Hot debate over technology issues
Martin Khor
In the ongoing climate talks towards the Copenhagen Conference in
December, technology transfer to developing countries is one of the
hottest issues. The developing countries argue that they are unable to
successfully shift to a sustainable development pathway that emits less
carbon dioxide per unit of output, unless they have access to
climate-friendly technology at the most affordable price.
At a workshop on technology development and transfer held in Delhi,
organized by the Indian Government and the United Nations Economic and
Social Department, participants agreed on such measures as the setting
up of a network of technology centres of excellence and joint research
among countries to develop and promote relevant technologies.
Collecting garbage for recycling. Courtesy: Google |
However, the biggest bone of contention, which was not resolved, was
whether the wealthy countries should relax the global rules on
intellectual property, so that developing countries can access patented
technologies more cheaply and with fewer conditions.
Developing countries generally argue that the price of technology
will be higher if there is a monopoly over the products and the
production processes. Moreover, firms in the developing countries will
be hindered from producing the equipment or products if they are
patented by the rich nations’ companies.
Thus, either developing countries should be allowed to exempt the
relevant technologies from patents, or they should be allowed to more
easily use existing or new flexibilities in the rules and their
applications. And there should be guidelines to regulate the terms set
by patent holders in providing licences to others to make the products
or use the processes.
However, the developed countries generally argue in return that
patents are needed to provide incentives to spur innovation, and that
they would not agree to relax the global rules on intellectual property.
One major reason against this is that the overwhelming share of patents
is owned by companies or individuals in developed countries and the
developing countries often incur high costs if they want to access
patented technologies.
Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh started the debate by saying
that climate-friendly technologies should be considered global public
goods. Intellectual property rights applied to those goods should
balance innovation with the needs of humankind.
There should be incentives to develop green technologies, but there
is also a need to facilitate their deployment at affordable cost in
developing countries. This balance was struck for technologies producing
medicines in developing countries and a similar approach to support our
climate and life support system is ‘equally compelling,’ said the Prime
Minister.
Two United Nations leaders also weighed in on behalf of technology
transfer. UN Under-Secretary General for economic and social affairs Sha
Zukang said a tough issue was in intellectual property and on how to
reward innovation while accelerating technology diffusion.
He advocated a big investment push on renewable energy in developing
countries. International technology cooperation and knowledge sharing
can mobilize mature technologies for developing countries and make other
technologies like renewable energy more affordable to the poor.
The Secretary General of the UN Conference on Trade and Development
Supachai Panitchpakdi said intellectual property is a critical part in
technology transfer. He quoted a Chatham House report which concludes
that the IP system is too cumbersome. Instead, the rules must strike a
balance between IP holders and public interest and the Copenhagen
meeting should right that balance.
The WTO Ministers’ meeting in 2001 sent clear signals for developing
countries to be encouraged to make full use of flexibilities in the IP
agreements for health objectives and the same logic should apply to
climate technologies.
There should be a well defined framework to allow the IP regime to
transfer climate technologies, he concluded.
The Chairman of the Group of 77 and China, Sudan’s Ambassador
Abdalmahmood Mohamad who represents developing countries, said the group
had identified IPRs as a barrier to technology transfer. Business as
usual in IP cannot be the order of the day.
Therefore, the group had proposed that all steps be taken in the
relevant fora to allow developing countries to exclude climate friendly
technologies from being granted patents.
The G77 also proposed creating a global technology pool, in which IP
owners can lace their patents and know how and developing countries can
draw from this pool and have access to the technologies, including on
royalty-free terms.
Bolivian Ambassador Angelica Navarro said although developing
countries could use flexibilities like compulsory licences, there are
cumbersome procedures that make them inadequate tools.
Thus, Bolivia proposed a mandatory exclusion of patents on
climate-friendly technologies in developing countries.
Several developing countries’ experts and officials, however, argued
in favour of strict adherence of IP rules to give companies the
incentive to invent technologies.
In a closed-door session to formulate a conference declaration, the
debate intensified but there could not be any agreement on IPRs. Thus
the declaration was silent on this key issue.
In a summary of the conference proceedings by the conference
Co-Chairs, the Indian Environment Minister and the UN Under-Secretary
General, it was noted that there are different views on the IP issue and
a common understanding has to evolve.
Details of the ideal system should include how to provide more
universal access to intellectual property and knowledge, how to
democratise access to technologies and how to ensure that IPRs do not
become a barrier to achieving common global goals, said the Co-Chairs.
They added that there is wide recognition of the need for a special
mechanism under the UN climate convention for technology transfer and to
oversee the functioning of the IPR regime for climate and development
goals. Other concerns include insufficient R and D, inadequate funding,
weak capacity, market failure and market distortions, said the Chairs’
summary.
As the climate talks proceed to Copenhagen, these technology issues
will be discussed and hopefully there will eventually be a good
solution.
- Third World Network Features
(The writer is the Executive Director of the South Centre, in
Switzerland). |