269. This delegation would like to thank the co-sponsors for having introduced this interesting and relevant item, we have not heard any dissent to many of the statements that have been made, perhaps we can start a new trend. Increasingly, harnessing technological progress is viewed by policymakers as a key priority to boost economic growth and improve living standards. The relationship between IPRs and development is indeed quite complex from a theoretical point of view. Any attempt to quantify the impact of IPRs needs to appreciate the variable nature of the legal frameworks that supports IPRs. The context of IPRs is important: they are interwoven with other domestic laws and institutions governing competition policy and anti-trust, international trade, labour rights, privacy and many other issues.
270. The economic literature on the impact of IPRs is rather inconclusive. We have to ask whether current IPR frameworks encourage innovators to address the most pressing issues facing our global society and developing countries' needs? Do they ensure access to the products of this innovation by those who need it most? It remains ambivalent as to whether the social benefits of IPRs exceed their costs, even in relation to the developed world. The basic argument in favour of IPRs is that they are necessary to stimulate invention and new technologies. The main critique against IPRs is that they increase the cost of patented commodities which reduces welfare. This problem is exacerbated in developing countries because they are net importers of technology. Given these embedded costs, a quantification of the contribution of IPR frameworks to improving lives through social and economic growth ought to rest on development models that enable developing countries to catch up and as such the optimal IPR regime for them may be different from that for a more advanced economy. In the pharmaceutical industry, for example, pharmaceutical companies devote relatively little of their research budget towards diseases that afflict developing countries, and the incremental returns that they receive from developing countries are sufficiently smaller that they are unlikely to affect significantly the overall pace of innovation.
271. If it is argued that IPR frameworks lead to broader and stronger IPRs and that such systems may encourage more IP to be generated, or greater creativity to develop, such assumption must at the very least address the following questions: How much of the IP that is generated translates to more innovation, jobs, creativity, and productivity and greater societal benefits? Are IPRs currently calibrated to maximise innovation and inclusive growth? Some innovators avoid heavy reliance on IP because they are concerned that it could slow innovation down. In their view, most innovation is incremental and if IP rights are too strong or too widely used, IP will retard progress for subsequent inventors. This perspective originated with certain software hackers and academics and eventually helped to shape the development of open-software platforms like Linux, Android and Chrome OS.
272. Furthermore, the pace of innovation in some industries is raising doubts in the minds of some stakeholders about the universal suitability of IP systems for helping to solve major global challenges such as climate change. This was illustrated by the decision of Tesla Motors to open its patent portfolio, which Tesla said was a result of its disappointment with the slow pace of adoption of electric motor technology.
273. Whereas the transformational effect of new technologies cannot be denied, the diffusion and access to such technologies are not only dependent on IPR frameworks. UNCTAD's Information Economy Report: Digitalization, Trade and Development underscores the fact that affordable access to different ICTs is essential for people and enterprises to take active part in the evolving digital economy and reap development gains from it. More than half of the world's population remains offline and the broadband divide is ever wider.
274. Proponents advance the argument that in respect of education and training, a range of intellectual property rich materials foster social and economic contributions to society. A fundamental component of the right to education is access to high quality text books and other learning materials. Yet in many developing countries, access to such resources can be prohibitive since textbook scarcity is a serious challenge affecting the quality of education. In Cameroon, there is approximately one reading textbook available for every 12 grade two students and one mathematics text per 14 students. As more and more learning is facilitated through computer access and the internet, both students and teachers are able to log onto fast amounts of information. Unfortunately, access to these technologies are both inadequately and unequally distributed between the developed and undeveloped regions in the world. The disparities experienced in the physical world is often exacerbated in the online environment. Buy a book and you own it forever; pay for access to a digital book and when the period of service is over you often retain nothing.
275. A better understanding of the enabling conditions and implications of digitalization for the economy and society is urgently needed in order to maximize potential benefits and opportunities, and cope with various challenges and costs. The adoption of digital technologies in global supply chains across all industries also impact on international production. In this context, we are beginning to see the disruptive effects of DT when firms re-shore investment as low-wage jurisdictions lose their cost advantages from increased use of robotics and artificial intelligence. There are concerns that the labour conditions may deteriorate in the digital economy and exacerbate polarised labour markets and inequality. Employment levels in many sectors appear set to decline and as the new technology augments the premium for higher skills and replaces routine jobs, workers will be forced to compete for fewer, lower-paying jobs. Where new employment is created, it is often insecure with declining levels of health, safety and unemployment benefits. The use of self-driving cars and drones may save time and money; however, the introduction of these technologies is not value neutral in themselves, aside from the IPR dimension, there are a myriad of other factors that determine their ultimate societal impact and utility.
276. Over 40,131 patents originating from all over the world were registered in South Africa between January 2005 and July 2015. Only 10% of the total number of patents granted were South African patents, this translates to on average less than 400 South African patents granted per year. The South African patent landscape is characterized by the easy grant of patents of dubious quality and value, as well as the enforcement of a legal frame work that appears to be heavily skewed in favour of patentees. What this means in practice is that in exchange for very little, market exclusivity is easily granted, and maintained, ordinarily at a high cost to society.
277. Intellectual property in itself has always been an integral part of general economic, social and cultural development worldwide. Whether IPRs are a good or bad thing, the developed world has come to an accommodation with them over a long period. Even if their disadvantages sometimes outweigh their advantages, by and large the developed world has the national economic strength and established legal mechanisms to overcome the problems so caused. Developing countries are far from homogeneous, a fact which is self-evident but often forgotten. Not only do their scientific and technical capacities vary, but also their social and economic structures, and their inequalities of income and wealth. The determinants of poverty, and therefore the appropriate policies to address it, will vary accordingly between countries. The same applies to policies on IPRs. The impact of IP policies on poor people will also vary according to socio-economic circumstances. What works in India, will not necessarily work in Brazil or Botswana.
278. We thank the proponents for the introduction of this very useful contribution. Much of what is presented is based on broad generalisations and assumptions. This delegation would like to invite proponents to enter in to a more focused discussion on the theme of Intellectual Property and Innovation. More specifically, we would like proponents to address some of the following issues in upcoming discussions:
What can we learn from the economic and empirical evidence about the impact of IP in developing countries? Does the historical experience of developed countries hold any lessons for developing countries today? How can technology transfer to developing countries be facilitated?
How does the IP system contribute to the development of medicines that are needed by poor people? How does it affect the access of poor people to medicines and their availability? What does this imply for IP rules and practices?
How does copyright protection affect developing countries' access to knowledge, technologies and information that they need? Will IP or technological protection affect access to the Internet? How can copyright be used to support creative industries in developing countries?
How should developing countries frame their own legislation and practice on patents? Can developing countries frame their legislation in ways that might avoid some of the problems that have occurred in developed countries?
Are the international and national institutions involved in IPRs as effective as they could be in serving the interests of developing countries?
