WTO Panels Look At Partnerships, Digital Trade 04/10/2015 by William New, Intellectual Property Watch Leave a Comment Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Among the many topics at last week’s World Trade Organization Public Forum were panels on o partnerships and on digital trade. This article takes a brief look at two of the panels that touched on intellectual property rights. The WTO Public Forum took place from 30 September to 2 October. Innovation, Digital Trade and the WTO A panel entitled, “Innovation, Digital Trade and the WTO” was held on 2 October. The panel looked at how regional trade agreements, but not the WTO, are addressing “21st century trade challenges,” – such as “localization barriers, restrictions on cross-border data flows, forced technology transfers, and discriminatory treatment of digital products, disclosure requirements.” Some suggestions for the WTO were offered by panellists. Peter Allgeier, president of the Coalition of Service Industries, said trade needs to enable things to get across borders, and with digital trade now so important, governments need to avoid localisation requirements whereby companies have to set up a processing system or sourcing wherever they are selling. “It doesn’t make sense, and really frustrates the use of new technologies such as cloud computing,” he said, adding that the WTO needs to look at these issues. “It doesn’t mean you can’t have regulations for legitimate purposes.” Nicholas Hodac, Government and Regulatory Affairs Executive, IBM Europe, said if the WTO wants to make itself relevant it “needs to put the digital economy at its heart.” Governments involve national security and privacy arguments as excuses to localize, he said, but there needs to be justification. Torbjörn Fredriksson, chief, ICT Analysis Section, UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), gave highlights of UNCTAD’s Information Economy Report 2015, including that the estimated value of global business-to-business e-commerce in 2013 was more than $15 trillion. Global business-to-consumer e-commerce was estimated at $1.2 trillion, but appears to be growing faster. Citing low numbers in some countries, he mentioned that there might be a need for an “aid for e-trade” program at WTO. Prompted by the moderator, Allgeier discussed the Antigua gambling dispute settlement case against the US at the WTO, in which the US was ordered by the panel to either allowing online gambling services or pay damages. Allgeier said this case is an example of why a “negative” list approach might be better in trade deals, where everything is allowed except was is listed as not. This allows for technologies that may not have been foreseen, for instance, an issue which is being seen in the WTO Information Technology Agreement (ITA) negotiations. Edward Brzytwa, Director of Global Policy for Localization, Trade, and Multilateral Affairs, Information Technology Industry Council (ITI), said if the next goal for the ITA cannot be set by the December Nairobi WTO ministerial, “that spells further trouble for WTO.” Hodac mentioned the expected decision next week of the European Court of Justice on the EU data protection case involving Facebook, saying the WTO should be engaged in this, with government-to-government discussions on government surveillance. Brzytwa said digital issues being addressed in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) need to be looked into at the WTO too. Allgeier said a lot other areas could be addressed in the WTO. “The work program at the WTO could be bulked up,” he said. For instance, it could work to prepare and educate negotiators on unfamiliar issues that arise, and WTO work could be made more useful, such as the trade policy reviews, which he called a “treasure trove of data.” Also on the panel, James Messent, trade policy analyst, Development Division, Trade and Agriculture Directorate at the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) discussed a survey being conducted at OECD on data and digital issues. Partnerships Another panel entitled, “Trade works through innovative partnerships for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda,” was held on 1 October. On the panel, Thomas Bombelles, head of Global Health at the World Intellectual Property Organization addressed the question of why have partnerships involving the private sector, and why in the area of health? “Because they work.” The private sector has greater resources than most governments, he noted, but development is not the private sector’s job. And there is a need to manage for development. So there should be clearly defined goals. Bombelles, a former US pharmaceutical industry representative, was asked at WIPO to bring in a partnership with the private sector, and he did that on neglected tropical diseases (those primarily affecting developing countries), he said. “They’re really not in the business model of companies,” he noted. Companies may be focussed on Alzheimer’s disease or cancer, and the business model is in fact aligned with the health needs of the population. So at WIPO, he helped set up the Re:Search partnership initiative, which is hosted by WIPO with a number of other platforms. Through this, companies make available their research, such as compounds and other assets for neglected tropical diseases. Companies aren’t using those assets so they want to partner with people who want to use them in research, he said. Roberto Vega, head of product and smallholder policy at agricultural giant Syngenta, talked mainly about smallholder farmers, saying the company sees potential for farmers to produce more. The company can bring access to markets, along with training, adaptability to climate change, and other assistance. “The private sector is important, be can’t do it alone,” said Vega. Also on the panel, Ricardo Meléndez-Ortiz, chief executive of the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), talked broadly about partnerships. He said partnerships may work but it is necessary to make sure it is an integrated effort and “fit for purpose.” He cited the recently adopted UN Sustainable Development Goals for 2030. In addition, a system of checks and balances is needed, he said. And policy is important. There needs to be a move to a new form of governance, he said, citing the upcoming Paris climate change talks. There, he said, governments are making voluntary pledges with commitments by state and non-state actors, and it would be under a common monitoring system. But partnerships should not be a substitute for intergovernmental work, he said. Also on the panel was Debapriya Bhattacharya, chair, Southern Voice on Post-MDGs. Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window) Related William New may be reached at wnew@ip-watch.ch."WTO Panels Look At Partnerships, Digital Trade" by Intellectual Property Watch is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.