The 21st session of the WIPO Intergovernmental Committee on Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge, and Folklore (IGC) met from 16-20 April in Geneva, Switzerland.

The Committee was created in 2000 amid concerns by biodiversity-rich countries and indigenous peoples regarding the misappropriation of their genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge.

The IGC’s mandate was renewed last year at the WIPO General Assembly, with countries setting the goal of engaging in text-based negotiations to reach agreement on an international legal instrument(s) for the effective protection of genetic resources, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions. With this goal in mind, the first IGC of this year - held in February - saw members focus solely on genetic resources (See Bridges Weekly, 22 February 2012).

The IGC was also asked to submit texts to this year’s WIPO General Assembly, where members will consider progress made and decide on whether to convene a diplomatic conference (See Bridges Weekly, 28July 2011).

“We probably won’t have a nice, clean text necessary to convene a diplomatic conference tomorrow,” Chair Wayne McCook of Jamaica conceded on Friday, urging delegates to think of innovative ways to advance the committee’s work in the future.

No agreement over definition of TK, beneficiaries of protection

Last year’s renewed mandate urged the Committee to advance negotiations at last week’s session on four key issues: subject matter of protection, beneficiaries, scope of protection, and limitations and exceptions.

To this end, discussions at last week’s meeting were based on the draft articles text prepared in two revisions by three facilitators from Canada, Colombia, and Egypt, respectively.

Member states were unable to find common ground on whether a definition of traditional knowledge should be broad in scope or more detailed and descriptive.

South Africa underlined the need to define TK as ‘dynamic and evolving’, given that “traditional knowledge changes in the passage from generation to generation.”

“If we remove the terms ‘dynamic and evolving’ it becomes a static, frozen concept,” added the South African delegate.

Bolivia, for its part, asked that TK be defined as ‘inalienable, indivisible and imprescriptible’, as TK “cannot be given away by indigenous people, it cannot be fragmented, it is a unit.”

Some developed countries, however, urged members to instead adopt a broader definition without descriptive terms.

“Increasing elements decreases the value of the definition,” Australia argued.

Differences also persisted over who should be the potential beneficiaries of protection under a potential TK instrument, with several members arguing against a proposal that would include individuals, families, nations, and other national entities as beneficiaries of protection.

The EU, for instance, highlighted that “references to families and individuals are ambiguous” and “nations should not be considered as beneficiaries.”

Other proposals spark disagreements

Developed countries asked for the insertion of extensive exceptions and limitations in the draft articles. In particular, the US presented a proposal by which national authorities may exclude from protection “diagnostic, therapeutic and surgical methods for the treatment of humans or animals” and “traditional knowledge that is already available without restriction to the general public.”

In addition, Norway presented a proposal for a disclosure requirement regarding any process or product related to TK in patent and plant variety applications. India welcomed the proposal, but considered it should go beyond patents and plant varieties to encompass all intellectual property rights.

WHO: link between TK and public health
During the session, a representative from the World Health Organization (WHO) highlighted the growing importance of traditional medicines, as well as their widespread use in Africa, Asia, and South America.

Noting the overlap in the work of the IGC and the WHO, the representative stated that an IP system for the protection of TK should not  “restrict access to traditional medicine to the detriment of efforts to further develop existing treatments, to develop new products or to provide access to such treatments.”

Indigenous participation

The IGC also discussed proposals to reform the rules of participation for observers and indigenous people groups in the committee.

During the last session of the IGC, indigenous groups staged a walk-out from the committee and avowed to withdraw their participation until member states “change the rules of procedure to permit our full and equitable participation at all levels of the IGC.” (See Bridges Weekly, 22February 2012)

At last week’s meeting, member states agreed to a proposal by the Indigenous Caucus - a group of indigenous peoples’ organisations at the IGC - requesting that the Secretariat prepare an information document on the practical, procedural, and financial implications of greater involvement of indigenous peoples’ representatives in the work of the Committee. The information document is expected to be circulated for members’ consideration at the next IGC session in July, which will focus solely on traditional cultural expressions.

The WIPO General Assembly will review the IGC’s work in September.

ICTSD Reporting.

In that regard, this information note highlights the most salient proposals for action on technology transfer and innovation in country submissions to the Rio+20 process. Identifying key priority areas in proposals - namely mechanisms, innovation, enabling environments, capacity building, intellectual property and financing - could potentially contribute towards a tangible outcome at Rio.

Ultimately, Rio+20 should seize the opportunity to send a strong signal about the importance of innovation and technology transfer in accelerating sustainable development and transitioning to a green economy.

文章作者James G. McGann，着重记述中国智囊机构在国内和国际舞台的兴起历程，阐述其在国内外政治语境中的优势及不足，并与印度及巴西等其他新兴大国的智囊机构进行横向比较。

前中国国务院副总理增培炎卸任后不久，当选为中国国际经济交流中心执委会主席。该中心2010年于北京成立，是一家高位阶智囊机构。中国各官方媒体公布了此消息并将这家新机构定位为“中国顶级智囊机构”及“超级智囊”。许多前中国政府高官获聘任职于该机构董事会。该机构高调举办了启动仪式，众多智囊组织及政府决策部门代表受邀参加了2011年春天的成立大会。

中国国际经济交流中心的初期研究议题雄心勃勃，其中包括持续蔓延的金融危机，中国崛起及国际金融新秩序，中美战略合作，外国政府及国际货币基金组织，世界银行和世贸组织等国际机构的决策体系，以及智囊组织在政府经济政策制定中所扮演的角色作用。
中国社会科学院，上海社会科学院及中国现代国际关系研究院等其他中国智囊机构在国际会议中的知名度日益攀升，对全球范围同行机构的影响力亦与日俱增。