G20 urges ‘voluntary’ tech transfer amid IP row at WHO

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Cookies Settings

G20 urges ‘voluntary’ tech transfer amid IP row at WHO

G20 health.jpg
A meeting of health ministers in Gujarat, India last week | Credit: Govt of India

A statement from health ministers arrived as negotiations over pandemic prevention measures continue at the WHO

G20 health ministers have hailed the importance of tech transfer and knowledge sharing to prevent future pandemics, but only on “voluntary and mutually agreed terms”.

An outcome statement, published after a two-day meeting of health ministers in Gujarat on Saturday, August 18, highlighted the need to improve access to vaccines, diagnostics, and therapies in developing countries.

Negotiations to achieve that aim are ongoing at the World Health Organization (WHO), which is preparing the text of a new pandemic preparedness treaty.

But developed countries have so far resisted lower-income nations’ demands to make rights owners share their intellectual property.

The shadow of that debate is visible in the wording of the G20 statement, says Ellen ‘t Hoen, director at Medicines Law & Policy in Amsterdam.

“This statement does not detract from the rights countries have to use compulsory patent licensing. But the G20 does seem to want to pre-empt the outcome of the pandemic treaty negotiations at the WHO by stressing voluntary measures,” she said.

As Managing IP has previously reported, low-to-middle income countries that want harder commitments on knowledge sharing face an uphill battle at the WHO.

WHO negotiators met in Geneva last month for the latest round of talks on the pandemic treaty, which has several chapters that could affect the global IP system.

The latest text, prepared by the bureau of the WHO’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Body, mostly promotes the voluntary sharing of know-how rather than any hard obligations.

India and South Africa, G20 members that have argued for tech transfer obligations on IP owners in other forums, signed the outcome statement over the weekend.

‘T Hoen said WHO member states should take a “more courageous approach” than shown either by the G20 or in the bureau draft of the pandemic treaty so far.

“‘Voluntary’ is how the world left it the last time around. That did not work out for most countries,” she said.

The outcome statement was agreed unanimously by G20 states, except Russia and China, which objected to a paragraph calling on Russian forces to withdraw from Ukraine.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Law firms don't particularly like saying no to clients. Perhaps they should get better at it
The office, which has a relatively new patent litigation team as well as a wider ‘soft’ IP offering, would remain independent if the rejection is rubberstamped
The IP boutique is betting that growing investment in quantum and semiconductors will fuel demand as technology shifts toward physical systems
Lawyers say the overhaul better reflects commercial reality, with changes spanning novelty searches, digital designs and access to a small claims track, but stopping short of criminalising unregistered design infringement
Carpmaels & Ransford hires its fourth partner of the year and wins access to UPC files, as fresh orders address costs, confidentiality and the use of divisional patents
Peter Ling of Lenz & Staehelin in Zurich discusses trends in patent litigation, the regulation of AI and the benefits of teaching IP
Brandsmiths and Powell Gilbert will contest claims over several UK trademarks in a High Court case examining the ownership and revival of a heritage brand
Hogan Lovells Cadwalader is taking a fresh strategic approach to pricing in its AI strategy. It could amplify calls for law firms to ditch the billable hour
Charles Harding plans to build a new team around life sciences oppositions and contentious work, drawing on his three decades developing a practice from scratch at D Young & Co
The firm reveals how its litigation strategies informed the arguments that took Masimo’s judgment past $818 million
Gift this article