The Caribbean  Journal of Law , Policy and Social Change  was started in 2010  as  the Caribbean Law Journal Online to promote writing and scholarship in law and policy the Caribbean community. In recognition of  the lasting and transformative value of social change , and the need to incorporate policy practices that create positive impacts in legislation, policymaking and implementation, the journal has been rebranded as the Caribbean Journal  of Law, Policy and Social Change. This is a peer reviewed journal sponsored by the Caribbean and Americas Intellectual Property Organization (www.caaipo.org). We invite you to contribute your expertise in collaboration with those who support the concept of scholarship for development of the Caribbean and its peoples. We welcome submissions on interdisciplinary research which examines current and future areas of many field in the humanities including economic, environmental , sociological , climte related, gender isuues, food security , intellectual property and others. The aim is to broaden the discourse on the future of the region and to help move individuals, groups and scoieties in the region towards a more just and sustainable future.

We welcome your submissions and look forward to adding your contributions to the discourse.

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] (UNESCO, 2022).The dedication to science and development of the Cuban government in consideration of the economic circumstances, still provides a clear example of an adaptable approach that can be considered and even implemented in a sustainable manner.

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] (Weinstein, 2010)

[2] (Cambridge University Press, 2017)

[3] (Ezell & Cory, 2019)

[4] (Inniss, 2017)

[5] (Inniss, 2017)

[6] (Chen & Puttitanum, 2005)

[7] (United Nations, 2025)

[8] (Lorenczik & Newiak, 2012)

[9] (The Statute of Anne ; April 10, 1710, n.d.)

[10] (United States Government, 2025)

[11] (The Constitution of the Republic of Haiti 1987, 2025)

[12] (Overview The TRIPS Agreement, 2025)

[13] (Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, 2025)

[14] (UNESCO, 2022)

[15] (UNESCO, 2022)

[16] (National Innovation Pathways of the United States 2023, n.d.)

[17] (Overview The TRIPS Agreement, 2025)

[18] (United Nations, 2025)

[19] (Kenya Clinate Smart Agriculture Project, 2025)