WIPO International Conference on IP and Development
07 April 2016
There is an intrinsic link between intellectual property and development.
By providing incentives for new inventions/creations, IPR regimes can provide a steady stream of innovations that fuel economic progress, alleviate poverty and diseases, and enrich cultural heritages.
IP protection should not be considered an end in itself - it is an instrument for technological development for the benefit of entire societies.
To paraphrase a familiar expression, IP is too important to leave to the IP experts.
IPRs are cross-cutting and potentially affect everyone:
- Availability of educational materials for schoolchildren or life-saving pharmaceuticals for sick patients
- Preservation of traditional knowledge among indigenous communities
- Not to mention relationship between IPR and competition policies
Thus, IP important not only for commercial interests, but for wider development objectives
How an IP regime affects development depends several factors.
LDCs and other developing countries with low absorptive capacity, limited skilled labor, and underdeveloped technological infrastructure do not derive as many benefits from stronger IP protection as developed countries.
Yet if an IP regime is designed in a balanced manner, it can encourage investment and innovation in developing countries.
For instance, SMEs competing in a domestic market would likely invest and grow more if they benefitted from protection of their trademarks, utility models, or trade secrets. At the same time, SMEs may find it difficult to access new technologies under a strong IPR regime. Balance is key.
The lesson we can draw from economic history is that IP protection should be adapted to a country's - and yet better an industry's - level of development.
As UNCTAD's work in the area of IP and pharmaceuticals shows, many industrialized countries introduced patent protection for pharmaceutical products only after their domestic industries had acquired the capacity to engage in pharmaceutical innovation.
For example, Germany introduced pharmaceutical product patents in 1968, Switzerland in 1977, and Sweden in 1978.
This allowed their researchers to study foreign inventions and build domestic absorption capacities.
Example: Korea gradually strengthened its IP regime as the domestic industry moved up through the development stages of (1) duplicative imitation, (2) creative imitation, to (3) the stage of innovation. This strategy played a role in catalyzing Korea's growth from poor farming economy to highly industrialized economy today.
It is the purpose of today's session to examine in more detail the interface between IP and economic development.
In particular, we will examine the question how much room for maneuver remains for developing countries under multilateral IP treaties (and an increasing number of regional and bilateral FTAs).
- Prior to the adoption of the TRIPS Agreement, all countries were free to exclude entire areas of technology from IP protection.
- Today, WTO Members no longer have the same flexibility as the developed countries, except for the LDCs.
In our discussion, we should also bear in mind the question of how IP-related technical cooperation should be designed to maximize its impact.
