G77 training


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

G77 training

  1. 1. Innovation, Science and Technology, andDevelopment: Strategic Considerations for IP Negotiations First Annual G77 and China Course for Developing Country Negotiators: The Strategic Dimensions of Negotiations November 19-20, 2012 Geneva Nirmalya Syam
  2. 2. InnovationTechnological change that leads to the introduction of new or improved products and processes• R&D• Absorption, diffusion and transfer of technology• Reverse engineering
  3. 3. Stages of Technological Development• Initiation stage: Technology imported as capital goods• Internalization stage: Local firms learn through imitation under a flexible IPR regime• Generation stage: local firms and institutions innovate through their own R&D
  4. 4. The Relevance of IP• IP – an incentive to reward inventors and creators …• … to benefit society through the use of such inventions and creations and foster scientific and technological progress• “… this court has consistently held that the primary purpose of our patent laws is not the creation of private fortunes for the owners of patents but is to promote the progress of science and useful arts ...“ (US Supreme Court in Motion Picture Patents Co., vs. Universal Film Mfg. Co. (243 U.S. 502, p.511, 1917))
  5. 5. The Relevance of IP• IP does not mean ‘innovation’, it may deter innovation - Access to and diffusion of manufacturing technologies - Access to technologies for climate change
  6. 6. The Relevance of IP• Innovation and creativity also require competition and follow-on innovation and creativity• Governments in formulating IP policy need to balance between: - Providing IP protection - Providing access by competitors and consumers• IP policy should be coherent with public policy areas of education, health, agriculture, environment, local employment, etc.
  7. 7. Striking a Balance• The extent to which IP should be protected varies with the level of development of the country, priorities identified and among sectors.• No « one-size-fits-all » model IP law• Historical evidence: (Europe, USA, Rep. Korea) - Early stages of technological development require broad public domain for indigenous learning - Advanced stages of development require higher level of protection of technological assets - Even technologically advanced economies depend on competition and follow-on innovation
  8. 8. Development Oriented IP Policy - Challenges• IP policy has to be integrated into different aspects of national development policies• IP regimes must be in accordance with the realities of developing countries – innovation systems are fragmented and weak, and depend overwhelmingly on foreign innovations – very limited public sector investment in scientific activities – domestic firms generate «minor» or «incremental» innovations derived from the routine exploitation of existing technologies
  9. 9. Development Oriented IP Policy - Challenges• Lack of local expertise• Technical assistance – lack of appropriate development orientation• Limited coordination on IP issues between related government departments• Coercion exerted by developed countries to deter use of flexibilities and inappropriately raise standards of IP protection and enforcement• Different components of IP (patents, trademarks, designs, copyright) may warrant different approaches
  10. 10. IP discussions in Multilateral Forum WTOIdeal framework WIPO UNFCCfor cooperation: ITU UNAIDS UNCTAD UNDPMillenniumDevelopmentGoals ISO Interpol UN Bilateral & IP Human Regional Trade & WCO RightsReality: bodies Investment AgreementsFocus on CBD UPUincreasing IPprotection & FAO UNEPenforcement..but UPOV UNESCOCHANGING WHO UNIDO
  11. 11. Variety of issues:Traditional focus on Access, Affordability Production of Access to global Missapropriation ofincreasing standards and availability of medicines for public goods, i.e genetic resourcesof protection and medicines – WIPO, diseases that clean air and and associatedenforcement of IPRs WTO TRIPS mainly affect poor water – WIPO, traditionaland harmonization Council, WHO countries – WHO UNFCCC, UNEP knowledge – WTO CEWG, GSPOA. TRIPS Council, WIPO, CBD, Nagoya ProtocolImpacts of patents Commodification Traditional Erosion of genetic Anti-competitiveand PVP on small and privatization of knowledge resources leading practicesscale farming and life forms, i.e. plants owners not to loss of diversity associated with IPsustainable and animals – rewarded and or in animal and use, i.e. refusal toagriculture – WIPO, WIPO, WTO respected – plant varieties - license - WIPOWTO, UPOV WIPO IGC WTO TRIPS GRTKF, WTO Council, CBD TRIPS CouncilIP-related technical Lack of impact Impact of IP Lack of focus on Role ofassistance assessment of IP on strategies of big improving collaboration andinsufficient or development – business on commercialization non-IP, i.e. open,inappropriate – WIPO CDIP SMEs - WIPO and marketing of models forWIPO, WTO technologies innovation - WIPOUnforeseen Access to cutting Inoperability of Access to The scope of fairconsequences of edge technologies technologies and research and use of copyrightedover IP-enforcement for economic systems due to IP educational works in digital– WIPO ACE, WCO, development – in standards – materials – WIPO form and sharingINTERPOL WIPO, UNFCCC WIPO, ITU SCCR over the Internet – WIPO SCCR
  12. 12. Important Issues in Relevant Fora• WIPO – Mainstreaming development orientation in the technical assistance activities and norm-setting processes in WIPO; Implementation of the WIPO Development Agenda• WTO, TRIPS Council – Retaining maximum flexibility in designing laws and regulations for IP protection and enforcement; interface with CBD;• UNFCCC – The role of IPRs in relation to ensuring transfer of EST to developing countries• WHO – Implementation of the GSPOA-PHI; CEWG recommendations for an R&D Treaty; keeping IP enforcement out of discussions on quality, safety and efficacy of medicines in the SSFFC negotiations• Bilateral Negotiations – Resisting TRIPS plus provisions
  13. 13. Negotiating Considerations• Coherence with national policy objectives - In multilateral, regional or bilateral negotiations, the outcome agreements should support domestic policy making on IP in accordance with development priorities in various sectors, and not constrict this policy space• Coordination - Greater coordination among developing country negotiators within and across various fora where IP is a critical issue - Coordination between negotiators in CBD/Nagoya Protocol, FAO, WTO and WIPO - Coordination among negotiators in WIPO, WTO and UNFCCC - Coordination on bilateral and regional trade and investment agreement negotiators on IP chapters/provisions
  14. 14. How Can South Centre Assist• Facilitate involvement of think tanks, research institutions, academics and civil society from the South on issues of IP and development• Preparatory meetings• Involvement of SC experts in technical assistance programmes• SC assistance on national IP issues