public health policy

The new pharma FDI policy undermines Indian generics, which may make drugs more expensive

By relaxing brownfield pharma FDI norms, the government is making way for multinational corporations to take over 'Make in India' generics companies.

The Union government’s decision to allow up to 74% foreign direct investment in pharmaceutical companies through the automatic route could threaten competition in the pharmaceutical sector and India’s role as a supplier of low cost, life-saving drugs across the developing world.

In 2013, the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, which is the nodal body for FDI policy in India, sought to restrict FDI in brownfield pharmaceutical projects (those in which a government or private entity buys or leases existing production facilities to start new production activity) to discourage multinational drug corporations from taking control of Indian generic companies that produced critical drugs and vaccines at prices lower than brand-name drugs. The decision to roll back on this policy now could mean that the majority stake in key generics manufacturers, like Cipla, can be easily transferred to multinational drug corporations.

Blow to world’s pharmacy

Cipla is a symbol across the world of all that India has achieved with its policy of self reliance in technology, domestic production and the provision of life-saving drugs to its people. It represents the aspirations of the country and its lawmakers who invested and built a generic industry to ensure that it had the technology to manufacture affordable essential medicines for its people.

Mahatma Gandhi with Cipla founder KA Hamied during his visit to Cipla in July 1939.
Mahatma Gandhi with Cipla founder KA Hamied during his visit to Cipla in July 1939.

Indians should be concerned about the recent decision to allow 74% brownfield FDI in pharma under the automatic route as this will speed up the ongoing pincer strategy to take over the pillars of the Indian generic industry, which is known as the pharmacy of the developing world. Companies like Cipla that contributed not only to employment, development of indigenous technologies and innovation but also significantly to the availability of medicines to tackle public health challenges, could be taken over with no prior approval.

Generic companies like Cipla are now at great risk of being merged and acquired, becoming a part of multinational pharmaceutical corporations like Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck or Bristol-Myers Squibb. They might no longer play a role in meeting the public health needs of the developing world, but simply be cogs of the multinational pharmaceutical industry whose sole aim seems to be to generate supra-normal profits for its CEOs and shareholders.

Affordable healthcare hit

It is important to distinguish between brownfield investments that are basically mergers and acquisitions, and greenfield investments in which the parent company builds the business up from scratch. Greenfield FDI in the pharma sector will have a stronger and long-term impact on growth as foreign investors will have to build new manufacturing units and/or research and development facilities from the ground up, contributing to jobs and technology transfer to the country.

Unfortunately, government policies over the last decade have increasingly encouraged brownfield investments, which work like this: A Japanese or US pharmaceutical corporation purchases a Indian generic company, resulting in a transfer of the controlling stake, with huge profits accruing to the firm’s previous owners without resulting in major investment in the country.

Ranbaxy is a classic example. In 2008, the owners of the company, the Singh brothers, sold their stake in the company, which consisted of brands, production units and research and development facilities. The owners earned huge profits, but the company itself has all but disappeared. Ranbaxy’s phenomenal growth stagnated after it was acquired by the Japanese company Daiichi, and it was finally resold to Sun Pharma in India, which was one of its competitors. From one of the leading generic manufacturers that took pride in leading the production and supply of affordable HIV and cancer medicines like Zidovudine and Imatinib at the beginning of the century, Ranbaxy today exists only as a subsidiary for Sun Pharma’s branded business.

Relaxing the norms on brownfield FDI in pharma will not contribute to technology transfer or new research and development facilities. It will only allow capital flow from India to developed countries whose pharmaceutical industry is taking over key Indian companies to enter the generic branded business in high and middle income countries. In the process, India will lose an independent generic industry that fiercely competes with patent-holding multinational pharmaceutical corporations to bring low cost essential medicines to the market.

Leena Menghaney is a lawyer working on access to medicines in developing countries.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at letters@scroll.in.
Sponsored Content BY 

Do you really need to use that plastic straw?

The hazards of single-use plastic items, and what to use instead.

In June 2018, a distressed whale in Thailand made headlines around the world. After an autopsy it’s cause of death was determined to be more than 80 plastic bags it had ingested. The pictures caused great concern and brought into focus the urgency of the fight against single-use plastic. This term refers to use-and-throw plastic products that are designed for one-time use, such as takeaway spoons and forks, polythene bags styrofoam cups etc. In its report on single-use plastics, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has described how single-use plastics have a far-reaching impact in the environment.

Dense quantity of plastic litter means sights such as the distressed whale in Thailand aren’t uncommon. Plastic products have been found in the airways and stomachs of hundreds of marine and land species. Plastic bags, especially, confuse turtles who mistake them for jellyfish - their food. They can even exacerbate health crises, such as a malarial outbreak, by clogging sewers and creating ideal conditions for vector-borne diseases to thrive. In 1988, poor drainage made worse by plastic clogging contributed to the devastating Bangladesh floods in which two-thirds of the country was submerged.

Plastic litter can, moreover, cause physiological harm. Burning plastic waste for cooking fuel and in open air pits releases harmful gases in the air, contributing to poor air quality especially in poorer countries where these practices are common. But plastic needn’t even be burned to cause physiological harm. The toxic chemical additives in the manufacturing process of plastics remain in animal tissue, which is then consumed by humans. These highly toxic and carcinogenic substances (benzene, styrene etc.) can cause damage to nervous systems, lungs and reproductive organs.

The European Commission recently released a list of top 10 single-use plastic items that it plans to ban in the near future. These items are ubiquitous as trash across the world’s beaches, even the pristine, seemingly untouched ones. Some of them, such as styrofoam cups, take up to a 1,000 years to photodegrade (the breakdown of substances by exposure to UV and infrared rays from sunlight), disintegrating into microplastics, another health hazard.

More than 60 countries have introduced levies and bans to discourage the use of single-use plastics. Morocco and Rwanda have emerged as inspiring success stories of such policies. Rwanda, in fact, is now among the cleanest countries on Earth. In India, Maharashtra became the 18th state to effect a ban on disposable plastic items in March 2018. Now India plans to replicate the decision on a national level, aiming to eliminate single-use plastics entirely by 2022. While government efforts are important to encourage industries to redesign their production methods, individuals too can take steps to minimise their consumption, and littering, of single-use plastics. Most of these actions are low on effort, but can cause a significant reduction in plastic waste in the environment, if the return of Olive Ridley turtles to a Mumbai beach are anything to go by.

To know more about the single-use plastics problem, visit Planet or Plastic portal, National Geographic’s multi-year effort to raise awareness about the global plastic trash crisis. From microplastics in cosmetics to haunting art on plastic pollution, Planet or Plastic is a comprehensive resource on the problem. You can take the pledge to reduce your use of single-use plastics, here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of National Geographic, and not by the Scroll editorial team.