Pfizer are launching a proactive attack on counterfeiters, reports Bloomberg writer Simeon Bennett this week. The company are hiring former officials to hunt down counterfeiters, and beginning to pursue cases through civil courts, rather than simply waiting for the authorities to process criminal procedures.

Given the extent of counterfeiting of Pfizer’s Viagra product, their valiant effort is little surprise. However, as IPN have often pointed out – the weak rule of law (in both criminal and civil proceedings) often stops companies and victims from successfully pursuing civil cases.

The Confederation of Indian Industry has noted this as well. It notes that laws to protect trademarks do exist, yet the ability to enforce them is lacking. One of their reports states: "there remains a general view that prosecuting such civil offences is a lengthy and cumbersome process, often resulting in less than desirable outcomes."

Interestingly, in China the decision of certain companies to register branches in Hong Kong could come back to bite them. Many companies do this so that, in the event of disputes, they can take advantage of Hong Kong’s courts which are far less arbitrary and corrupt than their equivalents in mainland China. However, this opens up the companies to legal action against them, should they produce substandard products which harm people. Hence the victims of melamine-tainted milk (from mainland China) are pursuing a case against the producers, registered in Hong Kong. Perhaps the old adage – what goes around, comes around – will finally catch up with counterfeiters and substandard producers who harm so many people in parts of Asia and Africa.

It’s a rather hazy and secretive proposal at the moment, but it seems that the EU could end years of frustration and deadlock over whether to grow genetically modified organisms. On Tuesday, the European Commission is set to propose that the decision should be up to national and local governments. This would be a rare application of subsidiarity, the recognition that the individual 27 EU member states are better placed – and elected – to represent their people’s wishes. Hence the unlikely duo that pushed for the proposal, the pro-GM Netherlands and anti-GM Austria.

There were already signs of change in the EU with the approval of a genetically modified potato in March, the first approval since the decade-long de facto moratorium. The effects of breaking the deadlock would be felt far beyond the EU’s borders. It could potentially encourage the growth of GMOs in Africa, whose low uptake of the technology has largely been determined by its largest agricultural export market, the EU. 

But GMO-critics like Greenpeace are already threatening the viability of the offer. They argue that all Member States will be asked to approve GMOs at the EU level, but not given any extra powers to ban them at the local or national levels should they wish.

It is true that certain issues remain unclear: for example, Belgium questioned whether the whole bloc would suffer retaliatory trade measures should the US challenge a Member State ban, as it did for the EU.

But for both GM enthusiasts and staunch opponents alike, this is a rare opportunity to exercise greater influence over decision-making and to ensure that citizens’ wishes are better represented at the sub-national and national levels, rather than by unaccountable bureaucrats in Brussels.

New research into the components of Apple’s iPhone 4 nicely demonstrates the fragmented nature of modern trading. Californian designers, Korean processors, German microchips and Chinese labourers all combine to create  final product sold by retailers around the world. Developing countries should recognise that embracing global trade is the surest route out of poverty and seize upon the opportunity to attract foreign investment.

Apple is not unique in utilising localised cost efficiencies to provide lower prices for consumers. Manufacturers the world over rely upon complex international supply chains which create much needed employment opportunities and prosperity. Globalised trade is increasingly fluid: as production costs increase, as is happening with rising labour costs in China, so businesses will look elsewhere to source their products and labour- just as European businesses looked to the east in the 1960s when the Asian Tiger economies offered cheaper production opportunities.

The significance of this? Governments in developing countries should follow the Asian model of development and look to attract foreign investment by creating  favourable business environments at home.  Where this has happened Mauritius- Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea- the results have been incredible, with millions emerging from poverty in just a few decades. It is time for other developing nations to open their economies up to investment and trade.

Our daily round-up of what other think-tanks and commentators are saying on the big issues:

Per Pinstrup-Andersen on the need for GM crops to help farmers in regions with low yield outputs.

Tim Harford calls for more competition to be introduced into the National Health Service – to improve efficiency and patient outcomes.

Even by its own scant performance assessment, one in four of DfID’s main overseas programmes are failing as reported in yesterday’s Sunday Telegraph. Meanwhile some of the funded projects are so absurd that they rival the cronyistic “awareness” spending that we’ve revealed at IPN. One programme, for example, spent £190,991 on “strengthening the voices of older people” in Ukraine.

New Secretary of State Andrew Mitchell continues to make cuts in wasteful or self-serving projects, but is tied to the commitment of increasing DfID’s budget irrespective of these factors. The government recognises that there are unaccountable and opaque projects within DfID’s budget, but is still throwing (extra) billions in their direction. These revelations are a stark reminder that this unscrutinised spending can not only wasteful, but can actually harm development.