Sophie Egan understands that there is an astounding amount of confusion over what to eat. If you care about the planet, animals, human health and supporting companies that give back to their communities, you are a "conscious eater" and she has written the book for you. Her new book: How to Be a Conscious Eater: Making Food Choices for You, Others, and the Planet, helps guide you through the confusing aisles of the supermarket to hone in on the right choices to put your money where your heart is.

Using three criteriaIs it good for me? Is it good for others? Is it good for the planet?Sophie Egan helps readers make the right decisions based on research andinformation instead ofmarketing hype.

Author of the book: Devoured, How What We Eat Defines Us, Egan is an expert on foods impact on human and environmental health. Conscious Eaterdivides food into four categoriesstuff that comes from the ground, stuff that comes from animals, stuff that comes from factories, and stuff thats made in restaurants to help consumers decide what's important to them and how to put their consumer dollars to work backing those values.

SE: There's so much misinformation that there has been a loss of food literacy. People don't trust their instincts about what to eat. I wanted to empower people to make food choices they can feel good about. There'sinformation overload and misinformation.

So I made sure not to overwhelm the reader. The format offers breaks it down into these short and sweet bottom-line answers of what to eat.

SE: I found myself realizing:It's not enough to think is this good for you, but also is this good for the climate. So I wanted us to think about good for you and good for others, including other people and also the animals in the journey from farm to fork. And is it good for the planet?

SE: Right, So it helps to broaden the lenses and add an aperture. I wanted this book to broaden it so the mental checklist, People wonder: If I get this food, is it worth this? The way I look at it conscious eating is about getting clear on what your values are and shopping those. You first need to decide what you want to support with your grocerydollars.

SE: It provides a variety of tools including telling you a product's water footprint comparison, carbon footprint comparison, and of course these topics are complex, but you canmake consumers aware of the cost of their food. They can then ask themselves: "What are the things I care the most about?" If you care the most about carbon footprint or animal rights. Often they are in alignment. The carbon and water footprints: The worst for the planet and for animals is cow milk. But then when you go to buy plant-based milk, you also want to look for flavor and sourcing footprint, because of course almonds require a lot more water than oats.

SE: Plant forward and mostly plant-based foods can be more sustainable than strictly plant-based. But then human health is also a factor and plant-based is healthier. We can only hold so much complexity in our heads at once. If you eat mostly whole foods and mostly foods from the ground, that can check a lot of boxes. Across the board that may be best in all categories.

SE: These third-party certifications, like the certified "organic" label, a lot of time they are referees of the transparency game. They help tick through the checklist we would not be able to even know about.

SE: There are important stickers to know, that have real meaning that helps you align with your values. USDA Organic is arguably one of the most rigorous standards of how food is grown. It supports an eco system and farm workers health and supports

USDA Organic Inhibits synthetic peticides and growth hormones and antibiotics. From an environmental standpoint that is significant.

But a lot of them are not standardized. Something can say "natural" and mean little. But "organic" does ensure that it is chemical-free when harvested. But that doesn't mean they can't add preservatives and more chemicals after it's harvested. A processed food product with the label USDA Organic just means that 95 percent of the sources are organic.

But in terms of the organic label, there is still the halo effect. Organic chocolate frosting is still organic chocolate frosting. So for health, you're getting a load of added sugar.

SE: The label Fair Trade is also meaningful.Fair for Life or Fair Trade Certified.These are truly meaningful for farm workers and harvesters. It ensures that no discrimination or harassment is taking place, no forced labor or child labor either. This has become a shocking problem for Cocoa production. In Africa, South America, the Ivory Coast and other places. Those certainly are not the only place. Fair Trademeans that it's monitored.Part of theprice of that item gets fed into local funds for infrastructure and jobs where the product or ingredients originated.

Where these certifications differ from one another, is how far along the spectrum they ensure a liveable wage for workers, versus a fair wage or a minimum wage. Fair for Life is the strongest. Look for that on bananas, coffee, chocolate, since those are three common ones.

The Beet: Sometimes I look for the frog, from the Rainforest Alliance

SE: that is a good one, as is Bird-Friendly from the Smithsonian. This is specifically for coffee.It means that when coffee is grown in the tropics, it signals the homes of migratory birds are respected. And it ensures the coffee is grown in shade. So no trees needed to be cut down which takes away bird habitats. The less we disturb nature for farming the better.

Of all the crops grown worldwide, only about 1 percent are organic, which is shocking. For all the perceived consumer interest, "organic" only accounts for 1 percent of all growing.

There's a lot of different variables. It can take three years or more to transition to organic soil. But the other thing is that some farmers think the term organic does not even go far enough.

One term is Biodynamic from Demeter International Organization. They have certified "Biodynamic" which means at least 10 percent of the farmer's land is off-limits to growing, so it encourages biodiversity.

Another term to watch is "Regenerative." This is a big one. That's basically going to replace what we're doing now. Some people think we're going to skip straight to this "Regenerative" This is about soil and growing practicesand it's a way of growing that integrates with the surrounding ecosystemfor more biodiversity and more natural growing practices.

Biodynamic also promotes water conservation and treats wetlands grasslands and forests as part of the farm ecosystemso the farm is part of a larger ecosystem and natural landscape.

Farmers and ranchers have roles to play in being climate super heros. Improiving soil health and capturing carbon and creating best practices. This is something we need to encourage.

The "Regenerative" growing practice leaves the soil better than they found it. It depends on all the methods coming together to create a healthier earth. Some crops do this already. One that is really known for that is lentils. They are nitrogen fixers. Environmental super crops.

SE: It's not the case the shorter the distance, the better. The analysis includes the assessment of the total environmental footprint of a crop, and how people are treated in harvesting and packaging the food. Soall the methodstogether might be more important.

Transportation is just a fraction of the decision. Of course, farm to table is great. But there is nuance. Personally, when I am considering what to buy, my personal guidance is to better understand the methods andlook at transportation within that context.

Visit link:

How to Choose Foods That Are Good for the Planet, Animals & You - The Beet

They're being called "local news ecosystems," and one is building in Northeast Ohio.

It's what philanthropies, civic activists and entrepreneurial journalists across the country see as the sprouting of mostly young and fragile organizations that are trying to bring news and information, usually online, to overlooked neighborhoods and communities. Many share content to spread their stories further, with a focus on bolstering, if not directly competing, with the work of struggling traditional print and broadcast media.

Northeast Ohio has already spawned several news operations, including the Observer group of community newspapers serving Lakewood and several other Cuyahoga County communities, and The Devil Strip in Akron.

One of the latest, and maybe the most ambitious, is The Land, which just launched its website. As planned, The Land would "deliver in-depth stories that foster accountability, inform the community and inspire people to take action," according to the crowdfunding proposal prepared by founder and editor Lee Chilcote and publisher Tammie Wise, both formerly associated with Freshwater Cleveland, a for-profit digital magazine owned by Detroit-based Issue Media Group.

The Land plans to cover all of Cleveland's neighborhoods and the city's inner ring of suburbs, eventually building a staff of six reporters to cover government, development, environment, education, health care and civic engagement.

"There's been a tremendous amount of growth in the nonprofit news sector in recent years," Chilcote said. "The nonprofit model will allow us a lot of ability to serve the community, have some earned income but have memberships and grants to fulfill our mission."

Chilcote said he and Wise were motivated by what they see as a "news crisis" in Northeast Ohio as traditional news organizations, particularly The Plain Dealer, have made significant cuts in news coverage.

This is not a Northeast Ohio phenomenon. Across the country, the decline or demise of newspapers has created so-called "news deserts" in many communities. At the same time, foundations and other philanthropies are beginning to see that local news is critical to maintaining healthy communities, especially in lower-income parts of cities.

Last year, the Cleveland and Knight foundations commissioned a study, "Northeast Ohio's Local News and Information Ecosystem," by two North Carolina consultants that was aimed at civic leaders. One of its key conclusions: "Whatever your primary issue of concern, your second issue should be media." It argued that local news engages citizens, improves public decision-making and makes political and civic leaders accountable to their communities. It also makes contributions to public health and political participation.

When participants in six focus groups were asked to talk about issues they were facing and how they stayed informed, they were critical of the existing media landscape. Said one participant: "I can find out where the trash is, or (about) an event over here. But what's really, really happening policy-wise coming from city hall, coming from my school board and that sort of thing? People are not really getting good quality information."

The study also found that the number of news gatherers in Cleveland was down 61% between 2004 and 2019. In Akron, that figure was down 54%.

Michael Murphy, chief marketing officer of the Cleveland Foundation, said that funding parts of the ecosystem makes sense to his and other organizations in the community. In December, the Cleveland Foundation and the Akron Community Foundation, the Center for Community Solutions, the George Gund Foundation and the Knight Foundation announced more than $110,000 in journalism grants to address community information needs in Akron and Cleveland.

"As a coalition of funders, we are starting to see news and information as the critical part of any community infrastructure," Murphy said. "If you don't have a healthy news and information ecosystem, you can't have a community that's thriving. Citizens need to be informed."

The Cleveland Foundation, for example, has funded a project on food insecurity in Cleveland developed by Black Girl Media, a blog and podcast collective; Edible Cleveland, a print and online magazine; and WOVU, a community radio station created by Burten, Bell, Carr Development Inc., the nonprofit community development corporation serving Cleveland's Central and Kinsman neighborhoods.

It also is sponsoring a one-year pilot of a program through Neighborhood Connections, a Cleveland nonprofit that boosts Cleveland neighborhoods, to pay Greater Clevelanders to document official committee meetings of Cuyahoga County and City of Cleveland governments. The program, Documenters.org, was created in Chicago by City Bureau, a nonprofit civic journalism lab.

"Residents in Cleveland, especially, felt that they don't feel represented at editorial meetings, that there is not someone that looks like them who is making decisions. There is a strong, strong sense of distrust," Murphy said. "They feel that even when there are stories of hope in their neighborhood, the traditional media rely on antiquated B-roll, or antiquated images, to even tell a story of good news."

One of the oldest parts of the building Northeast Ohio news ecosystem is the Observer group, a loosely connected group of for-profit and nonprofit news organizations started more than a decade ago as print monthlies or biweeklies that are considered "hyperlocal" because they focus on a single community, or closely linked communities. They cover schools heavily but also housing, libraries and city councils. Seven Observers, each separately owned, cover communities from Westlake and Parma to Collinwood and Euclid.

Bob Rosenbaum, advertising director of the Heights Observer, which covers Cleveland Heights and University Heights, said the Observers started as print publications and continue to have a strong print presence because its revenue comes from local advertisers who don't need or can't afford to reach the kind of audience that larger media reach.

"We're now in our 11th year, and we've been making it on advertising revenue almost exclusively. Ninety percent of our revenue is advertising," he said. "We've largely had year-on-year growth until this year. This year, everything is blown to the wind."

Rosenbaum said his organization does attract some foundation funding for specific projects, and it is a member, along with some of the other Observers, of the Neighborhood & Community Media Association of Greater Cleveland. That association's website posts stories from its 14 members, including the Plain Press, which covers Cleveland's West Side neighborhoods, and the Real Deal Press, which covers "the interplay of race, class and power in the civic, business and cultural spaces of Northeast Ohio."

The Devil Strip, a 5-year-old online and print news co-op in Akron that believes media are a city's "chief storyteller," sees its role as being an advocate for the city.

"I think the way we fit into the local news ecosystem is filling gaps that we see," said editor Chris Horne. "We're looking at more narrative, long-term, slow journalism. Part of it is, we don't have the ability to do the daily stuff."

Those gaps include looking at local arts, music, entrepreneurship and community leadership, and celebrating the people who make Akron a unique place as well as exploring the challenges that hold it back.

Horne said Devil Strip is getting 30,000 unique visitors a month. Before the pandemic hit, much of Devil Strip's revenue came from advertising. But it also is in the middle of a two-year, $200,000 grant from the Knight Foundation, and it has won a $50,000 grant from the GAR Foundation.

News organizations like these are cropping up all over the country. The Institute for Nonprofit News, a Los Angeles organization that is a hub where members can share best practices, pool resources and collaborate on stories, has more than 250 members including The Devil Strip and Belt magazine in Northeast Ohio.

Read the rest here:

Local news ecosystem is taking root in Northeast Ohio - Crain's Cleveland Business

Mangrove ecosystem in western Indian Ocean, comprising 10 African countries, is rapidly depleting

The mangrove ecosystem in the Western Indian Ocean (WIO) comprising 10 African nations is rapidly getting depleted; some areas have reportedly lost asmuch as 88 per cent of the cover, according to the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).

Conserving and restoring mangroves is essential and a nature-based solution is required to address adverse environmental, societal and climatic challenges in the region, according to the new UNEP guidelines on mangrove ecosystem restoration for the WIO region.

West Africa accounts for 31 per cent of the mangrove cover in the continent.

The threats

The UNEP status report stated that the ecosystem was under threat due to the increasing population, coastal development and poor governance.

Climate change poses a risk to the remaining mangrove areas, mainly through rising sea levels and increased sedimentation caused by precipitation and shoreline change. In fact, the future of mangroves is uncertain especially in the region, according to another report.

According to the Global Mangroves Alliance, 67 per cent of mangroves have been lost or degraded to date, and an additional one per cent being lost each year. Without mangroves, 39 per cent more people would face threat of floods annually and flood damage would increase by more than 16 per cent.

The guidelinescame a week after the high-level panel on ocean called for mangrove conservation and restoration. Every $1 invested in mangrove conservation and restoration generates a benefit of $3, estimated the panel.

Livelihoods of coastal communities depend on mangroves, and therefore, restoring mangroves could also contribute to building back better through green recovery after the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic ends, according to UNEP.

Mangroves also drive eco-tourism, create jobs; there is a need for an interaction between local communities and mangroves that is often ignored during formulation of mangrove restoration projects, the document pointed.

Mangroves are essential life support system for coastal communities in the WIO region, said James Kairo, chief scientist at the Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute and lead author of the guidelines.

If degradation continues, communities will be without resources for shelter or fuel, food or a means to make a living, he added.

Restoring mangroves is possible but challenging

Restoring mangroves is possible but challenging, according to the UN show casing case studies on mangrove restoration projects from Kenya, United Republic of Tanzania, Mozambique, Madagascar, Mauritius and Seychelles.

Mangrove restoration can be used as a tool to return the lost forest in order to achieve the objectives of sustainable mangrove management, said the UN citing Kenyas experience.

Restoring mangroves is feasible as long as the questions of why, where, when, how and by whom are appropriately addressed, it added.

While analysing the challenges faced by the community-based mangrove restoration projects, the global UN organisation also enlisted the possible solutions:

Golden rules for identifying site for restoration

The UNEP document underlined the Golden Rules proposed by Enright and Wodehouse to be considered for restoration.

It stated that the degraded site should be accessible and devoid of strong waves. Planting should be restricted to vegetated areas where the forest has been degraded and lost.

Long-term monitoring

Lack of monitoring is one of the major reasons behind failures of most restoration projects, and hence, monitoring mangrove restoration projects is important, the UNEP said.

Rehabilitation of the degraded mangroves must be considered as a programme and not a short-term project, since the communities have to be engaged and empowered, it added.

UN recommended development of alternative income generating activities (IGAs) targeted at all mangrove users, including mangrove cutters.

Explore ecosystem services

At least$1.2 billion is the economic value of protection provided by coral reefs and mangroves in the WIO, according to WWF estimates.

Hence, ecotourism and payment for ecosystem services programmes should be explored, UN recommended, citing successful restoration of mangroves at Gazi bay, Kenya.

It is supposedly the worlds first conservation project that linked mangrove forests to the global carbon market. It was able to provide direct income to participating community from sale of carbon credits.

Most mangrove-restoration efforts have emphasized on planting as the primary tool for managing degraded areas, rather than first assessing causes for the degradation and then assessing the natural recovery opportunities, the UN noted.

But mangrove ecosystem is dynamic and the degraded mangrove areas may recover naturally. Natural recovery must be considered before initiating any mangrove planting activities, cautioned the UN document.

We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.

Read more:

Restoring mangroves in west Africa a challenge, but UNEP shows the way - Down To Earth Magazine

-Zinnov hosts its Annual Awards for the 11th consecutive year, recognizing exceptional individuals and organizations at the forefront of technology innovation ~

-The 2020 edition of the Awards celebrates distinguished leaders and teams who have gone beyond to become true agents of change in the wake of the ongoing pandemic ~

BANGALORE, India, July 31, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Zinnov, a leading global management consulting firm, hosted the 11th edition of its marquee Awards today and released the names of the winners across all categories. Hosted virtually, this edition had individual winners and representatives from winning organizations acknowledging the Awards digitally.

Zinnov Awards 2020 is a testament to the grit, perseverance, and commitment of Global Centers of Excellence to rise above the uncertainties to emerge stronger and more resilient than ever. This year, the spotlight was on those remarkable individuals and organizations who faced adversity and emerged stronger for it, by building future-ready leadership, focusing on diversity, and driving innovation, even during these trying times. It equally emphasized the importance of recognizing not just the Goliaths of the technology ecosystem but the Davids too. It was an opportunity for smaller and emerging GCoEs to showcase their commitment to journey beyond resilience to become antifragile.

The virtual gathering included 1000+ leaders, technology practitioners, thought leaders, and the families of the winners who came out to celebrate the ecosystem in full strength. Zinnov Awards continues to be an acknowledged gold standard in recognizing the outstanding achievements and pivotal contributions of GCoEs in India, and this year too, saw an overwhelming response with 350+ nominations from 150+ companies across 8 award categories.

Award Categories and Winners

Category 1: Unlocking Centre Value:A company-wide award, this recognizes R&D Organizations across both Engineering and Enterprise IT centers that have rapidly evolved from being a pure play cost center to a value center.

Winners:

Category 2: Great Place to Innovate:This category is a company-wide award to recognize GCoEs that are focused on value creation from the India center and have made concerted efforts across five key areas Organization Charter, Culture, Internal Programs & Processes, External Linkages, and Innovation Metrics.

Winners:

Category 3: Business Continuity Readiness:This is an organization-wide award that assessed the BCP readiness of GCoEs in dealing with various disruptions and the specific role played by them in mitigating the impact of COVID-19.

Winners:

Category 4: Inclusion & Diversity:A company-wide award, this aims to recognize organizations that have established programs and are the gold standards for Inclusion and Diversity in India, across four major drivers of Inclusion, namely, People, People Processes, Operational Enablement, and Ecosystem Engagements.

Winners:

Category 5: Building a Culture of Intrapreneurial Leadership:This is an organization-wide award to recognize those GCoEs that are focused on creating a culture to develop and nurture intrapreneurial leaders from the India center and have made concerted efforts to drive a strong leadership philosophy with allied programs to identify and develop leaders to deliver key business outcomes.

Category 6: Building World Class Site Ops:An organization-wide award, this category recognizes GCoEs that have an impeccable site operations team that forms the backbone of any company.

Winners:

Category 7: Next Generation Women Leaders:An individual contributor award, this felicitates women leaders in technology GCoEs who have created large scale impact through their business, leadership, and/or technology expertise. This year, two sub-categories were created to recognize women leaders in Business/Technology and Corporate Functions.

Winners:

Category 8: Technical Role Model:This is an individual contributor award that recognizes those individuals who have been technology stalwarts and star contributors to the internal and external technology ecosystems. This year, two sub-categories were created to recognize technologists who have created a significant impact in Artificial Intelligence & Big Data Analytics (AI & BDA) and Intelligent Automation (IA).

Winners:

About Zinnov

Founded in 2002, Zinnov is a leading global management and strategy consulting firm, with presence in Santa Clara, Houston, Bangalore, Gurgaon, and Paris. Over the past 18 years, Zinnov has successfully consulted with over 250+ Fortune 500 enterprises and technology companies to develop actionable insights that help them create value across dimensions of both revenue and optimization. With core expertise in Product Engineering, Digital Transformation, Innovation, and Outsourcing Advisory, Zinnov assists clients by:

With their team of experienced consultants, subject matter experts, and research professionals, Zinnov serves clients from across multiple industry verticals including Enterprise Software, BFSI, Healthcare, Automotive, Retail, and Telecom in the US, Europe, Japan, and India.

For more information, visit http://zinnov.com.

Media Contact:Nitika GoelChief Marketing Officer, Zinnov[emailprotected]+91-98450 16255

Logo: https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/694742/Zinnov_Logo.jpg

SOURCE Zinnov

Read the original post:

Zinnov Awards 2020 recognizes the Titans in Tech, individuals, and organizations who have become synonymous with excellence in the GCoE ecosystem - PR...

Biotech and pharma patents have generated significant controversy in recent years, including in countries like the US and UK (see here and here). But the coronavirus pandemic has intensified worldwide scrutiny of life sciences innovators, their IP strategies and the patent system in general.

Many commentators (see here and here, for example) have expressed concerns that patents and other rights will impede research collaboration or will limit access to new covid-19 vaccines or treatments. These worries, if corroborated by events, could lead to a backlash against IP rights.

In recent months, national governments, international bodies and life sciences innovators have all been reacting to these concerns and seeking to adapt to new circumstances. Here are the four key things we have learned so far.

Compulsory licensing has historically been associated mainly with middle-income countries. However, given the seriousness of the current medical and economic crises, several high-income countries have raised the prospect of using legal mechanisms to circumvent IP rights covering coronavirus-related innovations.

While most countries have some form of compulsory licensing law in place, several have felt it necessary to take measures to sharpen these tools to overcome potential IP barriers to medical access. Canada, for example, passed Bill C-13 to allow its government to issue a licence without first negotiating with the rights holder and with greater flexibility over how the patentee is remunerated.

Germany also implemented legislation providing the Federal Ministry of Health with new powers to grant compulsory licences, while France has adopted sweeping measures allowing its Prime Minister to launch generic drugs prior to patent/SPC expiry and even to seize drugs from private companies.

None of this means that developed countries expect to have to use these provisions (although Israel has already made use of previously unused powers to grant a permit to import generic versions of AbbVies Kaletra) or that this readiness to circumvent IP rights will continue after the pandemic. But it shows that the US administrations view that patents are almost sacrosanct is not shared by other governments in high-income countries.

In the early stages of the pandemic, IP owners provoked public controversies by seeking or asserting exclusive rights to coronavirus-related innovations. Gilead, for example, applied for seven years orphan drug exclusivity for potential covid-19 treatment remdesivir.

But biotech and pharma rights holders came quickly to understand the need to depart from their usual IP strategies. Many have taken steps to promote wider and more affordable access to coronavirus-related innovations and to accelerate research efforts.

Gilead rescinded its request for regulatory exclusivity, promised to donate 1.5 million doses of the drug and subsequently entered into non-exclusive licences with five generic companies to increase the supply of remdesivir to 127 low-income countries. AbbVie announced it would not enforce its patents for covid-related uses of Kaletra, and Novartis, too, has committed to making any IP relating to the use of hydroxychloroquine available.

Oxford University has made its leading vaccine candidate available on the basis of non-exclusive IP licence for those wishing to sell it at-cost or at a small profit. Its partner AstraZeneca, which is striking deals to manufacture the vaccine for markets around the world, has pledged to make no profit. However, other vaccine innovators, like Pfizer and Moderna Therapeutics, have not ruled out making a profit.

Despite the above, hopes that life sciences innovators will voluntarily participate in initiatives, such as the WHO Covid-19 Technology Access Pool (C-TAP) or the Open COVID Pledge, aimed at promoting open-access licences to patents, data and other valuable IP are forlorn.

Research-based companies have advocated non-exclusive patent licensing, supported using the Medicines Patent Pool to license IP for use in lower-income countries and co-founded the WHO ACT-Accelerator for sharing covid-related scientific data.

But IFPMAs director general Thomas Cueni has said that: The pharmaceutical industry draws a line at an open-access platform to enforce worldwide open-licence agreements for covid-19 vaccines and treatments. That risks undermining a predictable IP system that underpins largescale R&D investment, he warned.

Innovators have rejected a one-size-fits-all model that assumes IP should be licensed the same way regardless of the nature of the product, the situation of the rights holder and whether the product is being sold into a wealthy or poor country. Companies wish to retain some control over the partners with which they collaborate and over the role IP will play in future innovations, Novartiss IP affairs chief Corey Salsberg told IAM recently.

Rights intended to confer monopolies risk obstructing access to medicines in certain circumstances. In a public health crisis of this magnitude it is reasonable for governments to ensure they have the ability to bypass patents if doing so is the only way to gain access to vital treatments. It is also imperative to consider how new forms of IP licensing or cooperation might better serve the interests of patients around the world (as HGFs Leena Contarino and Ellie Purnell do here).

But it is also important to challenge simplistic attacks on the IP-based innovation system (see here for a recent example), which overemphasise the significance of IP rights as a barrier to covid-19 treatment access and understate their contribution to the fight against the pandemic.

The most important problem we face is the lack of an approved covid-19 vaccine. But it is thanks in significant part to the incentives provided by IP rights that we have an innovation ecosystem capable of producing more than 160 experimental vaccines, 24 of which have already entered human trials. IP bolsters ongoing incentives for those involved in developing these candidates and can help delineate the partnerships needed as part of this effort.

Owners of leading inoculations and their partners are also currently investing significant sums of money in the manufacture of vaccine doses that might never be approved, partly because IP offers the prospect of recouping their costs. And it isnt obvious that an open-licensing approach would better enable the Oxford University/AstraZeneca vaccine, for example, to be produced at greater scale than the large number of bilateral agreements they have already entered.

Nevertheless, the benefits of IP are in a sense less visible than its downsides. Innovators should beware that if they are perceived to be charging too much for any coronavirus vaccine that comes on the market, steps may be taken to bypass their IP and perceptions of pharma patents in general will suffer.

Book your place at IPBC Connect today

See the article here:

Ignore naysayers, the patent system is playing a vital role in the fight against covid-19 - IAM