Although IPRs have not been an important barrier until now, evidence suggests that they may already be hampering access to cutting edge technology - a problem that may be
worsened by a significant increase in IPRs for climate-friendly technology.
The arguments for uniform IPRs across very different countries and sectors are very weak. Historically, all rich countries
have utilised tailor-made IPR regimes to promote growth and development. The TRIPS agreement and pressure from rich countries deprive poor countries of the same opportunities.
Although stronger IPR
protection may have some beneficial effects on technology transfer, investments and innovation in middle-income and larger developing countries, there is no evidence of such positive effects in the
poorest countries. On the contrary, the evidence suggests that it may even have negative effects on research and innovation. This may hamper the development and deployment of locally adapted climate
change technologies for mitigation and adaptation.
Moreover, IPR protection in poor countries will lead to higher prices and less access to new climate friendly technologies. This will lead to
increased global inequality and become a significant barrier for development, mitigation and adaptation to climate change.
Indeed, the evidence clearly indicates that more flexible IPR rules in poor
countries may be the best, most efficient way to promote "infant industry protection" and the transfer and deployment of climate-friendly technology.
We need to revise the old-fashioned thinking that
stronger IPRs are necessary to create growth and development, and to tackle the climate crisis. Indeed, there is a need for fewer and more flexible patent rules, especially for the worlds poorest
countries, to do exactly that.
The report ends with recommendations on how this could be done:
• Issue a statement on IPRs and Climate Change following in the foot-steps of the agreement
on IPRs and Public Health to ensure that the world's poorest countries can access the technology they need to tackle the climate crisis.
• Grant an unlimited-time exception to the current
IPRs for Least Developed Countries.
• Develop new, innovative IPR schemes for climate technologies such as patent pools/libraries to ensure easy access for other developing countries. • Develop a special IPR regime to encourage public-private partnerships for the development of pro-poor climate friendly technology for adaptation and mitigation.
The important conclusion in
the report is that the international climate negotiations must ensure that intellectual property rights do not block, but instead build an equitable and effective solution to the climate crisis.
[ Any views expressed in this article are those of the writer and not of Reuters. ]
Houses are developed in a peat area in the Mengkatip district of Indonesia's South Kalimantan April 25, 2009. Within a vast deforested area on Borneo island, Australia and Indonesia hope to ...
