The political economy of the global pharmaceutical industry
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The majority of the world's population has limited access to needed medicines. The purpose of this paper is to explain why certain characteristics of the global pharmaceutical market have not served a large majority of potential consumers in the developing world. Design/methodology/approach Through a political economy analysis of evolutionary and regulatory aspects of both supply and demand conditions for global pharmaceuticals, it can be understood why most of the world's poor have limited access to basic medicines. The paper then turns to what avenues are available for improving access to medicines. An analysis of the chief proposed solutions, namely: pooled demand and relaxation of intellectual property rights, reveals their inadequacies. A third emerging avenue, the growing production of pharmaceuticals in the south, is examined through case studies of leading producers including India, China, and South America. Findings While each of the three options offers potential benefits, none is adequate to solve the problem – a new, perhaps combinatorial, approach will be needed to ensure that a wider global market for pharmaceuticals can be created. Originality/value The paper offers insights into the political economy of the global pharmaceutical industry.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it