Fragmentation of TRIPS-plus provisions in bilateral trade agreements of the European Union (2019–2024): a case study

Purpose The European Commission suggested in 2014 a differential approach to negotiating intellectual property rights (IPR) clauses in bilateral trade agreements, whereby least developed and poorer developing states were to be offered less burdensome obligations in the sphere of IPR. This made the policy of European Union (EU) with regard to IPR standards in third countries open to fragmentation, which could lead to increased transaction costs. The purpose of the study is to advance research on the following questions. How extensive has such fragmentation been in practice? Has such fragmentation followed any discernible pattern? and Have the impasse in the World Trade Organization (WTO) Appellate Body and the COVID-19 affected in any significant way the extent of such fragmentation? Design/methodology/approach The study includes an overview of the key developments in WTO negotiations with regard to the IPR after the Doha Ministerial Conference, and the explanation of the methodology of sampling, whereby eight clauses on IPR in three bilateral agreements are selected for analysis. The method of comparative analysis is used to establish the trends in EU bilateral trade agreements before and after COVID-19 with regard to IPR. Findings The study concludes that neither COVID-19 nor WTO Appellate Body stalemate changed dramatically the EU policy with regard to IPR standards in bilateral trade agreements. However, the fragmentation of the IPR clauses in trade agreements remains an issue, which may negatively affect the efficiency of the relevant commercial and investment activities. Originality/value Even though the IPR clauses of EU trade agreements with third states have been well researched, there is insufficient research of the effects of the COVID-19 and WTO Appellate Body stalemate on the treaty practice of the EU in the sphere of IPR on two aspects: treatment of developing countries and fragmentation of the international IPR standards. The study is, thus, offering a novel view of an important aspect of the EU external economic policy.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of International Trade Law and Policy
Published
2025-05-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1108/jitlp-12-2024-0079
Primary Topic
International Arbitration and Investment Law
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Fragmentation of TRIPS-plus provisions in bilateral trade agreements of the European Union (2019–2024): a case study

Dmytro Skrynka
Journal of International Trade Law and Policy
International Arbitration and Investment Law
article

Fragmentation of TRIPS-plus provisions in bilateral trade agreements of the European Union (2019–2024): a case study

Dmytro Skrynka
article en

Abstract

Purpose The European Commission suggested in 2014 a differential approach to negotiating intellectual property rights (IPR) clauses in bilateral trade agreements, whereby least developed and poorer developing states were to be offered less burdensome obligations in the sphere of IPR. This made the policy of European Union (EU) with regard to IPR standards in third countries open to fragmentation, which could lead to increased transaction costs. The purpose of the study is to advance research on the following questions. How extensive has such fragmentation been in practice? Has such fragmentation followed any discernible pattern? and Have the impasse in the World Trade Organization (WTO) Appellate Body and the COVID-19 affected in any significant way the extent of such fragmentation? Design/methodology/approach The study includes an overview of the key developments in WTO negotiations with regard to the IPR after the Doha Ministerial Conference, and the explanation of the methodology of sampling, whereby eight clauses on IPR in three bilateral agreements are selected for analysis. The method of comparative analysis is used to establish the trends in EU bilateral trade agreements before and after COVID-19 with regard to IPR. Findings The study concludes that neither COVID-19 nor WTO Appellate Body stalemate changed dramatically the EU policy with regard to IPR standards in bilateral trade agreements. However, the fragmentation of the IPR clauses in trade agreements remains an issue, which may negatively affect the efficiency of the relevant commercial and investment activities. Originality/value Even though the IPR clauses of EU trade agreements with third states have been well researched, there is insufficient research of the effects of the COVID-19 and WTO Appellate Body stalemate on the treaty practice of the EU in the sphere of IPR on two aspects: treatment of developing countries and fragmentation of the international IPR standards. The study is, thus, offering a novel view of an important aspect of the EU external economic policy.

Journal of International Trade Law and PolicyVol. 24(3)
University of Warsaw (PL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 86%
International Arbitration and Investment Law
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Fragmentation of TRIPS-plus provisions in bilateral trade agreements of the European Union (2019–2024): a case study — Dmytro Skrynka · Journal of International Trade Law and Policy (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS