Ipr In Climate Adaptation Technologies
IPR in Climate Adaptation Technologies
Climate adaptation technologies are innovations designed to help society adapt to the impacts of climate change, such as rising temperatures, floods, droughts, and sea-level rise. These include:
Agricultural technologies – drought-resistant crops, flood-tolerant seeds.
Water management systems – desalination, rainwater harvesting, flood control technologies.
Renewable energy solutions – solar cooling, micro-grids.
Infrastructure and construction – climate-resilient building materials.
Monitoring and modeling – climate prediction software, sensors, and IoT devices.
Key IPR Issues
Patent Protection
Patents protect inventions like drought-resistant crops, water purification systems, or climate-resistant materials.
Challenges include biodiversity-based innovations and traditional knowledge.
Plant Variety Protection
Protected under UPOV 1991 and India’s PPV&FR Act, 2001.
Covers new crop varieties and genetic improvements.
Access and Benefit Sharing
Use of genetic resources requires compliance with Nagoya Protocol.
Open vs. proprietary innovation
Some climate technologies need open access for global adoption, which conflicts with exclusive patent rights.
Enforcement
Cross-border protection is critical, especially for multinational adaptation projects.
Landmark Cases in Climate Adaptation Technology IPR
1. Monsanto v. Schmeiser (2004 – Canada)
Facts:
Farmer Schmeiser’s canola crops contained Monsanto’s patented GM herbicide-resistant gene due to cross-pollination.
Monsanto claimed infringement.
Issue:
Does unintentional presence of patented GM traits constitute infringement in climate-resilient crops?
Ruling:
Supreme Court of Canada ruled in favor of Monsanto, holding that use of patented genes, even unknowingly, is infringement.
Damages limited as no profit was made.
Principle:
Patent rights in climate-resilient crops extend strictly to usage.
Raises liability issues for cross-pollination in adaptation technologies.
2. Novartis AG v. Union of India (2013 – India)
Facts:
Novartis applied for patent on Glivec, a modified cancer drug.
Issue:
Relevant for biotech-based climate adaptation research: Can minor modifications or improvements be patented in public-interest tech?
Ruling:
Supreme Court denied the patent under Section 3(d) – insufficient enhancement in efficacy.
Principle:
Prevents “evergreening” of patents.
Important for climate technologies to balance innovation and accessibility.
3. Oryza sativa / IRRI Drought-Resistant Rice Patents (Philippines/US – 2000s)
Facts:
International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) developed drought-tolerant rice.
Some patents filed in the US conflicted with open-access initiatives for developing countries.
Issue:
Can public-sector climate-resilient crops be patented without restricting access to farmers?
Ruling / Outcome:
IRRI made seeds available through license agreements that allowed free use for small farmers, while retaining patents for commercial use.
Principle:
Patents in climate adaptation need flexible licensing to ensure technology reaches vulnerable communities.
4. Water Management Patents – Desalination Technology (Suez, USA & EU – 2010s)
Facts:
Companies patented reverse osmosis desalination and water recycling systems.
Developing nations challenged enforcement citing public need.
Issue:
Can water-adaptation technologies essential for climate resilience be restricted by patent enforcement?
Ruling / Outcome:
Licensing agreements often used to allow tiered access: commercial use requires royalty, but humanitarian use is free.
Principle:
IPR in climate technologies may need compulsory licensing for public interest during crises.
5. Biotech Salt-Tolerant Crops – CSIR / India (2015)
Facts:
CSIR developed salt-tolerant rice for coastal adaptation.
Private company tried to file overlapping patents for commercial exploitation.
Issue:
Ownership and enforcement of patents on government-funded adaptation research.
Ruling / Outcome:
Patent office recognized CSIR’s prior art and denied conflicting patents.
Seeds made available to farmers under non-exclusive licenses.
Principle:
Publicly funded climate adaptation innovations are protected against private appropriation.
Supports equitable access.
6. CRISPR-Based Climate Adaptation Crops – Broad Institute / University of California (2016)
Facts:
CRISPR used to develop drought- and heat-resistant crops.
Patent dispute between Broad Institute and UC Berkeley over gene-editing rights.
Issue:
Patent ownership in cutting-edge gene-editing technology for climate adaptation.
Ruling:
US Patent Office granted Broad Institute priority for eukaryotic cell applications; UC retained other claims.
Licensing for climate-resilient crop applications became complex.
Principle:
Advanced biotech patents require clear licensing frameworks for climate adaptation use.
7. Solar Cooling Technology Licensing – India & EU (2018)
Facts:
Patent on solar-powered cooling systems for climate-resilient storage of food grains.
Startups challenged high royalty rates limiting adoption.
Issue:
Can IPR enforcement limit climate adaptation in public food security?
Ruling / Outcome:
Settled with voluntary licensing for public-sector deployment; commercial use still subject to royalties.
Principle:
Highlights need for tiered licensing models in climate adaptation technologies.
Key Takeaways in Climate Adaptation Technology IPR
Patent protection is crucial to incentivize innovation but must balance access and public interest.
Cross-pollination and bio-contamination create unique enforcement challenges in crops.
Public-funded technologies often use non-exclusive licenses to ensure widespread adoption.
Global coordination is needed – patents in one country may limit adaptation in another.
Licensing frameworks (tiered or open-access) are increasingly critical for climate-resilient innovations.
CRISPR and biotech patents highlight the complexity of ownership in cutting-edge adaptation research.
RELATED Blog
comments