Questioning the Potential of the Forthcoming WIPO’s Diplomatic Conference on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources: Endless Negotiations Coming to a Successful End?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In July 2022, Member States of the World Intellectual Property Organization agreed to hold a Diplomatic Conference no later than 2024, for an international instrument on genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge to be concluded. This recent development could bring to an end more than 20 years of negotiations on the matter by the WIPO Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore. Indeed, genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge are left unregulated within the IP system and open for misappropriation through western IP concepts like the public domain. As a result, indigenous and local communities have faced biopiracy and began to demand protection for their traditional knowledge. The draft instrument to be negotiated puts forward a new mandatory international standard of disclosure of origin in relation to genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. Through an analysis of this proposal, this essay questions its potential to become a successful tool to protect traditional knowledge related to genetic resources, reduce its misappropriation and achieve transparency within the patent system. It will be argued that the proposed instrument may well represent a prudent compromise, but the protection it offers is neither effective nor inclusive and lacks ambition.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".