Transparency Without Results: UN Climate Reports Fail to Show Effective Transfer of
Technology to Developing Countries
By Ningxiner Li, intern of the Health, Intellectual Property and Biodiversity Programme (HIPB) at the South Centre
This report synthesizes the findings of research on the reporting and compliance mechanisms governing transfer of technology obligations of developed country Parties under the United Nations climate change regime. The legal basis for transfer of technology has evolved from foundational principles in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to an enhanced transparency framework (ETF) as part of the Paris Agreement, with defined modalities, procedures and guidelines for the transparency framework for action and support (MPGs). The ETF requires that developed countries submit Biennial Transparency Reports (BTRs) detailing their transfer of technology provided to developing countries. Our review of developed countries’ first BTR submissions reveals significant shortcomings that hinder proper evaluation of compliance with the transfer of technology obligations. The current system allows reporting that meets procedural requirements but fails to deliver clear, comparable, and outcome-oriented data essential for enforcing the legal obligations on transfer of technology and ensuring it serves as a genuine catalyst for global climate actions. This report argues that the ETF, as currently operationalized, prioritizes procedural transparency over substantive effectiveness. The design of the reporting requirements is characterized by discretionary language, fragmented methodologies, and weak linkages between financial and technological support. These features undermine the ability of Parties, review bodies, and the global stocktake to assess whether technology is being delivered in a manner that meaningfully supports developing countries’ climate action. Recommendations are advanced to strengthen reporting requirements, enhance traceability and comparability, and reorient the transparency framework toward measurable outcomes rather than process-based compliance. As the first comprehensive review of the first BTR submissions by developed countries, this report is intended to provide an evidentiary foundation for the 2028 MPGs review.
These inputs have been provided in response to the letter by the Co-Chairs of the Global Dialogue on AI Governance dated 18 March 2026 requesting for stakeholders to share perspectives, priorities and proposals to inform the thematic focus, structure and preparations for the first Global Dialogue, to be held in Geneva on 6-7 July.
Engaging the UN Scientific Panel on Artificial Intelligence for the Global South
By Danish
The UN General Assembly has set up the new Independent International Scientific Panel on Artificial Intelligence to assess how the development and deployment of AI technologies are creating risks, impacts and opportunities. Co-chaired by Maria Ressa and Yoshua Bengio, the Panel will be presenting its inaugural report in July 2026. This paper presents significant priorities for developing and least developed countries around AI impacts, benefit-sharing and governance, and provides some recommendations on how these priorities can be addressed by the Panel for promoting sustainable development in the global South.
Addressing Barriers to Accessing Monoclonal Antibodies (mAbs) in Developing Countries: Challenges and Potential Solutions
By Nirmalya Syam
Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have revolutionized treatment in oncology, autoimmune disorders, and infectious diseases due to their high specificity and efficacy. However, access to mAbs in developing countries remains severely limited due to high costs, market concentration in high-income regions, regulatory hurdles, and intellectual property barriers. Despite the potential of biosimilars to enhance affordability, their availability remains restricted due to expensive development processes, patent thickets, and complex regulatory requirements. The dominance of multinational pharmaceutical companies in the market further restricts competition, delaying biosimilar approvals and preventing price reductions. Additionally, regulatory agencies in developing countries often lack the resources to expedite biosimilar approvals, further exacerbating delays in access.
Policy interventions such as improved regulatory harmonization, stricter patent examination guidelines, and expanded public investment in mAb production are necessary to address these barriers. The adoption of the revised 2022 WHO Similar Biotherapeutic Products (SBP) Guidelines could streamline biosimilar approval by reducing unnecessary comparative clinical trials. Moreover, technology transfer initiatives and market-shaping incentives, including compulsory licensing, could help lower costs and accelerate the availability of mAbs in underserved regions.
By implementing these strategies, developing countries can bridge the access gap, ensuring that lifesaving mAb therapies reach the patients who need them most. A coordinated global effort involving policymakers, regulators, and industry stakeholders is essential to establishing a sustainable and equitable mAb supply chain.
G20 Critical Minerals Deal: A Step Toward Equity or a New Extractive Frontier?
By Touba Esfahani Nejad
This paper examines the Group of Twenty (G20) Critical Minerals Framework adopted under South Africa’s Presidency and the extent to which it represents a shift toward more equitable mineral governance. It analyses the Framework’s key pillars and political commitments alongside the Johannesburg G20 Leaders’ Declaration, assessing their implications for mineral-rich developing countries, importing economies, refining hubs, and the G20 itself. The paper pays particular attention to gaps between stated ambitions and practical constraints having in view financing, technology transfer, and the policy space under the World Trade Organization (WTO) rules. It concludes by identifying the conditions under which the Framework could support real value addition and industrialization in the Global South rather than function as a supply-security tool for advanced economies.
Unlocking Innovation Traps: A Systems Thinking Approach to University–SME Collaboration
By Dr. Ufuk Türen and Syed Ibrahim Bilal Majid
Despite growing institutional interest, university–small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) collaborations often underperform, stalling before generating sustainable innovation. This study adopts a systems thinking perspective to diagnose such persistent failures as structural—rather than individual—challenges. Using OSTİM Technical University (OSTİMTECH) as a case study, the research employs participatory causal loop diagrams (CLDs) to visualize key feedback dynamics affecting trust, incentives, and knowledge flows. Central to the analysis is the “Success to the Successful” archetype, which explains how dominant academic incentives reinforce publication-oriented behaviors while marginalizing collaboration and applied innovation. The resulting model reveals why certain loops—like academic reputation—gain momentum while others—such as ecosystem learning—remain underdeveloped without intentional redesign. By identifying leverage points for institutional reform, including incentive recalibration and long-term partnership support, the paper offers actionable insights for third-generation universities. Ultimately, reframing collaboration through a systemic lens enhances understanding of complex innovation ecosystems and guides more credible, sustainable approaches to university–industry engagement.
Towards a Development-Oriented TRIPS Review Under Article 71.1
By Nirmalya Syam
This paper calls for a comprehensive, development-focused review of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) under Article 71.1, a process that has been mandated but never carried out. It critiques the narrow, compliance-driven approach favored by developed countries, which risks sidelining the broader developmental objectives enshrined in Articles 7 and 8 and reaffirmed by the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health. Through a detailed analysis of the political context, procedural history, and legal mandates, the paper argues that the TRIPS review should center on the real-world impact of the Agreement on developing countries—particularly in areas such as public health, access to medicines, technology transfer, and innovation capacity. It proposes an impact assessment framework grounded in empirical indicators to evaluate how TRIPS has influenced public welfare, policy space, and economic development. Ultimately, the paper urges the World Trade organization (WTO) to fulfill its long-overdue obligation to reassess TRIPS not as a compliance checklist but as a living instrument that must align with global equity and development goals.
South Centre Statement submitted to Session Three: A Fair and a Just Future for All:Critical Minerals; Decent Work; Artificial Intelligence
Dr. Carlos Correa, South Centre Executive Director, highlighted at the G20 Leaders’ Summit that while the world is transitioning to a critical mineral-intensive future, resource-rich poor countries are stuck at the bottom of the value chain. On AI, he stressed that the United Nations should continue to play an important role in shaping the international AI governance.
From Fragmentation to Impact: Strengthening Southern Agency in Global AI Governance
By Vahini Naidu and Danish
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming production, trade and governance systems, yet global regulatory efforts remain fragmented and uneven. The multiplicity of forums, frameworks and initiatives, from UN processes to plurilateral and trade-centred mechanisms, has produced overlapping agendas and resulted in diminished participation from global South stakeholders. For developing countries, the challenge is to engage meaningfully in global AI governance while preserving national policy space and advancing sustainable development priorities.
This policy brief examines the evolving landscape of AI governance, focusing on its institutional fragmentation and the competing conceptions of regulation advanced through the UN, G20, BRICS, and other fora. It argues that coherent, development-oriented AI governance requires strengthening UN-anchored processes and linking AI regulation to industrial policy, innovation systems and data sovereignty. The brief concludes that inclusive, sustainable and responsible AI governance should support governments in enhancing their capacities to harness AI and emerging technologies to shape their digital transformation.
South Centre in collaboration with IT for Change and Center of Policy Research and Governance, with the support of the Permanent Mission of India to the UN in Geneva
Monday, 17 November 2025, 13:15 – 14:15, Palais des Nations, Room VIII, Geneva
Held in preparation for the AI Impact Summit 2026, this event will discuss how countries can work together to ensure Artificial Intelligence supports inclusive and sustainable development, strengthens national and regional capacities, and promotes equitable participation in global AI governance.
Statement by South Centre at the Ministerial Meeting on Artificial Intelligence, Data Governance and Innovation for Sustainable Development (G20 Task Force)
30 September 2025, Cape Town
The South Centre welcomes the G20’s effort to advance meaningful participation of developing countries in shaping a fair, safe, secure, responsible, inclusive, ethical, trustworthy, and sustainable global AI landscape. Data governance is a foundation for equitable AI. Countries are entitled to develop and adopt regulatory frameworks for AI systems, including to reflect diverse knowledge systems and fair remuneration for data contributions.
