China has taken an aggressive posture on technology transfer in its comments on the Bali Action Plan - the “roadmap” for guiding the next round of discussions on a post-Kyoto global climate change regime.

The UNFCCC Secretariat posted comments from 26 countries earlier this week, in advance of the first session of the Ad hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention that will convene in Bangkok from March 31 to April 4, 2008. While most countries’ positions reiterate statements made during the Bali Climate Change Conference, China’s submission is notable for its stance on intellectual property rights (IPR), clean technology financing, and transfer. China made it explicitly clear that it has uniquely high expectations for the United States, noting that special consideration in the negotiations should be given to ensuring “quantified emission reduction targets [25%-40% of 1990 levels by 2020] for the Annex I Parties to the Convention that are not Party to the Kyoto Protocol.”

China is leading the push of the G-77 (developing countries) by asserting that developed nations have a moral obligation to facilitate access to emission reduction technologies because historic emissions were largely the responsibility of the most-industrialized countries. China’s comments on the Bali Action Plan strongly reemphasize China’s position that developed countries must provide “technology, financing, and capacity building in a measurable, reportable, and verifiable manner to enable developing countries to take national mitigation actions. ” China goes further by noting its expectations that “technology transfer really happen at a preferential rate” and that the issue of IPR be “appropriately addressed.”

In contrast to China’s approach of facilitated access, the U.S. wants the new agreement to “take a practical approach” to technology research and development by “recognizing that these mechanisms need not be contained within the Convention.” The U.S. supports the adoption of more efficient technologies, including through a multi-donor International Clean Technology Fund, if recipient countries commit to the elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade in clean technologies.

The debate over IPR protection and access to clean technologies for the developing world will be one of the most contentious points in the coming negotiations, given the billions of dollars at stake. Companies that develop and market clean technologies should take China’s position very seriously, and understand the significant threat that it poses to licensing fees, profits, and the ability to enforce valuable patents.

For further information about this topic, please contact Akin Gump.