China\u27s Indigenous Innovation Policies Under the TRIPS and GPA Agreements and Alternatives for Promoting Economic Growth

China\u27s intricate web of Indigenous Innovation policies affords preferences in government procurement to certain high-technology products whose intellectual property is owned or registered in China. While the the policies were intended to strengthen China\u27s national economy, they have been heavily criticized, notably by the US and the EU, as a strategic attempt to commercialize non-Chinese proprietary ideas in China and as a trade barrier that harms all stakeholders in the world marketplace. Although China\u27s State Council recently committed the county to repealing several key Indigenous Innovation measures, the extent to which Indigenous Innovation preferences will be implemented by the local Chinese governments, which have significant autonomy in administering national policy measures, remains elusive. This Comment analyzes the legal status of Indigenous Innovation policies under the TRIPS and the GPA Agreements, examines the economic and policy goals underlying the policies, and concludes by considering alternative and mutually preferable solutions that would allow both China and its foreign competitors to achieve their technological and economic growth objectives