Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research - CGIAR
|
Document No.: SDR/TAC:IAR/98/7.1 |
Mid-Term Meeting, 1998
May 25-29, 1998
Brasilia, Brazil
Attached is the Report of the CGIAR Panel on Proprietary Science and Technology with the transmittal letter from the Chairman of TAC to the Chairman of the CGIAR and TAC's commentary on the Report.
This report is issued as background to the agenda item on Biotechnology - Report of the CGIAR Panel on Proprietary Science and Technology.
The Report, which will be introduced by the Panel Chair in plenary session, will be discussed in parallel session. The Chair of the parallel session will report the outcome of the discussions to the Group for decision making.
CGIAR Secretariat · Mailing Address: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A. · Office Location: 701 18th Street, N.W. Tel: (1-202) 473-8951 · Cable Address: INTBAFRAD · Fax: (1-202) 473-8110 · E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]
CONSULTATIVE GROUP ON INTERNATIONAL AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
REPORT OF THE CGIAR PANEL ON PROPRIETARY
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
TAC SECRETARIAT
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS
APRIL 1998
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Donald L. Winkelmann, Chairman
15 April 1998
Dear Mr. Serageldin,
I have the pleasure of transmitting to you the report of the CGIAR Panel on Proprietary Science and Technology that was chaired by Mr. Timothy Roberts of the UK. The report, as well as comments solicited by TAC from a number of outside experts, were considered by the Committee at its 74th meeting in Hyderabad in March 1998. The Panel Chair was present at the meeting as was one of the Panel members. TAC subsequently prepared a commentary on the report which is attached to this letter.
Discussion of this report will complete one phase of the process initiated at MTM'97 when the Group requested the appointment of this Panel under the auspices of TAC. Panel membership was decided after extensive consultation with the Members of the Group and combined a remarkable range of relevant experience.
The Panel started its work in September 1997, engaged initially in an electronic exchange on the issues to be addressed, consulted with Members of the CGIAR community and other stakeholders, held two meetings, and conducted surveys, one of centres utilizing intellectual property. TAC considers that the Panel's report significantly advances understanding of the issues confronting the CGIAR with respect to intellectual property protection. The Committee recognizes that the Panel's terms of reference were difficult to satisfy, given the wide diversity of views on the issues by different stakeholder groups and the uncertainty of the legal environment. Nevertheless, TAC is pleased with the progress that has been made.
.../2
Mr. Ismail Serageldin
CGIAR Chair
World Bank
1818 H Street, NW
Washington, DC 20433
USA
355 E. Palace Avenue, Santa Fe, NM 87501 · (1-505) 988-1284 · FAX: (1-505) 988-1285 · [email protected]
In its commentary, TAC first reaffirms specific areas of agreement, expands on some points made by the Panel, and then supplements aspects of the Panel's recommendations. TAC joins the Panel in favouring the arguments for acquiring protection in three situations: access, partnerships, and technology transfer. TAC also agrees that centre research and development should not be undertaken explicitly for the purpose of generating intellectual property for trade or for revenue. The Committee believes that CGIAR policy should promote an assessment of patenting and other forms of protection while assuring that advantages and disadvantages are accounted for.
One implication of the recommendations of the report lies in the consequences for the CGIAR's focus on international public goods. Public goods are, among other things, non-proprietary and non-rivalrous. Biotechnology is opening up new possibilities and new opportunities to make proprietary claims, in effect thereby permitting the removal of some products from the public goods portfolio. The very pursuit of intellectual property protection by the CGIAR testifies to the non-public goods nature of the products for which such rights are being pursued. Even so, to the extent that the CGIAR intends to use property rights to maintain the products in the public domain, the products retain some of the characteristics of non-proprietary goods.
We believe that the attached report and TAC's commentary will allow for a stimulating discussion at MTM'98 and provide the Group with the information necessary to make appropriate policy decisions. The issues involved are difficult and often extremely sensitive. The CGIAR must address these urgently if it is to make further progress in reaching its goals of sustainable food security.
Sincerely yours,
Donald L. Winkelmann
TAC Chair
This electronic document has been scanned using optical character recognition (OCR) software and careful manual recorrection. Even if the quality of digitalisation is high, the FAO declines all responsibility for any discrepancies that may exist between the present document and its original printed version.
TAC COMMENTARY ON THE REPORT OF THE CGIAR PANEL ON PROPRIETARY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
3.1 Access to Proprietary Science of Others
3.2. Intellectual Property Protection for the CGIAR Developments
4.1. How does the CGIAR motivate owners to share proprietary technology?
4.1.1. Current Situation
4.1.2. Why should companies license?
4.1.3. When will companies be unwilling to license?
4.1.4. How can markets be segmented?4.2. Respect for Patents
4.3. How does the CGIAR decide when to seek Protection for its Technologies and Materials?4.3.1. Would intellectual property protection facilitate and/or ensure delivery of benefits to the poor?
4.3.2. Would intellectual property protection be necessary to ensure access to benefits for the poor?
4.3.3. Could intellectual property protection provide rights in a fundamental new technology and/or material which could be used to obtain access to others' intellectual property?
4.3.4. Is partnering with other institutions required to further develop the technology and/or material?
4.3.5. Can delivery and access to the poor be accomplished by publishing or otherwise making the technology and/or material publicly available?
5.1. Access to Others' Proprietary Science
5.2. Proprietary Science developed by CGIAR Centres
Appendix A - Terms of Reference for the Panel
Appendix B - Panel Members and Participants
Appendix C-1 - ISNAR The Use of Proprietary Biotechnology Research Inputs at Selected CGIAR Centers
Acknowledgments
I. Executive Summary
II. Purpose and Methodology
III. Context for Biotechnology and IPR at the IARCs
IV. Analysis of Information
V. Legal Analysis and Options
VI. Summary, Conclusions and Implications
VII. Recommendations
Selected ReferencesAppendix C-2 - June Blalock. Interviews With Selected Commercial Companies and Universities
Appendix C-3 - E. Binenbaum and B. Wright. On the Significance of South-North Trade in IARC Crops1. The Issue
2. The Data
3. Discussion of Tables and Graphs
4. Conclusions
5. Tables and FiguresAppendix D - Background Papers
Appendix D-1 - Guiding Principles for the CGIAR Centers on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources 1
Appendix D-2 - Calestous Juma. Comments on the Convention on Biological Diversity and IPR
Appendix D-3 - Bernard le Buanec. Plant breeders' rights and farmers' rights - A complex debate
Appendix D-4 - Timothy Roberts. Market Segmentation
Appendix D-5 - Miguel Altieri. Third World Farmers and IPR
Appendix D-6 - Thammasat Resolution
Appendix D-7 - Agri-Food Statement