PowerPoint Template WIPOPowerPoint模板 WIPO.pptVIP

Evaluations at the EC (the IP context) Kamil Kiljański Geneva, 6 October 2011 Outline Policy assessment over the legislative cycle. Methodology and institutional set-up. Experience in IP impact assessments and evaluations. The institutional set-up. Centralised review: Impact Assessment Board (Secretary General). Decentralised ‘production’ (individual Directorates General). Policy unit (evidence, consultation and drafting). Economic analysis unit (fresh pair of eyes). Transparency: roadmaps, joint publication of IA and IAB opinion. The broader context (European Parliament). Evaluations (ex post assessment). More frequent for spending programmes than legislation. The evaluation ‘mandate’. Resources and timing. Scope. Choice of the counterfactual (reference scenario). Stakeholder consultation and data gathering. Outsourcing. The evaluation criteria: Effectiveness (indicators) and efficiency (least cost?). Distributional effects (and unintended consequences). Consistency with other related initiatives. IP evaluation so far (completed). 2004 IA Directive amending Directive 98/71/EC on the legal protection of designs 2005 IA accompanying the decision on accession to Hague agreement on Designs IA on copyright in the online music sector 2008 IA on Directive 2006/116 on term of protection of copyright and related rights 2009 IA on the fees payable to the OHIM and on the Community trade mark 2010 IA on the translation arrangements for the EU patent 2011 IA on enhanced cooperation in the creation of unitary patent protection Study on the overall functioning of the trademark system in Europe IA on the cross-border access to orphan works IA on European Observatory on Counterfeiting and Piracy Trademark study (Max-Planck Institute, 2011)  Hybrid approach: Interviews with national patent offices and user organisations. User survey (by Allensbach, ~1500 respondents). Econometric analysis (INNO-Tec). Key issues: Relationship be