The 2002 Doha Declaration reaffirmed that the TRIPS Agreement should not prevent members from taking the necessary measures to protect public health. Despite this recognition, less developed countries have argued that flexible TRIPS provisions, such as compulsory licensing, are almost impossible to enforce. Less developed countries, in particular, cited their young domestic manufacturing and technology industries as evidence of the imprecision of the policy. (a) arising from international agreements on mutual legal assistance or application of a general nature which are not particularly limited to the protection of intellectual property; (d) arising from international agreements for the protection of intellectual property which entered into force before the entry into force of the WTO Agreement, provided that such agreements are notified to the Ad Hoc Council and do not constitute arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination against nationals of other Members. In addition to the basic intellectual property standards established by the TRIPS Agreement, many nations have engaged in bilateral agreements to introduce a higher level of protection. This collection of standards, known as TRIPS+ or TRIPS-Plus, can take many forms.  The general objectives of these agreements are as follows: the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is an international agreement between all Member States of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). It establishes minimum standards for the regulation of different forms of intellectual property (IP) by national governments, as applied to nationals of other WTO member countries.  TRIPS was negotiated at the end of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) between 1989 and 1990 and is managed by the WTO. Since the entry into force of TRIPS, it has been the subject of criticism from developing countries, scientists and non-governmental organizations. While some of this criticism is directed at the WTO in general, many proponents of trade liberalization also see TRIPS as bad policy.
The wealth concentration effects of TRIPS (the movement of money from people in developing countries to copyright and patent holders in developed countries) and the imposition of artificial shortages on citizens of countries that would otherwise have weaker intellectual property laws are common bases for such criticism. Other criticisms focused on TRIPS` failure to accelerate the flow of investment and technology to low-income countries, an advantage advanced by WTO members before the agreement was created. World Bank statements indicate that TRIPS has not been able to tangibly accelerate investment in low-income countries, although this has been done for middle-income countries.  The long periods of validity of patents under TRIPS have been examined to indicate that they excessively slow down the market entry of generic drug substitutes and competition in the market. . . .