The WIPO Negotiations on IP, Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge: Can It Deliver?
There has been much expectation on what the Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) can deliver on intellectual property aspects of the protection of genetic resources (GRs), traditional knowledge (TK) and related traditional cultural expressions (TCEs). Results from fourteen years of extensive study, analysis and discussion have been distilled into three negotiating texts. But in July 2014, negotiations suffered a reversal. (more…)
The Nagoya Protocol: Main Characteristics, Challenges and Opportunities
The Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity entered into force in October 2014. Its provisions clearly reflect the need for countries to set up access and benefit sharing rules and procedures for the Protocol’s implementation at the national level. (more…)
The Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing of Genetic Resources: Analysis and Implementation Options for Developing Countries.
As is common knowledge, the Nagoya Protocol was rushed through in the final hours of COP10 in an attempt to secure a binding instrument on ABS. As a result the Protocol represents, at best, a partially negotiated instrument. In the process, transparency, legal certainty and balance seem to have been sacrificed. (more…)
Developing Biotechnology Innovations Through Traditional Knowledge.
This paper suggests that by using biotechnology, traditional knowledge holders may obtain economic gain, through innovation and research and development based on the traditional knowledge. It also explores what are the obstacles in the development of biotechnology-based traditional knowledge innovation. (more…)
Mandatory Disclosure of the Source and Origin of Biological Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge under the TRIPS Agreement.
The discussion on TRIPS and CBD in the WTO demonstrates the growing convergence on content, scope, relevance and effectiveness of an international mandatory obligation on disclosure of source and country providing biological resources and traditional knowledge. (more…)
Integrating Development into WIPO Activities and Processes: Strategies for the 2004 WIPO Assemblies.
The fortieth Series of Meetings of the Assemblies of Member States of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) will take place in Geneva from 27 September to 5 October 2004.1 The Assemblies will address various matters including issues currently under negotiation in various WIPO committees and bodies. (more…)
Protection and Promotion of Traditional Medicine – Implications for Public Health in Developing Countries
Traditional medicine (TRM) includes knowledge and practices either codified in writing or transmitted orally. TRM serves the health needs of the vast majority of people in developing countries, where access to “modern” health care services and medicine is limited by economic and cultural factors. TRM is broadly used in such countries, often being the only affordable treatment available to poor people and those in remote communities. In a context of persisting poverty and marginalization and, in particular, in view of the high prices generally charged for patented medicines, the relevance of TRM in developing countries may, in the future, increase. TRM has been recognized in western science as a valuable source of products and treatments for health care. It often provides leads for the development and commercialization of new pharmaceutical products. However, western intellectual property systems have regarded TRM, as well as other components of traditional knowledge (TK), as information in the “public domain”, freely available for use by anybody. This has meant that TRM and other traditional knowledge has been exploited in Western contexts without any recognition, moral or economic, to those who originated or held the relevant knowledge. Further, diverse components of TRM have been appropriated under intellectual property rights (IPRs) by researchers and commercial enterprises, without any compensation to the knowledge’s creators or holders. While all these forms of ‘protection’ are important, this paper focuses on issues relating to protection of TRM in the context of IPRs, both as a defensive and offensive strategy. Its main purpose is to try to clarify the extent to which IPRs may be used in relation to TRM, and what the implications of such use may be for public health.
