Thomas R. Eimer

Varieties of localization: international norms and the commodification of knowledge in India and Brazil

ABSTRACT The legal implementation of internationally agreed norms on a domestic level gives momentum to a substantial reinterpretation. Based on this insight, this article develops an ideal-typology of possible ‘localization’ outcomes. Apart from a literal adoption of an international norm, we show that the domestic implementation may change its emphasis (accentuation), amend it by supplementary purposes (addition), or imply a deviation which nevertheless sticks to the letter of the international wording (subversion). We argue that the specific form of localization depends on the interaction between international pressure politics and its congruence with the prevailing domestic public and private preferences. International power constellations explain why an international norm is implemented, but the specific character of its localization is mainly determined by domestic actor constellations. To substantiate our claims, we analyze the implementation of two interconnected international agreements in India and Brazil. While both the Convention on Biodiversity and the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights introduce the norm of property rights for intellectual knowledge in previously (at least internationally) unregulated fields, the particular characteristics of their respective implementation in both countries display the interaction between international pressure and domestic preferences in our four case studies.

Networks hanging loose: the domestic sources of US–EU patent disputes

ABSTRACT Intellectual property assets and most notably patents are assumed as most crucial instruments for an effective commercial exploitation of technological inventions. Although both the US and Europe agree in principle that an enhanced cooperation between their patent offices would foster the economic development, various negotiation rounds to harmonize patent application standards have been frustrated during the last 30 years. In our article, we claim that neither the US nor the member states of the European Patent Organization are willing to invest their regulators with a comprehensive negotiation mandate. As long as the decision-making substantially remains within the competencies of domestic institutions, societal actors in both economic spheres prove able to impede any rapprochement. The article concludes with a few tentative generalizations about the relationship between transnational regulatory networks, their institutional embeddedness, and domestic actors’ constellations.