Executive Summary
The topic of technology transfer has been an important part of international
discussions on development policy for decades. In the context of environment
and development, technology transfer was a key element in the United Nations
Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) agreements, including Chapter
34 of Agenda 21 and several Articles in the UNFCCC. These agreements note that
effective technology transfer will be essential to meet the global challenges
and to enable collaboration between developing and developed countries for the
transfer of technologies. This will depend both upon local initiatives and regulations
- many of which (such as efficiency improvements) could be beneficial anyway
- and various international agreements that bear upon the technology transfer
process.
Governments effectively own some important technologies, and these will require
government-driven pathways. For private-sector pathways, harnessing the bulk
of international investment, intellectual property rights (IPR) regimes are
an important consideration. Overall the literature is diverse concerning the
relationship between IPRs and technology transfer. Stronger IPRs, particularly
resulting from the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIP) agreement,
may foster innovation and vertical technology transfer, but could impede horizontal
dissemination of certain technologies through private-sector and community-driven
pathways. Compliance with decisions reached in Agenda 21, UNGASS 1997 and other
relevant fora is important in this regard, and the TRIP agreement allows for
compulsory licensing as a last resort if other avenues are exhausted and with
due compensation. A number of international mechanisms are available for bilateral
and multilateral financial assistance including, for example, international
financial assistance for licensing relevant technologies. This could be one
way for the international regime to support technology transfer where market-driven,
grants, equity investment, and joint venture solutions are not feasible. IPR
regimes could be harnessed more widely to support innovation and dissemination
of environmentally sound technologies (ESTs). Industry standards, including
management standards developed through the International Standards Organization
(ISO) and sectoral standards for some industries, could also play an important
role in fostering global dissemination of ESTs.
Specific provisions on technology transfer form an important part of "positive
measures" in several multilateral environmental agreements, which help
to foster effectiveness and stability of these regimes. Apart from financial
mechanisms, there is little empirical evidence concerning how technology transfer
provisions have operated in practice. The most extensive experience is with
the Montreal Protocol, where the Multilateral Fund (1998), working together
with a multitude of supporting institutions and networks, has facilitated extensive
technology transfer.
The UNFCCC itself spawned a number of technology-oriented initiatives. Attempts
to set up Technology Assessment Panels failed primarily due to disagreements
over representation. The Climate Technology Initiative is expanding as an important
supporting endeavour though its impact is as yet difficult to evaluate. Ways
of discouraging transfer of inferior technology need to be found. The text in
the Kyoto Protocol recognises the need for cooperation and enhancement of supportive
conditions, including for the private sector in developing countries, as well
as the responsibilities of Annex II Parties. The project-level mechanisms of
Joint Implementation (JI) and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) could be
important avenues for furthering international technology transfer. This, however,
does not absolve Annex II Parties from their commitments. The COP4 decision
on technology transfer represents an important new opportunity for furthering
technology transfer under the Convention. Ultimately, however, it is what happens
within countries, and companies, that will do the most to determine the pace
and nature of technology transfer.
|