Inextricably linked to the concept of intellectual property is the concept of innovation. Where there is intellectual property, there necessarily is innovation.
Yet, the converse may not be always true. Innovation, to be felt and appreciated, must be translated in terms of products and services. While both are abstract concepts, they have tangible and lasting effects. But if intellectual property can be measured in terms of filings (i.e., patent, trademark, utility model, industrial design), of grants, of registrations, how can we measure innovation, considering that it is just as abstract as the concept of intellectual property?
Fortunately, to help us answer that question, the Global Innovation Index (GII) was developed. The index computes an economy’s performance innovation-wise using the following principle: innovative and creative outputs result from a combination of factors which enable innovation. Stated in GII terms, the level of knowledge and technology outputs, as well as creative outputs—as indicated by intellectual property filings, among others—are influenced by how much the government and the market allow them to thrive.
Imagine a machine churning out products: what you put in determines what goes out. Here, both input and output sub-indices are measured to determine the innovation index of an economy. (A more extensive discussion of the GII will be had in a future column.)
How did we fare as a country? In the 2016 GII ranking, the Philippines placed 74th of 128 economies—translated in percentile ranking, the 42nd. While this is a nine-notch leap over the 2015 performance, this translated to only a one percentile ascent from our placement last year at 43rd. Pitted against our Asean neighbors, excluding Brunei, Myanmar and Lao PDR (they had incomplete data), we are ranked 5th out of seven. I repeat—5th out of seven Asean countries. Why should the Philippines be alarmed?
Wen Jiabao, the former Chinese Premier, sums why succinctly: The future world competition is for intellectual property.
With the GII as a guide, the felt need for a national Intellectual Property strategy (NIPS) can no longer be ignored. A whole-of-government and private sectors approach is a must, in terms of strengthening institutional policies to attract businesses and fostering growth, improving the capacity for innovation by investing more in human capital and research, creating more infrastructures to allow easy access to information and products, and enabling an environment supporting investment locally and access to local and international markets. Our end goal is very clear: to create a stronger environment conducive and not deterrent to innovative endeavors.
Motivation for undertaking the NIPS
Three reasons motivate the creation of a NIPS. One, the 4th industrial revolution is in our midst and there is no stopping it. Artificial intelligence, autonomous vehicles, big data, Internet of things and Internet of everything interfacing humans and things, are some of the increasing disruptive technological developments in this industrial revolution that government and society face.
Two, in an essentially seamless global economy and in the face of climate change phenomenon, where extraordinary natural disasters are experienced, the strength of the Philippines as an agriculture country is significantly challenged. The onslaught of agricultural products from rice to fruits imported from neighboring countries places the livelihood of our own traditional farmers to an irreversible disadvantage. We urge the government to envision a strategically industrialized Philippines and for whole of society to start paving the way.
Three, we have Filipinos who made it big in Silicon Valley, with the likes of Dado Banatao. We have scientists and researchers all over the world. Some of them have expressed their desire to come back very soon and help the country. Thus, we must tap them, get them back, and ask them to train our young population not only towards science, engineering and research, but also towards the arts. We bank on these young people from both science and the arts; they should be able to steer the Philippines toward technological transformation as a country. We will make the period for crafting the NIPS the springboard to thresh out all challenges.
Going back to the fundamental question of WHY the need for a national intellectual property strategy: The simple answer is, we want to ensure we add more value to the various development plans and roadmaps, including creativity and innovation, of the Philippines through the effective use of the intellectual property system.
More importantly, we want the Philippines to actively participate in the global competition; but we need a national policy purposively to transform knowledge creation, and utilize those that have been independently innovated, or those that have foreign contributions.
****
Josephine Rima-Santiago, Ll. M., is currently the Director General of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines. E-mail: jrsantiago@columnist.com.