Minutes - TRIPS Council - View details of the intervention/statement

Ambassador Alfredo Suescum (Panama)
Bangladesh on behalf of Least-developed countries
14 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND INNOVATION: INCLUSIVE INNOVATION AND MSME COLLABORATION
511. I thank the proponents Australia, the European Union, Japan, Switzerland, the United States and Chinese Taipei for submitting such an important issue for discussion. I thank them for sharing with us their good and exciting experiences with MSMEs in their countries. It is true that micro, small and medium-sized enterprises are the real pivotal force for the national and global trade and commerce and this could not be more factual and relevant for LDCs because as mentioned in the submission, we also see the importance for employment, production of goods for daily necessities, agriculture, poverty reduction, empowering of women, savings, export and other social development. All these factors are particularly dependent on the activities of MSMEs in LDCs. 512. However, if we examine the status and investment of MSMEs in the LDCs, we see that establishment and securing an IP regime may or may not play a role for their development. A prerequisite for the development of MSMEs in LDCs is the creation and promotion of an ambiance for innovation first rather than enforcement of an IP regime. 513. In Bangladesh, the number of MSMEs are around 1.6million. MSMEs constitute 99% of private industrial establishments and provide 70-80% employment of the non-agriculture labour force. We have the two largest end-users in the world, one is Brac Bank and the other is Grameen Bank and they principally deal with employing the SMEs. In addition the Government also disperses huge amount of micro-credit for MSMEs. Our experience shows that if the MSMEs are provided with an enabling environment for innovation, they are better. We have seen that MSMEs usually use the local genetic resources, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions to the advantage of their business and development. 514. So, if we have to protect anything, then we will have to protect the genetic resources, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expression of the different countries locally and globally. The agenda items 4, 5 and 6 or the IGC can also be important in this regard. This national and global protection will create a beneficial and supporting environment for innovation. Going for protection of IP without promoting and securing these elements will be like putting the car before the horse. We also have to remember that the nature and orientation and the very differentiation of MSMEs in developing countries and LDCs are starkly different from those in developed countries. So, local realities in developing countries and LDCs must be considered when we look for ways and means for development of MSMEs. A simple combination of two different environments would be erroneous. I, again, thank all the proponents for introducing such an important issue to the Council.
The Council took note of the statements made.
76. The Chairman said that this item had been put on the agenda at the written request of the delegations of Australia, the European Union, Japan, Switzerland and the United States. Since the circulation of the initial proposed agenda, the item had also been co-sponsored by the delegation of Chinese Taipei. He also recalled two communications from the initial co-sponsors that had been circulated for consideration under this agenda item. The first contribution (document IP/C/W/622) set out the proposed items for an exchange of experiences among delegations in the course of this year with respect to the role of IPRs as a driver for more inclusive innovation that promoted the participation of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises in local and global trade. The second communication (document IP/C/W/625) introduced more specifically the agenda item of today's meeting regarding inclusive innovation and MSME collaboration. The delegation of Chinese Taipei had recently joined the co-sponsors of these documents.

77. The representatives of Australia, the United States, Chinese Taipei, Japan, the European Union, Switzerland, India, Colombia, Canada, Argentina, Guatemala, Mexico, Israel, Dominican Republic, the Russian Federation, Brazil, New Zealand, Bangladesh on behalf of the LDC Group and Nigeria on behalf of the African Group took the floor.

78. The Council took note of the statements made.

IP/C/M/85, IP/C/M/85/Add.1