Preprint
Intellectual
Property, Technology and Innovation for economic development and Social Change
in the Caribbean Community (Caricom).
By Dr. Abiola Inniss Ph.D. LLM
Abstract
Caribbean countries, particularly
those within the formal structure of CARICOM (The Caribbean Community), find
themselves at the juncture of an urgent need for greater self sufficiency for
food security, mitigating the effects of climate change, and improving the
quality of life for citizens. In an age
of advanced and continuously advancing internet, artificial and mechanical technologies,
the region is severely lacking in resources that can provide significant
benefits in bolstering economic growth, protecting and providing new livelihoods,
and reducing the challenges of food insecurity. Many of these technologies are
already in use in other parts of the world and the majority of this knowledge is
protected by intellectual Property Rights (IPRs).
The concept of intellectual property (IP) has been linked to
the creation of change in communities through enhanced economic opportunities
and tangible benefits where it can be properly implemented and utilized. Some
opponents of bolstered intellectual property rights argue that their
restrictive nature prevents individuals from accessing and using resources
freely, thereby preventing them from reaping economic benefit and furthering
the development of technologies which are useful to them. This essay posits that In order to
successfully exploit intellectual property within the context of maximizing
economic growth in the Caribbean community, it is important to invest in areas
that are IP and knowledge based intensive. This in turn can foster the
production of goods and services that are rich in innovation and make
meaningful changes for consumers, businesses, and the larger community across
the Caribbean region.
Social change and Intellectual Property.
The
concept of social change has been described by some thinkers as comprising
thoughts and actions which move progressively from one epoch to another and
sometimes bring improvement to the community under consideration. It is also
notable that as the frequency and intensity of dramatic social change continues
to increase in today’s world It is also thought that social change can be
regressive and encompass negative developments for a community[1].
The quality of change and the direction that it takes must therefore be defined
within the context of this essay, since it should not be assumed that all
social change is positive. The idea of social change can be associated with
positive impact on the community or on the society at large, however the
reality of change of any kind is that it brings a different state of existence
into being which can be positive or negative. The ideas of social change have
historically been represented in three major cycles in scholarly teaching in
different societies. First there is the idea of decline and degeneration, then
there is cyclical change in which there are recurrent phases of growth and
decline, and last, there is the idea of continuous progress. In any society all
three of these patterns can be observed in relation to a number of aspects of
its existence so that it is important to delineate clearly amongst them[2].
The
construct of intellectual property may also be linked to the creation of change
in communities through enhanced economic opportunities and tangible benefits
where it can be properly implemented and utilized. Some opponents of bolstered
intellectual property rights argue that their restrictive nature prevents
individuals from accessing and using resources freely, thereby preventing them
from reaping economic benefit and furthering the development of technologies
which are useful to them[3]However,
there is little evidence of any significant technological developments in the
absence of IPRs in the Caribbean region. In fact, the Caribbean region has
lagged behind in technological developments in all of its member countries
whether or not these countries have current IP laws. In investigating the
levels of innovation in the four largest economies in the region, namely,
Guyana, Jamaica, Trinidad and Barbados in a 2017 study, Guyana was found to
have the greatest amount of innovation while its IP system was the weakest in
the Caricom region[4].
There is little current evidence to suggest that this has changed for Guyana
and the WIPO Global Innovation Index 2024 does not provide any rankings for the
country. Over the past 30 years communities across the Caribbean have been
plagued by a decline in export diversification and a growing specialization in the
markets to which they export. These exports are mainly comprised of low value-added
goods, raw materials and a few commodities. Tourism, goods and services also
receive stiff competition from other parts of the world and are affected by
global financial fortunes[5].
Additionally, the small population size and the lack of emphasis on science and
technology development by regional governments have made advancements in this
area miniscule in comparison to the use of imported technologies by the
population.
There continues
to be some considerable debate by international scholars as to whether the
development of innovation and technology in the global south (developing
countries) needs to be prompted by government or there can be dependable
development from individuals and small to medium sized businesses which will
propel it in a manner that will change the technology landscape in major and
meaningful ways[6].
Questions also arise as to whether developing countries can use IP to advance
their development strategies relevant to sustainable development and to meeting
international goals such as those set out by the United Nations on poverty and
hunger[7].It
is important to recognize that sensible, robust public policy and
administration are key elements in addressing these challenges, and in the case
of Caricom can be a critical means of bolstering competitiveness using IP,
innovation and technology.
Economic analyses by
international scholars carried out over the past twenty years have led to
different conclusions about the effects of IPRs on the economies of developing
countries. In some instances, the findings were that countries with greater
levels of FDIs and stronger IP protections showed stronger growth in
technological developments and foreign countries were more likely to invest
there by opening factories and outsourcing manufacturing. Conversely countries
which engaged in imitation of technologies had a more difficult time attracting
investment and foreign capital which were needed to enhance their economic
development[8].
While
there have been suggestions that within the context of the Caribbean countries
that technological development can be best advanced by imitation followed by
innovation, this implies that government policies would have to incorporate the
unlicensed use of intellectual property often in contravention of national laws
or/ international agreements. It is important to note that all Caribbean
countries are signatories to the WTO TRIPS agreement, and that many of them
have enacted at least the minimum requirements into their IP legislation.
Additionally, some of them are signatories to a number of IP treaties which
require certain minimum standards and reciprocal arrangements for protections.
The international legal considerations and basic diplomatic concerns of
unlicensed imitations are therefore of critical importance.
The Diplomacy
of Intellectual Property
International
Intellectual Property law and Policy and its attendant diplomatic protocols and
concerns can be considered a very important part of international relations.
The simple explanation is that IP is an essential tool of economic growth in
developed countries and has been so recognized as early as the 1623 British
Statute of Monopolies which was later replaced by the Statute of Anne, 1710[9].
This central tenet is also enshrined in the United States Constitution Article
1 Section 8, Clause 8[10]on
intellectual property as follows “To promote the Progress of Science and useful
Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive
Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.” In the Caricom (Caribbean
Community) region, the 1987 Constitution of Haiti [11]at
Article 38, explicitly stipulates that artistic, literary or scientific works
are protected by law, and may be the only Caricom state in which this
protection is embedded in the constitution.
The seriousness with which this branch of regulation has been treated by
some policymakers is a clear acknowledgement of the importance of controlling
the amount, extent of access and, usage of intangibles related to creativity
and technological development. It is also a major aspect of trade negotiations
and over several decades has been hotly debated as to whether its exploitation
benefits developed nations more than developing ones.
The TRIPS
Agreement administered by the World Trade Organization[12]
has been a hotbed of argument on both sides of this contention, and there is
still some resistance to writing its minimal requirements into the domestic
laws in some developing countries. In some cases, countries have acquiesced to
the TRIPs agreement as members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) but refuse
to enact legislation or update laws which reflect the requirements of the TRIPs
agreement. There is in effect a signing on to the agreement but not a signing
in to it. Some developing countries have
adopted just such a stance and continue to avoid the issue of strengthening
intellectual property rights legislation and enforcement whilst managing to
engage in trade and other activities. The issue remains whether these countries
are still able to advance development at a pace that benefits them as a whole instead
of the promulgation of a narrow agenda based on limited views of IP rights
resulting in a balance of power that is detrimental to the country’s economy.
It is in fact the balancing of these very interests at the local and
international levels that has proved daunting to some policymakers.
Some specific difficulties faced by developing
countries in international IP negotiations.
Developing countries have concerns about intellectual property
(IP) negotiations for a number of reasons, including:
(a)
Economic impact:
Developing countries are concerned that stronger IP protection
would
- Drive
up prices
- Allow
foreign interests to benefit from indigenous knowledge and biological
resources
- Limit
growth in developing nations
- Be
an extension of monopolistic practices by multinational companies.
(b)
Access to medicines:
Developing countries are concerned that stronger IP protection
could impede access to medicines. This debate became particularly fierce during
the COVID19 pandemic 2020.
(c) Enforcement
standards:
Developing countries often negotiate agreements with high
levels of IP protection and enforcement standards, but these agreements often
lack concrete provisions on licensing and cooperation.
(d) Political
and Economic tools:
Some argue that developed countries use IP as a political and
economic tool to prevent others from using it.
Other issues in IP negotiations include:
- The
complex relationships between Intellectual Property (IP), Genetic
Resources (GRs), Traditional Knowledge (TK), and Traditional Cultural
Expressions (TCEs).
- The
need for negotiators to have a high degree of substantive expertise.
- The
need for extensive coordination and policy coherence at the national level.
- The
need to protect geographical indications to avoid misleading the public,
and to prevent unfair competition.
As outlined above, the diplomacy of intellectual property is fraught
with issues of politics and economics at individual country and regional levels.
In the case of Caricom, The Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas[13]
which is the legal instrument establishing the Caribbean Community (Caricom), provides
in its Article 66 for the establishment of a regional administration for
intellectual property rights with the exception of copyright, but governments
have been unable to agree on the creation of such a mechanism. It is clear that
conflicting policy interests and lack of political will have stymied the
process to the extent that the only regional activity on intellectual property over
the past decade at minimum has come from the European Union and other bodies
which have created widescale programs to promote the knowledge and use of
intellectual property rights at country levels in collaboration with Caricom. The
difficulty with this is that the agenda of these international bodies does not
take into account local idiosyncrasies and while the general policy is to
encourage the use of local provisions for IP, it is not necessarily concerned
with whether the available resources are adequate or function in a way that
makes it easily accessible or makes sense financially for those seeking the protections.
Indeed, the latter is solely in the purview of the local policymakers who are
often less than enthusiastic about addressing these issues for reasons previously
delineated above.
Creating a
strategy for social change through intellectual property for the Caribbean
Community.
The basis of social change through intellectual property is
that the positive aspects of implementing it as a tool for benefit to
communities and individuals must be highlighted and implemented. There may be serious
misgivings by policy makers as to the economic impact of IP implementation with
regard to international economic relations, such as foreign interests
benefitting from traditional knowledge, or onerous impacts on local prices for
goods and services, and the potential retardation of development of local
industries, and restricted access to medicines. Conversely, there are significant
benefits to be had from the implementation of intellectual property rights.
Intellectual property (IP) can help developing countries, especially
in the Caricom region, to advance their development strategy in several ways,
including:
- Promoting
innovation
IP protection allows innovators and investors to recoup their
investment in bringing new products to market. This encourages domestic
innovation and foreign direct investment.
- Supporting
creative industries
IP tools and resources help creators retain control over their
work, secure fair revenues, and incentivize further creativity. Creative
industries like music, film, software, design, and publishing can generate job
opportunities and foster local innovation.
- Attracting
investment
Strong IP frameworks increase investor certainty and lead to
increased funding for local creative projects and industries.
- Diversifying
economies
IP can help developing countries diversify their economies and
exports.
- Participating
in the global economy
IP systems can create a framework for developing countries to
participate in the economic activities in the global economy. This may be
intra-regional or at a greater global level amongst other developing or
developed countries.
It is within this context that Caricom countries should look
for opportunities to use intellectual property to benefit businesses,
communities, and their economies as a whole. In creating a strategy for IP the policymakers
must first establish a vision for at least a medium term development plan which
includes a focus on science technology and innovation. This may seem to be daunting
given the availability of resources. However, if one considers the example of neighboring
Cuba which in spite of its economic woes still dedicates a sizeable amount of
its GDP to science was approximately 0.32
% of its GDP as at 2021.This is interestingly, higher than that spent by Kuwait
which showed 0.08 % at 2021,and in similar vein to China Macao special
Administrative region which showed 0.38 % at 2021[14]
Most Caricom countries do not have a percentage of GDP
allocated to science and technology with the exception of Trinidad & Tobago
which registered 0.05 % at 2021[15].The
figure for Latin America and the Caribbean on average was 0.55 %. This is a
clear indication that research and innovation are not necessarily policy
priorities in the Caricom region and therefore the issues of IP and the
development of technology have not been examined and approached with
advancement and competitiveness in mind. For most of the countries in the
region that have enacted legislation, it has been the result of the need to
comply with elements of the TRIPs agreement in fulfillment of WTO requirements
for trade relations especially as relates to Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs) in
imports and exports, tourism, and hospitality.
Innovation occurs when people have the resources and the willingness
to create new things. The necessary resources often vary greatly from one
industry to another, and policy measures also have an impact on this. The
National Innovation Pathway 2023 of the United States of America[16]
is a White House office of Science and Technology Policy paper which was
created in collaboration with the US department of Energy and the US department
of State demonstrates an approach that facilitates an equitable distribution
and availability of supporting resources to all innovators and entrepreneurs. This
is obviously tied in with the economic plan which fosters innovation at all
levels, encouraging entrepreneurship across the economic spectrum, and not
simply focused on large industrial concerns.
Elements of a
national strategy.
A national strategy for intellectual property and innovation
should be crafted to encompass policies for the development of innovation and
technology alongside programs that promote the development of entrepreneurship
and creativity within communities in the country. Universities and other
technical institutions need to be prioritized for funding and other resources
such as technical collaborations with other international institutions and
companies. As in the case of the developed countries discussed above, a
national strategy for economic development, innovation and technology must
incorporate appropriate policy and legal frameworks which also allow for more
equitable distribution of resources to encourage endogenous creativity and
problem solving. This will help to decrease the gap between those who have
access to training and funding and those with less resources. It will also help
to generate solutions to local problems.
Developing a
regional intellectual property and innovation strategy, and the new UN Global Digital Compact
Advocacy for Intellectual Property Rights does not translate
into blind transport unto the innovation train. The fact is that IPRs
themselves are not sufficient to encourage innovation. As noted before there is
need for policy and funding that targets innovation and which are protected and
bolstered by measures that give entrepreneurs and innovators broad support. Intellectual
property is but one aspect of a comprehensive plan for the development of
innovation and technology which will impact the lives of communities and the
national economies of developing countries in a manner that is uplifting and
beneficial.
In order to
successfully exploit intellectual property within the context of maximizing economic
growth, it is important to invest in areas that are IP and knowledge based
intensive. This in turn can foster the production of goods and services that are
rich in innovation and make meaningful change for consumers, businesses, and
the larger community. If this situation is to be achieved, it is imperative to
develop a comprehensive knowledge optimization strategy for each country within
the Caricom region.
At this point it is
important to include the TRIPS agreement (Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual
Property Rights) administered by the World Trade Organization ( WTO) [17]which
sets out the minimal requirements for IPRs for countries that are members of
the WTO. All Caricom countries are WTO members, and this membership is a
critical component in their ability to do business internationally. WTO members
cannot legislate below the minimal standards of TRIPS without incurring the
risk of dispute settlement under the Dispute settlement Agreement which would
have serious consequences for the countries involved. The TRIPS agreement
contains some flexibilities on how the rules may be implemented and in what
circumstances these allowances can be
applied. For example, under these flexibilities WTO members may exploit
creative means of transposing into national law and practice those concepts
which the TRIPS agreement enunciates but does not define. These may include
concepts of novelty and inventiveness or situations of emergency such as those
related to public health or biodiversity protections.
As a result, the TRIPs agreement, to the extent that it has
been implemented by the countries, affects the ways in which IPRs are viewed
and utilized. Across the Caricom region there are varied levels of
implementation of the TRIPS requirements which have resulted in some instances
in the enactment of full suites of IP legislation across the range of IPRs and
in others (e.g. Guyana) the laws remain the same as at pre-independence 1966.
The United Nations Global Digital Compact[18]
is a new initiative formalized on December 24,2024 which aims to establish principles,
objectives, and actions for an open, free and secure digital future for all
peoples. According to the policy brief it is based on universal human rights
and intends to advance the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals. This
new initiative is based on the understanding that the digital divide between developed
and developing countries has increased greatly with the advent of new
artificial intelligences which have created a much wider chasm in economic benefits
from innovation and technology in all areas in which they are deployed. These
include of course medicine and medical technologies, business and enterprise,
manufacturing, agriculture and other sciences which are critical for developing
countries. It recognizes that digital technologies have moved beyond internet
and mobile technologies to generative artificial intelligence, autonomous artificial
intelligence, blockchain systems, digital currencies and quantum technologies.
The UN has established a new Office for Digital and Emerging Technologies as of
January 1st, 2025, to oversee the goals of this new initiative. At
this time Caricom has not pronounced any new initiatives which will examine this
fast-paced technological growth and make any recommendations for policy and
development concerning it.
Conclusion.
The importance of innovation and technological development in
the developing world is a topic of significant concern, especially in the face of
serious challenges in to the survival of communities from climate change, food
insecurity, communicable diseases and non- communicable diseases such as HIV
and AIDS and other maladies. Modern technologies often help to alleviate and
even eradicate some threats to the very existence of communities. It is
critical that appropriate and relevant resources become available where they
are needed, from medicines and treatment options and technological devices to
the cultivation of food crops management, and farming techniques that support
communities in providing food security. Many of these technologies are
available in the developed world and some have been deployed in developing
nations through international Aid agencies with local adaptations to make them
relevant and successful in the communities that employ them. One example is the
food farming practices undertaken by the Kenyan government, known as Kenya Climate
Smart Agriculture Project (KCSAP)[19].
The KCSAP program utilizes
available technologies from water management, selection of crop varieties that are
climate resilient, drones for precision farming and apps that give farmers
access to information and technical assistance. As a result, intellectual
property plays a key role in the further development of applicable and useful
technologies since patents, industrial designs and other applicable rights help
innovators to retain ownership and to distribute rights in a fair and equitable
manner.
Caricom countries and the regional body itself need to rethink
the way they strategize for the future of the region and its communities. The
Kenyan model mentioned above is a key example of how innovation and technology
can revolutionize food security and economic prosperity in a developing country.
It is a model that can be adapted for regional development, and which should be
considered by regional and national authorities. Additionally, as mentioned above
in discussing the UN Digital Compact the relevant new digital technological developments need to
be harnessed and deployed in the region expeditiously and as far as possible.
In spite of the challenges faced by the nations in Caricom,
there is evidence that by reshaping thinking and policy approaches to
strategically implement technologies that can improve food security, mitigate
climate change and improve the distribution and availability of medicines and health
care, the region can attain a higher standard of living for its citizens.
Collaboration with extra-regional scientific communities, along with endogenous
innovations are the key components to such a strategy. Intellectual Property
law and policy help provide a framework for encouraging adequate compensation
to innovators and protections for creating the much-needed technology.
References
Cambridge University Press. (2017). The Cambridge
Handbook of Sociology : Core aeas in sociology and the development of the
discipline. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Chen, Y., & Puttitanum, T. (2005). Intellectual
property rights and innovation in developing countries. Journal of
development Economics, 474-493.
Ezell, S., & Cory, N. (2019, April 25). The way
forward for intellectual property internationally. Retrieved from
Information Technology & Information Foundation:
https://itif.org/publications/2019/04/25/way-forward-intellectual-property-internationally/
Gervais, D. (2009). Of Cluster and Assumptions: Innovation
as part of a full TRIPS implementation. Fordham Law Review, 2353-2377.
Inniss, A. (2017). Examining Intellectual Property Rights,
innovation and technology within the Caricom Single Market and Economy.
United States: Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies 4223. Retrieved from
Kenya Climate Smart Agriculture Project: https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations/4223
Kenya Clinate Smart Agriculture Project. (2025). Retrieved from Kenya Climate Smart Agriculture
Project: https://www.kcsap.go.ke/
Lorenczik, C., & Newiak, M. (2012). Imitation and
innovation driven development uner imperfect intellectual proerty rights. European
Economic Review, 1361 -1375.
National Innovation Pathways of the United States 2023. (n.d.). Retrieved from National Archives and Record
Administration:
https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/US-National-Innovation-Pathway.pdf
Office, U. S. (2024). National Strategy for Inclusive
Innovation. Retrieved from US Patent and Trademark Office:
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/NationalStrategy.pdf
Overview The TRIPS Agreement. (2025). Retrieved from World Trade Organization:
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/intel2_e.htm
Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas. (2025). Retrieved from Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas:
https://treaty.caricom.org/
The Constitution of the Republic of Haiti 1987. (2025). Retrieved from WIPO LEX:
https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/legislation/details/7837
The Constitution of the Republic of Haiti 1987. (2025). Retrieved from WIPO LEX:
https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/legislation/details/7837
The Statute of Anne ; April 10, 1710. (n.d.). Retrieved from Yale Law School, The Lillian
Goldman Library, The Avalon Project:
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/anne_1710.asp
UNESCO. (2022). Science,technology and innovation :
9.5.1 Research and development expenditure as a proportion of GDP. New
York: UNESCO. Retrieved November 4, 2024, from
https://data.uis.unesco.org/index.aspx?queryid=3684
United Nations. (2025, March 11). United Nations
Department of Economic and Social affairs , sustainable development goals.
Retrieved from United Nations Deapartment of Economic and Social Affairs:
https://sdgs.un.org/goals
United States Government. (2025). Constitution of the
United States. Retrieved from United States Senate:
https://www.senate.gov/about/origins-foundations/senate-and-constitution/constitution.htm
Weinstein, J. A. (2010). Social Change. Lanham,
Maryland: Rowham & Littlefield.
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
Comments
Post a Comment