27 March 2026

Tradition “The oceans that sustain our islands, the stars that guide our ancestors across the Pacific, the songs, the weaving, the navigational charts etched into memories across generations, all of these are more than heritage. They are the living expressions of who we are as a people. We negotiate here on their behalf, and we remain committed that they are protected,” the representative of the Marshall Islands on behalf of all Pacific Island States stated at the closing session of the World Intellectual Property Organization’s (WIPO) Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions (the “IGC”), which took place from from 4 to 13 March 2026, in Geneva, Switzerland. This neatly summed up what is at stake for many negotiators at this meeting. In May of 2024, WIPO succeeded in finalising a treaty on intellectual property, genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge after nearly 25 years of negotiation. The treaty, however, will only go into force once 15 Member States have ratified it; to-date only 3 have done so. In the meantime, the IGC is tasked with continuing to progress its work on “the protection of genetic resources (GRs), traditional knowledge (TK) and traditional cultural expressions (TCEs), with the objective of finalizing an agreement on an international legal instrument(s), without prejudging the nature of outcome(s), relating to intellectual property, which will ensure the balanced and effective protection of TK and TCEs.” This is a significant task at WIPO, as it mandates member states to engage with text on another legal instrument: one that China expressed hope at the opening plenary would not take another 25 years to negotiate. Whether that hope will translate into concrete results is difficult to say; the committee spent much of the week in informal discussions with few major decisions other than to continue text-based discussions on the working documentsWIPO/GRTKF/IC/51/4 (The Protection of Traditional Knowledge: Draft Articles) and WIPO/GRTKF/IC/51/5 (The Protection of Traditional Cultural Expressions: Draft Articles), as well as any other contributions of Member States. One Member State contribution that sparked some discussion was a proposal from the United States and Japan that WIPO disseminate a questionnaire surveying national legislation in WIPO Member States for the sui generis protection of TK and TCEs (see WIPO/GRTKF/IC/52/6), arguing that this would support evidence-based negotiations. Others were concerned such a survey could act to delay meaningful progress towards a workable legal instrument text, which is the IGC’s primary mandate. Some, such as the Africa Group, raised concerns about how such surveys would be financed, what methodology would be used, and on what timeline work could be completed, and reminded delegates that the Committee is tasked “narrow existing gaps instead of adding more work.” The Committee decided that this item would remain on its agenda for further discussion. Decisions of the committee are available here. nearly 25 years of negotiation. The treaty, however, will only go into force once 15 Member States have ratified it; to-date only 3 have done so. In the meantime, the IGC is tasked with continuing to progress its work on “the protection of genetic resources (GRs), traditional knowledge (TK) and traditional cultural expressions (TCEs), with the objective of finalizing an agreement on an international legal instrument(s), without prejudging the nature of outcome(s), relating to intellectual property, which will ensure the balanced and effective protection of TK and TCEs”, (something that China expressed hope would not take another 25 years). Whether that hope will translate into concrete results is difficult to say; the committee spent much of the week in informal discussions with few major decisions other than to continue text-based discussions on the working documentsWIPO/GRTKF/IC/51/4 (The Protection of Traditional Knowledge: Draft Articles) and WIPO/GRTKF/IC/51/5 (The Protection of Traditional Cultural Expressions: Draft Articles), as well as any other contributions of Member States. One Member State contribution was a proposal from the United States and Japan that WIPO disseminate a questionnaire surveying national legislation in WIPO Member States for the sui generis protection of TK and TCEs (see WIPO/GRTKF/IC/52/6), arguing that this would support evidence-based negotiations. Others were concerned such a survey could act to delay meaningful progress towards a workable legal instrument text. The Committee decided that this item would remain on its agenda for further discussion. Also a topic of discussion is the full and meaningful participation of Indigenous peoples in the WIPO meeting, with Tulalip Tribes on behalf of the Indigenous Caucus noting that the voluntary fund which supports their participation was depleted and calling on WIPO to use its core budget to support Indigenous participation. At the launch of the Geneva Knowledge Center law professor Valmaine Toki noted that WIPO has a “flawed process” for Indigenous participation, as these communities who are the owners and stewards of TK and TCEs are not member states and cannot therefore make direct text suggestions. The March 2026 meeting of the IGC also marks the first time the committee has been chaired by an Indigenous person: Laine Fisher of New Zealand, a member of the Māori people. The IGC is taking place in the context of several other multilateral discussions on access and benefit-sharing regimes, including down the street at the World Health Organization (which is discussing pathogen access and benefit-sharing in the context of pandemic preparedness); within the Convention on Biological Diversity Cali Fund, meant to protect biodiversity through an exchange of financing for access to digital sequence information on genetic resources; and the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) treaty which is seeking access and benefit sharing for sustainable use of deep sea resources. Final observations The program for IGC 52 was not finalized in time to be circulated in advance of the session. As a result, Member States were not in a position to prepare adequately prior to the meeting. Several delegations therefore requested that, for the next session of the Committee in September, the program be circulated well in advance to facilitate proper preparation. The mandate for the 2026–2027 budgetary biennium provides that activities should not replace