[A2k] KEI intervention to the WIPO PCDA

[Thiru Balasubramaniam]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]

Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) General Statement  at 4th Session
of WIPO PCDA

11 June 2007

=A0
Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) congratulates you Ambassador
Clarke on your re-election as Chair.
=A0
This meeting of the PCDA will address a number of proposals to change
WIPO.=A0=A0 Among the most important are those that would have WIPO do more
empirical analysis of the actual and potential impacts of different
intellectual property policies, practices and norm setting activities
on development, as well as on innovation and global social welfare.=A0=A0
This is needed at WIPO, and is indeed, something that any serious UN
agency should embrace.=A0 The European Union is doing this.=A0 The United
States government is beginning to do this.=A0 OECD is beginning to do
this.=A0 Several developing nations are doing this.=A0=A0
=A0
We recognize that WIPO=92s current contributions in this area are not
zero.=A0 But they are inadequate, and the development agenda discussions
are the first real opportunity to have a serious conversation about
this can be improved, so that WIPO can gain more creditability, and
respect, among serious experts and stakeholders.
=A0
One of the thorny issues for such analysis concerns the relationship
between WIPO as an institution, and the member states.=A0=A0 We all know
that economic studies, while useful, can also be subject to all sorts
of manipulations.=A0=A0 So how can WIPO organize itself so that members are
comfortable with the process, and the process is perceived to be both
fair, and useful?
=A0
KEI suggests that WIPO develop a serious capacity to respond to
requests from member states for analysis.=A0=A0 The most political and
sensitive issue of analysis is in the way that questions are asked.=A0
Framing the questions is important.=A0 Once the questions are framed,
WIPO should be able to provide timely responses.=A0 These need not always
be exhaustive research reports, but they should at least provide
information gleaned from existing academic research, and through the
collection of data.=A0 The answers to the questions can be peer reviewed,
so they can be held to high standards.=A0=A0 In summary, the member states
should be able to frame questions as they wish, and WIPO should be a
resource for data that helps answer these questions.=A0 This entire
process should be transparent, with both the questions and the answers
available to the public.=A0
=A0
On a different topic, the PCDA has before it many suggestions for norm
setting activities dealing with the needs of consumers.=A0 For example,
there are proposals to have WIPO consider a treaty on access to
knowledge.=A0=A0 As a UN agency, it is very important that WIPO make
progress on this suggestion.=A0 Access to knowledge is important for
development, and it is important for innovation.=A0 WIPO has not yet had
a real conversation about what such a treaty might look like.=A0=A0 There
have been several multi-stakeholder meetings to discuss such a treaty,
including most recently one held at the Library of Alexandria in
Egypt.=A0 WIPO should have regional meetings to discuss the possibility
of a treaty on access to knowledge, and it should either discuss this
proposal in the SCP and SCCR, or through a special committee, like the
PCDA.
=A0
On 23 May 2007 (nearly three weeks ago), the 60th World Health
Assembly, the highest governing body of the World Health Organization,
WIPO=92s sister agency tasked in the UN family with international health,
took a bold step to change the way the WHO and Member States deal with
innovation and access. The World Health Assembly adopted language that
requests the WHO Director-General Margaret Chan to encourage the
development of proposals for health-needs driven R&D, including those
"addressing the linkage between paying for the cost of R&D and the
prices" of medicines, vaccines, diagnostic tools and other health care
products.
=A0
This sea change evidenced at the WHO and by its constituent Member
States on new paradigms of reconciling innovation and access is also
reflected in some of the provisions of Annex B which call upon WIPO to
consider discussions on complementary systems to intellectual property
including, as mentioned above, a treaty on access to knowledge, as well
as a Treaty on Medical R&D, and systems of free and open licenses and
creative commons, and the promotion of models based on open
collaborative projects to develop public goods, as exemplified by the
Human Genome Project and Open Source Software.=A0=A0
=A0
The PCDA has to find a way for these conversations to move forward, in
WIPO.=A0
=A0
Thank you.

---------------------------------
Thiru Balasubramaniam
Geneva Representative
Knowledge Ecology International (KEI)
voice +41.22.791.6727
fax +41.22.723.2988
mobile +41 76 508 0997
thiru@keionline.org
--