Non-singular Logics of Intellectual Property in Biomedical Innovation

Abstract The role of intellectual property in biomedical innovation is often construed by the source of its funding viz. public or private. While privately funded innovations are assumed to rely on intellectual property for monopolistic expansions and profit gains, publicly funded research is expected to serve the broader social good without proprietary constraints. In the light of the accumulating evidence over the last few decades, it is now understood that this causal narrative, appears simplistic. To gain a deeper understanding of innovation, whether profit-driven or socially oriented, it is crucial to examine the broader context of basic and translational research. This article investigates the management of intellectual property within two significant biomedical research funding organizations: the publicly funded United States National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the public-private-philanthropic partnership, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI). The findings reveal that despite different claims about intellectual property strategies, these institutions exhibit similar practices influenced by the spectre of larger privatisation processes intrinsic to global market forces. This analysis suggests that a singular logic of one-size-fits-all approach to intellectual property is inadequate in promoting biomedical innovation for the greater public good.