A/70/279 34. In conclusion, the term “authors” within the right to science and culture can be interpreted to include inventors and scientific discoverers. Under this interpretation, individuals and communities are entitled to protection of the moral and material interests related to the inventions with which they have a strong personal link, similar to the link between an author in the traditional sense and their creative work of authorship. This protection must ensure respect for this personal link, and promote the individual or community’s enjoyment of an adequate standard of living. This right does not provide patent holders’ grounds to challenge patent rules as providing inadequate protection of their financial or commercial interests. Nor can the right to protection of moral and material interests be used by States to defend patent laws that inadequately respect the right to science and culture. B. Rights of indigenous peoples and local communities 35. There is a “defensive” and a “positive” approach in using intellect ual property to protect the biocultural heritage of indigenous peoples and local communities. The defensive approach seeks to prevent the patenting of (or the acquisition of other intellectual property rights over) traditional knowledge by third parties, in violation of the rights and/or interests of indigenous and local peoples. The positive approach seeks to leverage indigenous and local intellectual property to provide indigenous and local groups with greater control over their knowledge assets. 36. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples states that indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their intellectual property (see art. 31, para. 1, of the Declaration). It differs from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in that it specifically enunciates a right to intellectual property, rather than to the protection of moral and material interests. The discussion has come to be framed around traditional cultural expressions (such as artwork, narratives, rituals and music), traditional knowledge (such as indigenous medical and agricultural know-how and technologies) and genetic resources (which might be plant, animal or microbial biological genetic material). 37. Several motivations underlie this right, including the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination, their right to maintain and develop their culture and their struggle for cultural survival. Some indigenous and local communities consider it vital to keep certain forms of knowledge from public disclosure, to be used only by persons and in ways that are appropriate according to customary laws and practices, and never commercially exploited. Simultaneously, some peoples wish to take advantage of the commercial potential of licensing products based on their traditional knowledge and genetic resources. Additionally, indigenous and local communities may object to the improper patenting of their natural or genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge and practices in ways that deny appropriate credit and ownership to the true source of the resource or knowledge. 38. International and national intellectual property regimes have historically failed to adequately take into account the concerns of indigenous peoples and local communities. The interests in maintaining control over non -commercial, communally created and historically rooted cultural assets tend to fall through the cracks of intellectual property regimes. For example, traditional knowledge that has been made available to the public is generally regarded as being in the public 15-12543 11/26