INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AS A TOOL FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH

The developed world and emerging economies have recognized the importance of strategic management of intellectual property rights for their economies. These countries value Intellectual Property (IP) both as a national resource and as an incentive to attract foreign investment. Despite the fact that there is a world-wide intellectual property protection regime each country is expected to develop and implement an appropriate policy regime in order to ensure that her citizenry benefit from their intellectual capital.  A pro-active policy regime should be able to support and reward creators, scientists, innovators while at the same time stimulating economic growth and development.

According to the 2011 World Intellectual Property Report titled The Changing Face of Innovation it is important that policymakers monitor and assess how innovations change. Governments are key stakeholders in national innovation systems. They  directly fund research and provide incentives for firms to invest in innovation –through the protection of intellectual property. As innovation practices shift, governments need to assess the effectiveness of existing policies and, where necessary, adopt them.

Innovation is particularly important for the economy as the country seeks to transform itself into a knowledge economy in the next two decades. Adoption of existing technologies or making incremental improvements on the same is unlikely to spur growth at levels necessary for the achievement of Kenya Vision 2030. It is therefore expected that players in both public and private sector should be able to leverage on intellectual property to design and develop competitive products and services for both local, regional and global markets. 

The Country’s new Constitutional dispensation contains considerable positive aspects in relation to the development of Science, Technology and Innovation (ST&I) in Kenya. Article 11(2) of the supreme law rests promotion of intellectual property rights of the people of Kenya to the State. Moreover, The Fourth Schedule that deals with distribution of functions places intellectual assets under the National Government and not County Government.   Intellectual property rights has thus been grouped with other critical national issues such as education policy, research, energy policy, health policy, agriculture policy, environment and natural resources, transport and communication.

The first medium term plan of Kenya Vision 2030 clearly recognised the need to use IPR as an economic tool. The Plan appreciated the fact that introduction of innovative ideas into products, processes and services is highly dependent on the presence of a clearly defined and supportive policy framework. This must continue as we plan for the second medium term plan.

The role of the government is therefore to provide an enabling policy framework for investment in science, technology and research for development by both public and private sector. The country has four public intellectual property agencies; the Kenya Copyright Board, Kenya Industrial Property Institute, Kenya Plant Health Inspectorate Service, and Anti Counterfeit Agency.  Currently, efforts are underway to develop a national intellectual property policy. Some of the policy issues that are likely to arise include capacity development, management of IP from public resources, indigenous knowledge, emerging technologies and commercialisation of IP.

Only a few hundred Kenyans hold postgraduate qualifications in Intellectual Property. This poses a great challenge not only to the research and institutions of higher learning that need to establish technology transfer offices but also to the provision of innovation related services. Development of a critical mass of Intellectual Property human resources is necessary for generation and effective utilisation of IP as a national resource. i have been adcocating for building human resources capacity, and this area is equally crucial.

The proposed establishment of a national IP academy is a step in the right direction.  In the meantime, the IP agencies should work with universities to launch postgraduate programs on intellectual property at both masters and doctoral degree levels. Specific training on Patent Drafting is essential if we are to increase both the quantity and quality of patent applications and patent grants. 

Debate on how to manage intellectual property arising from publicly funded resources is inevitable. The Science and Technology Act places all rights in all discoveries, inventions and improvements in respect of processes, and machines made on behalf of the research institutes in the respective research institutes. However, the best practice requires that all the players namely inventors, organisation and the public benefit from such breakthroughs. The national council for science and technology has supported several innovators to move from idea to product,  and urge the private sector to fill in the gap in commercilization of products.

There is an utgent need to to pro-actively manage ndigenous knowledge and create a balance between intellectual property protection and access to information, indigenous technologies, and cultural resources.  Whereas there is need to recognise the contribution of various communities, mutual benefit will be gained if appropriate mechanisms are in place to promote scientific and technological outcomes of such resources. Policy makers have to ask themselves whether the current IP regime is sufficient to achieve the goals of equitable access and benefit sharing.

The development and governance of emerging technologies is today a challenge to many countries given their potential benefits and risks. Technologies such as biotechnology, nanotechnology and nuclear technology provide an excellent opportunity for scientists, industrialists, and entrepreneurs to develop competitive goods and services for new business ventures necessary for economic take off. However, one issue that should be addressed is whether the existing intellectual property regime is adequate for management of new and emerging technologies.

Finally, proactive policies on science, technology and innovation encourage commercial application of research findings. Intellectual property rights should not be viewed as an end in itself but as means to an end. Appropriate strategies should be put in place to ensure that IP holders commercialize their products and services for the benefit of humankind. The government should encourage development of a system that would pro-actively respond to IP infringement and improve the capacity for handling such disputes. We shall continue to guide on this matter for social, economic benefit for our society.