A/HRC/20/26 scientists’ rights; only a few provide standards for respecting human rights in the conduct of work. Developing codes of conduct explicitly informed by human rights thus seems essential. 54. Many States have taken measures to oversee research methods and the conduct of science in the public sector. The research practices of private institutions receive less scrutiny, however. This area requires greater attention, particularly when companies undertake research that would be illegal in one country but which, owing to a lack of legal protections, are possible in another. As stressed by the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, States have an obligation to take steps to prevent human rights contraventions abroad by corporations which have their main office under their jurisdiction, without infringing the sovereignty or diminishing the obligations of the host States. 59 55. The Special Rapporteur also received information that assessments made pursuant to certain agreed international standards “are insufficient to determine the hazard(s) of certain chemicals”, and “have been criticized by civil society as an inadequate reflection of scientific progress in detecting the hazards of chemicals”. It has been further argued that the reluctance of regulators to use general peer-reviewed and published scientific evidence of chemicals hazard(s) may “impede the application of the benefits of scientific progress by effectively limiting access to relevant information in decision-making processes”.60 This requires further attention. IV. Areas for further consideration A. The right to science and intellectual property rights 56. Concern has been widely expressed about the conflict between the right to science and intellectual property rights, in particular since the adoption of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).61 Bilateral and/or regional trade and investment agreements containing “TRIPS plus” provisions or restricting TRIPS flexibilities can also pose problems. 62 The potential of intellectual property regimes to obstruct new technological solutions to critical human problems such as food, water, health, chemical safety, energy and climate change requires attention.63 57. The rights of authors protected by human rights instruments are not to be equated with “intellectual property rights”; both intellectual property rights and authors’ rights may, 59 60 61 62 63 E/C.12/2011/1. See also the Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights (A/HRC/17/31), annex. Submission by CIEL. See also the reports of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights obligations related to environmentally source management and disposal of hazardous substances and waste, for example E/CN.4/2006/42. In particular, see resolution 2000/7 of the Subcommission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights, preamble. See also A/HRC/11/12 and A/HRC/17/43, para. 6. A/HRC/11/12, para. 68. See Thomas Faunce, “Innovation and Insufficient Evidence: The Case for a WTO Agreement on Health Technology Safety and Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation”, in Incentives for Global Health: Patent Law and Access to Essential Medicines, Kim Rubenstein, Thomas Pogge and Matthew Rimmer (eds), Cambridge University Press, 2010, pp. 209-232. T. Faunce, “Will International Trade Law Promote or Inhibit Global Artificial Photosynthesis?”, Asian Journal of WTO and International Health Law and Policy, Vol. 6, , pp. 313-347. See also submission by CIEL and “Technology Transfer In the UNFCCC and Other International Legal Regimes: the Challenge of Systemic Integration”, International Council on Human Rights Policy, 2010. Available from www.ichrp.org/files/papers/184/138_technology_transfer_UNFCCC.pdf. 15