Developing countries call for review of WIPO Development Agenda

Developing countries call for review of WIPO Development Agenda

Developing nations have mounted a unified effort to protect and expand the development mandate of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), calling for a comprehensive structural assessment of the Development Agenda as it nears its 20th anniversary in 2027.

The push for a review dominated the final hours of the 36th session of the Committee on Development and Intellectual Property (CDIP), which took place in Geneva from 4 to 8 May 2026. The movement is led by an African Group proposal to use the 2027 milestone to conduct an analysis of the agenda's impact over the last two decades.

South Africa stated the Committee must perform a meaningful reflection on the achievements and lessons learned since the adoption of the Development Agenda recommendation.

To facilitate this, the African Group has requested an exceptional Director General's report. This document would be tasked with detailing the evolution of the Development Agenda, highlighting major implementation difficulties and shortcomings, and proposing solutions to align intellectual property (IP) matters with the needs of developing states.

The proposal gained support from several major blocs and nations, including the Group of Latin American and Caribbean countries (GRULAC), the Asia-Pacific Group, and the Central Asian, Caucasus and Eastern European Countries (CACEEC). Individually, Brazil, China, Indonesia, and Iran also backed the initiative. The Russian Federation, representing CACEEC, described the anniversary as an important milestone and an analytic tool.

United States opposes development mandate

The United States opposed the review, arguing it would be duplicative of an existing independent review. The U.S. Delegation further asserted that WIPO had egregiously overstepped its mandate by incorporating the implementation of UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into its workstreams.

The U.S. Stated unequivocally that WIPO is not a development agency and announced it would no longer reaffirm the Sustainable Development Goals as a matter of course, warning that it would scrutinize financial resources used for development-oriented work. In the Program and Budget Committee, the U.S. Argued that the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is a program of soft global governance that is inconsistent with U.S. sovereignty.

Nigeria rebutted this stance, arguing that 20 years is a generational moment rather than a routine milestone. The Nigerian delegation clarified that annual reports are merely snapshots, whereas the African Group seeks a retrospective of the full arc of the agenda. Nigeria directly challenged the U.S. Claim of duplication, stating, you cannot duplicate a document that has never been written.

Debate over IP and technology transfer

The clash has widened into a confrontation over WIPO's institutional purpose. Brazil reminded the committee that international IP systems should not be limited to the enforcement of rights but must contribute to the transfer of technology to accelerate social, economic, and cultural development. Brazil insisted that the central element of the Development Agenda remains norm setting rather than mere technical assistance.

The South Centre expressed concerns that a small number of Member States continue to block progress by prioritizing commercial IP interests. In a statement delivered during the May 2026 session, the South Centre claimed that not one Development Agenda project has been approved to facilitate the use of TRIPS flexibilities for food security, education, or health, and characterized WIPO's technical assistance as supply-driven.

Other nations emphasized the existential nature of these policies. Dominica noted that for nations on the frontline of climate disasters, global challenges risk creating an imbalance in the protection and retention of IP.

Broader normative and AI agendas

While the development mandate remains a point of contention, other normative work continues at WIPO. The organization recently concluded two treaties regarding design law and the disclosure of genetic resources in patents. However, the U.S. Opposed including the disclosure of genetic resources in the Patent Cooperation Treaty, arguing such requirements do not relate to the patentability of inventions.

Attention is now shifting toward the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR). There is significant pressure for a treaty on the protection of broadcasting organizations, supported by the EU, Australia, India, and the Philippines. Conversely, the African Group is prioritizing a legally binding instrument on limitations and exceptions for research, education, and persons with disabilities.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has also emerged as a priority. Nations including Estonia, Kazakhstan, Poland, and the Republic of Korea have called for WIPO to lead reflections on the legal and ethical implications of AI. Some expressed concerns that if left unregulated, AI could lead to the mass misappropriation of knowledge and cultural values.

Following informal consultations to resolve the deadlock, the Committee reached a procedural compromise. The African Group will formally submit a written proposal for the 20th-anniversary Director General's report in advance of the 37th session, where the battle over WIPO's development mandate is expected to resume.