EXTERNAL REVIEW OF WIPO TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IN THE AREA

EXTERNAL EXAMINER’S REPORT ACADEMIC YEAR 20 NAME
EXTERNAL VISITS PLANNING CHECKLIST PLEASE PRINT OFF
TERMS OF REFERENCE EXTERNAL EVALUATION FOR ACTION

04-17-_external_institutional_review_boards_reliance_agreements_for_multi-site_research
1 CHAPTER 10 EXTERNALIZING DISORDERS 2 EXTERNALIZING DISORDERS DISORDERS
161021 EXPERIMENTAL LOCALISM AND EXTERNAL VALIDITY FRANCESCO GUALA† UNIVERSITY

External Review of WIPO Technical Assistance in the area of Cooperation for Development:

External Review of WIPO Technical Assistance in the area of Cooperation for Development:

Public Consultation

As part of the independent External Review of WIPO’s Technical Assistance in the Areas of Cooperation for Development, the consultants leading the Review request input from all relevant stakeholders regarding their experience and views on the impact, orientation, cost-efficiency, management and coordination of WIPO technical assistance over the past three years (2008-2010).

Background

With the adoption of the WIPO Development Agenda (DA) in October 2007, the WIPO General Assembly called upon “all Member States, the Secretariat and other relevant WIPO bodies to ensure the immediate and effective implementation” of the 19 DA Recommendations that were considered to be for immediate implementation. The 2008 General Assembly extended this to all adopted Recommendations.

Subsequently, the Committee on Development and Intellectual Property (CDIP), at its 4^th Session in Geneva, in November 2009, approved the “Project on Enhancement of WIPO’s Results-Based Management (RBM) Framework to Support the Monitoring and Evaluation of the Impact of the Organization’s Activities on Development”^¹ which includes the implementation of DA Recommendations 41, namely to conduct a Review of WIPO technical assistance in the area of cooperation for development.

The terms of reference for the Review can be found on WIPO’s website at: www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/mdocs/en/cdip_4/cdip_4_8_rev_tor.pdf.^²

In October 2010, WIPO hired two consultants to make an independent External Review of WIPO´s Technical Assistance in the Area of Cooperation for Development (Dr. Carolyn Deere Birkbeck, University of Oxford and Dr. Santiago Roca, Universidad ESAN, Peru).

In addition to this public consultation, other aspects of the Review include a desk review of WIPO documents and reports, a survey of WIPO’s developing country members, interviews with WIPO staff in Geneva, and a sample of six country studies (involving field visits to national intellectual property offices and other relevant national government and non-government stakeholders).

According to the Terms of Reference, the Review should cover WIPO Technical Assistance activities extended over the three year period from 2008 to 2010 (the country studies will cover a period of five years). The report of the Review will be available to all WIPO members and to the public.

Public Consultation Process

Those interested in submitting comments are invited to complete the following short questionnaire electronically and submit it via email to [email protected] and [email protected].

The deadline for comments is February 28, 2011.

External Review of WIPO Technical Assistance in the area of Cooperation for Development:

Public Consultation Questionnaire

1. Identification

Name of Contact Person:

Name of Organization:

Contact Details of Organization:

What best describes your affiliation (please circle as many as relevant):

National Chamber of Commerce	X
International business association (e.g., of publishers, pharmaceutical companies, software producers, entertainment industries, manufacturing, etc)	X
International Professional Association (e.g., of intellectual property lawyers)	X
International association of intellectual property users groups (e.g., libraries, consumers)	X
International association of IP right holders	X
Parliamentary committee	X
Collective Management Society	X
National NGO or civil society group	X
Academic	X
Policy think tank/research centre	X
International NGO	X
Network	X
Indigenous community or organization	X
Multinational company	X
Small or medium size enterprise	X
R&D institute or centre	X
University	X
University technology transfer office	X
Inventors associations	X
Scientist	X
Creator, musician, artist, writer, etc	X
Provider of IP-related technical assistance	X
Donor/grant-maker/foundation on issues related to intellectual property	X
Student	X
Independent consultant	X
Other international organization	X

2. Activities on intellectual property

Does your organization or network conduct intellectual property-related activities at the national level in developing countries? Yes/No (Please circle as appropriate).

Please briefly describe your organization’s work on issues-related to intellectual property. Please limit your response to 200 words.

c. Is your organization part of a broader international network of organizations with similar interests? Yes/ No (Please circle as appropriate and describe that network and your link to it.)

3. Experience of WIPO Technical Assistance

Which of the following best describes your experience with WIPO’s TA? (Please circle as appropriate)

Participant – intended beneficiary	X
Observer	X
Provider	X
Expert consultant or speaker	X

In which of the following areas do you have experience or knowledge of WIPO technical assistance? Please circle as many as relevant.

Development of policies, strategies or plans on intellectual property, innovation, and/or creativity	X
Modernization of administrative infrastructure for intellectual property	X
Modernization of s support systems for intellectual property users (e.g., Technology Information Support Centres, collective management societies, access to electronic databases of patent information and journals)	X
Support for the development of national/regional legislative and regulatory frameworks	X
Training and human resource capacity building (courses, workshops, study visits, and national seminars)	X
International WIPO events, conferences & meetings	X
Raising public awareness about intellectual property	X

Please list and describe the WIPO technical assistance activities of which you have direct experience. Please limit your response to 300 words.

4. Views on WIPO Technical Assistance

In this section, we invite your concise assessment of WIPO Technical Assistance in the following five areas: impact, relevance, cost-efficiency, management and coordination.

Please note the following:

The Review can only take into account views where specific examples and evidence are provided to support your assessment.
Please limit your responses to a maximum of 500 words for each question.
It is not necessary to respond to all five questions
The scope of this Review is limited to WIPO technical assistance. Please ensure that your input is directly related to this topic. Comments on other WIPO activities, or on intellectual property and development more broadly, are invited only to the extent that these are directly relevant to WIPO’s technical assistance activities.
Some suggestions of issues for consideration are provided, but responses need not be limited to these issues.

a. What is your assessment of the impact of WIPO Technical Assistance in beneficiary countries? Please provide specific examples and evidence to support your assessment. (Possible issues for consideration could include results at the national level, impacts on development, incorporation of the principles of the WIPO Development Agenda, role of WIPO stakeholders, prospects of long-term impact, sustainability of results, national absorptive capacity, local ownership, and follow-up)

b. What is your assessment of the relevance and orientation of WIPO Technical Assistance? Please provide specific examples and evidence to support your assessment. (Possible issues for consideration could include: development-orientation, degree to which technical assistance is demand-driven and country-specific, transparency of technical assistance, relevance of technical assistance in light of changing needs and new developments, degree to which technical assistance accounts for priorities and levels of development of beneficiary countries, degree to which technical assistance accounts for particular needs of LDCs, degree of stakeholder engagement, incorporation of advice on relevant flexibilities in international treaties, and the alignment of technical assistance with national IP and innovation strategies, socioeconomic objectives and/or development priorities)

c. What is your assessment of the efficiency of WIPO Technical Assistance? Please provide specific examples and evidence to support your assessment. (Possible issues for consideration could include the cost efficiency of technical assistance activities, transparency of costs and resource-allocation, options for improving cost-effectiveness, sustainability of assistance, effective/appropriate use of partnerships and collaborations, and duplication/overlap with work of other providers and/or other WIPO activities)

d. What is your assessment of the management of WIPO Technical Assistance? Please provide specific examples and evidence to support your assessment. (Possible issues for consideration could include the adequacy of monitoring and evaluation, timeliness of project implementation, transparency of activities, use of appropriate management tools for planning, design and implementation, use of appropriate baselines for measuring results)

e. What is your assessment of the coordination of WIPO Technical Assistance? Please provide specific examples and evidence to support your assessment. (Possible issues for consideration include internal coordination by the WIPO Secretariat in its delivery of technical assistance, and WIPO’s relationship with other donors and providers active in the area of intellectual property and development)

5. Other comments

a. Please provide any other comments, suggestions or recommendations that you consider relevant to the Review of Technical Assistance.

6. Supporting materials

Please list any documents or web-based materials that you or your organization have produced that are relevant to the External Review of WIPO’s Technical Assistance. Where possible, please attach relevant documents to the email used to submit this completed form.

Thank you for your input.

1 CDIP/4/8 Rev.

2 This External Review also seeks to contribute to the assessment, recommended by the third session of the PCT Working Group (see document PCT/WG/3/14 Rev., paragraph 211bis) as to how well the PCT system has been functioning in terms of realizing its aims of organizing technical assistance for developing countries in the area of patents.

2 Open to Internal and External Candidates Vacancy Notice
2010 LIBRARY QUALITY REVIEW IMPLEMENTATION PLAN EXTERNAL REVIEW PANEL
24 THE RESIDUAL CHARACTER OF EXTERNALITIES MAURICE LAGUEUX UNIVERSITÉ

Tags: assistance in, technical assistance, review, external, assistance, technical