Proprietà Intellettuale e Cambiamento Climatico: riflessioni su uno sviluppo economico del futuro

This paper examines the critical yet contentious role of technology transfers (TT) in the global response to climate change, arguing that the current neoliberal framework for intellectual property (IP) protection systematically impedes an equitable and effective green transition, particularly for the Global South. While the climate crisis demands urgent decarbonization and technological transformation, the dominant mechanisms for funding and disseminating green technology remain mired in historical power asymmetries and a logic of market-driven competition that favors developed nations. The analysis contrasts the policy approaches of the Global North and South. In the North, state subsidies and industrial policies underwrite the green transition. Conversely, countries in the Global South, often lacking such fiscal capacity, must rely on regulatory frameworks to attract foreign investment and secure the essential knowledge transfer to innovate and ascend the value chain. This paper highlights the case of Indonesia, illustrating the prohibitive financial scale of transitioning from coal to renewables and the consequent dependency on external capital. The central tension arises within the global Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) regime, particularly the TRIPS Agreement. The paper historicizes this regime, tracing its emergence in the 1980s-90s as a strategic U.S. response to perceived economic decline and the threat of technological “free-riders.” It critiques the neoliberal dogma that posits strong IP protection as a direct driver of innovation, demonstrating instead how TRIPS has functioned to stifle technological upgrading in the Global South by raising acquisition costs and restricting knowledge flows. Technology transfers, including the use of compulsory licenses, are thus framed not as collaborative necessities but as market distortions. Finally, the paper considers the contemporary political landscape, analyzing the contradictory green policies of the Biden administration and the looming threat of a new era of American protectionism under a Trump presidency. The withdrawal of “soft power” instruments like USAID funding, while ostensibly reducing direct influence, risks exacerbating humanitarian crises without dismantling the underlying, hierarchical structure of the global IP system. The conclusion underscores that a genuine collaborative effort against climate change must move beyond a profit-centric vision. It calls for a paradigm shift that prioritizes the widespread diffusion of green technologies and the assertive use of legal flexibilities in IP law, arguing that this is not merely a matter of fairness but a practical necessity for achieving global decarbonization within an increasingly constrained timeframe.