In Intellectual Property Rights and Access to Essential Medicines, Pogge makes an argument for a reform plan to create universal access to essential medicines in collaboration with the pharmaceutical industry. Pogge refers to the problem of avoidably high morality rates in poor countries as "the morally preeminent problem of our age" (37). He clearly thinks that the main reasons that we should combat "horrendous, poverty-induced, and largely avoidable morbidity and morality in the less developed countries" are moral reasons; he says that we ought to support reform "insofar as it is necessary for rendering minimally just (in the sense of 'realizing human rights insofar as this is reasonably possible') the rules of the world economy considered as one scheme" (38).
However, in laying out the details and merits of his reform plan, Pogge refers only to the prudential reasons that corporations, and the pharmaceutical industry in general, that might compel the industry to take part in the reform. Pogge refers to the "interests" and "incentives" of corporations within the industry, even though he clearly thinks that some force of morality or justice is what really obligates us to reform the system in order to lower the morality rates of poor countries. It seems that Pogge has different standards for corporations and the decisions that they make than for individuals; the morality of corporations cannot be appealed to, because such an appeal will not be convincing for the corporations. In fact, Pogge says that the "root of the evil lies not in how corporations do business, but in how we regulate and incentivize them. If we structure markets so that corporations can earn billions by getting people to smoke, then corporations will work hard to get people to smoke . . . . It is our responsibility to restructure the patent regime so that pharmaceutical innovators lose the financial stake in the proliferation of their target diseases and gain a financial stake in the destruction and eradication of these diseases" (28-29).
I think that Pogge's characterization of corporation's tendencies is accurate; as we all know, morality tends to play no large role in determining how corporations conduct themselves. However, I think it's interesting that morality still grounds Pogge's account, but that he's able to create a reform plan that carries out the ultimate aims of justice while simultaneously creating appealing, pragmatic financial incentives for corporations. I think Pogge does a nice job of addressing the unrelated nature that often seems to exist between philosophical theories of morality and the "real world." However, I wonder what would happen if Pogge was not able to come up with a theory for how to address an ultimately moral aim in a way that appealed to the pharmaceutical industry, which he paints as merely one aspect of a larger system of incentives that the public and government have created themselves. What if there is some other moral issue that needs to be solved in the world (clearly, there are many), but there is no reform plan that will prudentially appeal to the instruments within the plan? Is it still necessary to eventually carry out that aim? Or is it hopeless at that point to try to carry out the moral aim?
OK, first, best typo of the semester: "unavoidably high morality rates in poor countries." Thank you.
ReplyDeleteAlso, very interesting point about corporations. On one common view of corporations they are legally required to have, as a dominant motive, the pursuit of profits within the law. In short, they are legally required, on such a view, to pursue their narrow self-interest within the law. On such a view reasons for them will be profit maximizing reasons, or reasons of conformity to the law. Moreover, since they can wield tremendous influence on the law in pursuit of profit (lobbyists, campaign donations, etc.), questions are raised about the extent to which law is really an effective check on the pursuit of their self-interest. Pogge is working within this model, but your question about policy contrary to corporate narrow self-interest is an interesting one.