![Click to read](https://ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/generic-molecule-background_zk0lCYvO-300x225.jpg)
In October 2004, the WIPO Assemblies launched discussions on a WIPO Development Agenda, in a decision considered a watershed in the intellectual property and development debate. Although for several years civil society and developing countries had been raising serious questions regarding the sustainable development implications of the activities being undertaken by WIPO, it was the first time WIPO was called upon to expressly address its role with respect to internationally agreed development goals. In this regard, the discussion of a WIPO Development Agenda has indeed been a turning point, with Member States voicing agreement on the need to view intellectual property rights as a tool, not an end in themselves, and to examine, in particular, how the work of WIPO is contributing to the use of such a tool in a manner coherent with development and other public policy concerns.
As the time approaches for the Inter-sessional Intergovernmental Meeting on a WIPO Development Agenda (IIM) to report back to the WIPO Assemblies, however, it is still uncertain whether concrete steps towards an effective mainstreaming of development concerns into the program and activities of WIPO will be taken. For all the rhetoric noted above, the position of many developed countries still seems firmly anchored in the belief that increasing levels of intellectual property promote economic growth and thus per se contribute to reducing poverty. In other words, WIPO, by focusing solely on promoting the protection of intellectual property around the world, would already be doing its part for sustainable development. Switzerland, for instance,expressed its surprise at the call for incorporating a development dimension, highlighting the “immense amount of work” already accomplished by WIPO in regards to development.3 Similarly, the United States affirmed that intellectual property facilitated, rather than hindered development, and thus considered the current work of WIPO as “a part of the solution” to development challenges. As a result, discussions have not always focused on the concerns that prompted the WIPO Development Agenda process, or on the specific proposals put forth to address these concerns. In this regard, despite the importance of advancing awareness and discussion of the gaps in the vision, governance, and activities of WIPO in regards to development, the comprehensive consideration and concrete implementation of measures to address these gaps remains the primary objective and fundamental challenge of the WIPO Development Agenda process.