A/70/279 I. Introduction 1. The present report is the second of two consecutive studies by the Special Rapporteur in the field of cultural rights on intellectual property policies and the right to science and culture. The first report ( A/HRC/28/57 and Add.1 and 2) focused on how copyright policy interfaces with the protection of authors’ moral and material interests, and the right of everyone to benefit from scientific and cultural creativity. The present report addresses patent policy. 2. The relationship between human rights and intellectual property is important and complex. The last decades have witnessed growing concern that the design and implementation of intellectual property laws may undermine the enjoyment of human rights. A notable example of this interaction is the tension between pharmaceutical patents and the affordability of medicines with respect to the ri ght to health. Patent policies in the areas of agriculture, energy -saving and climate-change mitigation technologies are sometimes feared to threaten the enjoyment of the rights to food and to a safe and sustainable environment. 3. The tension between patent protection and broad public access is common to all fields of essential technologies, beyond the areas of health, food or the environment. Innovations essential for a life with dignity should be accessible to everyone, and potential implications of scientific advances likely to have a significant impact on human rights require attention, for example, in the field of energy, information and communication technologies, nanotechnology and synthetic biology (see A/HRC/20/26, paras. 26 and 29). 4. The central challenge is “to recognize and reward human creativity and innovation, and, at the same time, to ensure public access to the fruits of those endeavours.” 1 Well-designed patent laws and policies play a vital role in encouraging private investment in scientific research and development, making an important contribution to scientific progress and human well -being. In order for the international patent system to continue to serve its fundamental purpose of encouraging innovation and promoting dissemination and transfer of technology, the right balance is required between the rights of technology holders and the rights of technology users for the benefit of society as a whole (see A/HRC/20/26, para. 58). 5. The right to science and culture, understood as encompassing the rights to take part in cultural life, to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress and its applications, and to benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from scientific, literary or artistic productions of which a person is the author, offers a particularly promising framework for reconciling the tensions between human rights and intellectual property laws. 2 Although the human right to science and culture does not establish a human right to patent protection, it does provide a human rights framework within which to consider patent policy. 6. The Special Rapporteur convened several meetings in 2014 to elicit the views of States and other stakeholders on the impact of intellectual property regimes on the enjoyment of the right to science and culture: an open consultation on 6 June __________________ 1 2 4/26 See Laurence R. Helfer and Graeme W. Austin, Human Rights and Intellectual Property: Mapping the Global Interface (New York, Cambridge University Press, 2011). See Lea Shaver, “The right to science and culture”, Wisconsin Law Review, vol. 2010, No. 1 (2010); available from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1354788. 15-12543