Proceedings of the International scientific and practical conference ―Science, Technology and Culture in the Era of Globalization‖ (December 24-26, 2025) / Publisher website: www.naukainfo.com. – Geneva, Switzerland, 2026. – 234 p.

9 The formation of the modern international patent protection regime in biotechnology occurred with the active involvement of transnational corporations, particularly in the pharmaceutical sector. In the 1980s-1990s, companies such as Pfizer, Merck, and Eli Lilly faced limited patent protection in developing countries, where generic production was often permitted or pharmaceutical patents were not recognized at all [7, pp. 1-2]. In response, pharmaceutical TNCs initiated large-scale political and legal lobbying campaigns through industry associations, in particular the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), aimed at institutionalizing strict global IP protection standards. As a result of this influence, patent protection norms were incorporated into the trade agenda of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and later into the WTO TRIPS Agreement [7, p. 9]. After the entry into force of the TRIPS Agreement, transnational pharmaceutical corporations encountered the limits of its compromise nature, particularly the implementation of flexibility mechanisms for states (compulsory licensing and public health exceptions). In response, companies such as Pfizer, Novartis, and Roche began promoting stronger intellectual property protection standards through bilateral and regional trade agreements – the so-called TRIPS-plus provisions, which include standards exceeding the minimum TRIPS requirements, namely: 1) Extensions of patent terms; 2) Expanded clinical data exclusivity; 3) Restrictions on compulsory licensing; Additional requirements for national patent offices [1, pp. 940-942]. The practice of concluding such agreements with countries in Latin America, Asia, and Africa has led to an effective narrowing of their political autonomy in the fields of public health and science policy. In this context, TRIPS-plus functions as an instrument of ―privatized global governance,‖ through which TNCs entrench a favorable model of innovation development at the interstate level [8, pp. 782-783]. Beyond shaping international legal norms, TNCs actively influence national science and regulatory policies. A notable example is Pfizer’s role in the United