, and the Economy in the US, China, and India. ISBN 9780128018903

Economics & Finance

In the 21st century, both personal fortunes and global economies are tied more tightly than ever to corporate businesses and financial markets. For scholars and professionals, a solid grounding in economics and finance is critical, as is up-to-date knowledge of technology, law, and corporate structures and practices in these swiftly evolving fields. Elsevier provides content written by leading experts on key topics of currency exchange, bank regulation, mergers and acquisitions, entrepreneurship, real estate, environmental economics, industry development, project finance, and more. We also produce essential handbooks on the economics of health care, agriculture, education, and a wide spectrum of other areas of public policy.