Patent Power: The Role of Intellectual Property in Robust Global Healthcare Systems

Pharmaceutical development is fundamentally governed by balance. But in the status quo, the balance between upholding the rights of innovators and increasing equitable access to pharmaceuticals has come into question. As lives hang in the balance, this review contends that prioritizing intellectual property (IP) rights in the pharmaceutical industry is essential to sustaining long-term medical innovation, ensuring drug quality, and enhancing equitable global access as part of the progression of long-term global healthcare robustness. Contrary to the belief that IP protections strictly hinder access to essential medicines, this paper demonstrates that such protections incentivize private investment in high-risk, high-cost drug development—particularly in the context of rare diseases and global health emergencies. The review critically evaluates proposed alternatives, such as prize-based models, compulsory licensing, and publicly funded R&D, and finds them insufficient in delivering consistent innovation in the long term. Furthermore, it highlights how IP protection mechanisms, along with equity practices that ensure IP security (ie, tiered pricing and voluntary licensing), enable wider affordability without undermining innovation incentives. Beyond fostering scientific advancement, IP rights serve as tools to uphold manufacturing standards, prevent counterfeit drugs, and strengthen global supply chains: all vital for the well-being of global healthcare systems. The analysis concludes that, while they must be balanced with other economic and regulatory factors, IP protections are fundamental to developing and delivering life-saving therapies in a sustainable and equitable manner.

pharmaceutical, intellectual property, research & development, health emergencies, healthcare costs

1. DiMasi, J. A., Grabowski, H. G., & Hansen, R. W. (2016). Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: New estimates of R&D costs. Journal of Health Economics, 47, 20–33. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhealeco.2016.01.012 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. U.S. Department of State. (n.d.). Why intellectual property matters. https://2009-2017.state.gov/e/eb/tpp/ipe/why/index.htm [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. World Health Organization. (2024). A case study on the ecosystem for local production of pharmaceuticals, vaccines, and biologicals. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. World Intellectual Property Organization. (2020). What is intellectual property (IP)?. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. https://www.wipo.int/en/web/about-ip [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2015). Patents and exclusivity. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. https://www.fda.gov/media/92548/download [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Merriam-Webster. (2020). Prioritize. Merriam-Webster.com. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prioritize [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. National Science Board. (2024). The State of U.S. Science and Engineering 2024. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. https://www.google.com/url?q=https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20243/discovery-u-s-and-global-r-d&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1787891084982326&usg=AOvVaw2Nkq-U8KlMwD7yClatTCsA [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Drugs.com. (2024). Who makes Skyrizi and where is it made?. https://www.drugs.com/medical-answers/makes-skyrizi-made-3560344/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. DeVol, R., Bedroussian, A., & Yeo, B. (2011). The Global Biomedical Industry: Preserving U.S. Leadership. Milken Institute. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Knowledge at Wharton. (2013, April 10). Access or profits? Drug patent rulings in India fuel the debate. https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/access-or-profits-drug-patent-rulings-in-india-fuel-the-debate/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Kyle, M. K. (2022). Incentives for pharmaceutical innovation: What’s working, what’s lacking. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 84, 102850. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijindorg.2022.102850 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Borges, C. (2025). RAI explainer: How IP rights promote innovation | perspectives on innovation | CSIS. Csis.Org. https://www.csis.org/blogs/perspectives-innovation/rai-explainer-how-ip-rights-promote-innovation [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Roberts, A.-D., & Wadhwa, R. (2023, June 5). Orphan drug approval laws. StatPearls Publishing. PubMed. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK572052/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Ezell, S. (2019, March 4). The bayh-dole act’s vital importance to the U.S. life-sciences innovation system. Itif.Org. https://itif.org/publications/2019/03/04/bayh-dole-acts-vital-importance-us-life-sciences-innovation-system/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Gilead Sciences, Inc. (2014a). Gilead Sciences to acquire Pharmasset Inc for 11 billion. https://www.gilead.com/news/news-details/2011/gilead-sciences-to-acquire-pharmasset-inc-for-11-billion [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Gilead Sciences, Inc. (2014b). US Food and Drug Administration approves Gilead's Sovaldi (sofosbuvir) for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C. https://www.gilead.com/news/news-details/2013/us-food-and-drug-administration-approves-gileads-sovaldi-sofosbuvir-for-the-treatment-of-chronic-hepatitis-c [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Philipp, J. (2026, February 15). Poverty and malaria vaccine price cuts. The Borgen Project. https://borgenproject.org/poverty-and-malaria/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Shafrin, J. (2022, December 28). The role of intellectual property in the biopharmaceutical sector. Healthcare Economist. https://www.healthcare-economist.com/2022/12/28/the-role-of-intellectual-property-in-the-biopharmaceutical-sector/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Kalil, T. (2024, June 17). Prizes for technological innovation - the hamilton project. The Hamilton Project. https://www.hamiltonproject.org/publication/policy-proposal/prizes-for-technological-innovation/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. National Institutes of Health. (2026). Reinforcing NIH’s continued commitment to Fundamental Research | grants & funding. Nih.Gov. https://grants.nih.gov/news-events/nih-extramural-nexus-news/2026/05/reinforcing-nihs-continued-commitment-to-fundamental-research [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Stevens, P., & Ezell, S. (2020). Delinkage Debunked: Why Replacing Patents With Prizes for Drug Development Won’t Work. Information Technology & Innovation Foundation. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Lybecker, K. (2016, June 27). Counterfeit medicines, IP & patient safety. IPWatchdog.com. https://ipwatchdog.com/2016/06/27/counterfeit-medicines-ip-patient-safety/id=70397/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Fincham J. E. (2021). Negative Consequences of the Widespread and Inappropriate Easy Access to Purchasing Prescription Medications on the Internet. American health & drug benefits, 14(1), 22–28. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Akunyili, D. (2005). Counterfeit and substandard drugs in Nigeria: Situations, trends, and sustaining the fight. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Polgreen, L. (2009, February 7). 84 children are killed by medicine in Nigeria. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/07/world/africa/07nigeria.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Reichman, J. H. (2009). Comment: Compulsory licensing of patented pharmaceutical inventions: Evaluating the options. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 37(2), 247–263. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-720x.2009.00369.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Medicines Patent Pool. (2020, March 2). Licensing for public health. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. https://medicinespatentpool.org/what-we-do/licensing-for-public-health [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Williams, O. D., Ooms, G., & Hill, P. S. (2015). Cautionary notes on a global tiered pricing framework for medicines. American Journal of Public Health, 105(7), 1290–1293. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2015.302554 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations. (2012). The changing landscape on access to medicines. https://www.abpi.org.uk/media/el4dae4g/the-changing-landscape-on-access-to-medicines.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Correa, C. M. (2002). Intellectual property rights, the WTO and developing countries: The TRIPS agreement and policy options. Zed Books. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. International IP Index 2026 Fourteenth Edition. (2026). U.S. Chamber of Commerce. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. LaMattina, J. L. (2021, September 24). Even me-too drugs matter when it comes to new medicines. STAT. https://www.statnews.com/2021/09/24/me-too-drugs-matter-when-it-comes-to-new-medicines/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Halbert, D. (2002). Moralized discourses: South Africa’s intellectual property fight for access to AIDS drugs. Seattle Journal for Social Justice, 1(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. https://digitalcommons.law.seattleu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1231&context=sjsj [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Measuring Waste of Patient Time in Health Care at Non-Digitized Hospital: An Observational Study in Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University, Bangladesh
• Reaffirming Clinical Confidence in Atorvastatin Therapy: A Digital Outreach Case Study from Tamil Nadu, India
• Clinical Manifestations and Therapeutic Response in a Patient with Hypothyroidism: A Case Report
• Eranda (Ricinus Communis) In Gridhrasi (Sciatica): Classical Rationale, Pharmacology and Clinical Evidence- A Narrative Literature Review
• Magnetotherapy in Pain Management: Mechanisms, Clinical Applications, and Future Perspectives – A Review