General Studies 2024 GS Paper III 10 marks 150 words Compulsory Explain

Q5

What is the present world scenario of intellectual property rights with respect to life materials? Although, India is second in the world to file patents, still only a few have been commercialized. Explain the reasons behind this less commercialization. (Answer in 150 words) 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

जीवन सामग्रियों के संदर्भ में बौद्धिक संपदा अधिकारों का वर्तमान विश्व परिदृश्य क्या है? यद्यपि भारत पेटेंट दाखिल करने के मामले में दुनिया में दूसरे स्थान पर है, फिर भी केवल कुछ का ही व्यवसायीकरण किया गया है। इस कम व्यवसायीकरण के कारणों को स्पष्ट कीजिए। (उत्तर 150 शब्दों में दीजिए)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2024 General Studies questions

Directive word: Explain

This question asks you to explain. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'explain' requires clear causal reasoning for both parts: first, the global IPR scenario for life materials (biotech, genetic resources, traditional knowledge), then reasons for India's patent-commercialization gap. Structure as: brief global context (TRIPS, CBD, Nagoya Protocol, biopiracy concerns) → India's patent filing vs. commercialization paradox → systemic reasons (lab-to-market gap, funding, regulatory hurdles, industry-academia disconnect) → concluding with way forward.

Key points expected

Global IPR scenario: tension between TRIPS/WTO patent regime and CBD/Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit-sharing for genetic resources; biopiracy debates (turmeric, neem cases); emerging issues around CRISPR/gene editing patents
India's patent paradox: 2nd globally in filings (WIPO 2022 data) but <1% commercialization rate; distinction between filing volume and value realization
Structural barriers: weak industry-academia linkage, inadequate Technology Transfer Offices (TTOs), limited venture capital for deep-tech/biotech startups
Regulatory and financial hurdles: lengthy approval processes (DCGI, GEAC), lack of seed funding, high cost of clinical trials and market validation
Knowledge/commercialization gap: researchers lack business acumen; absence of robust patent valuation and monetization mechanisms; weak enforcement and litigation capacity

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Demand-directive understanding	20%	2	Clearly addresses both parts of the bifurcated question—global life-materials IPR regime AND India's commercialization gap—with explicit causal reasoning for 'why' commercialization lags	Covers both parts superficially or conflates them; treats patent filing and commercialization as synonymous without explaining the gap	Misses one part entirely (only global scenario OR only India) or misinterprets 'life materials' as generic IPR without biotech/genetic specificity
Content depth & accuracy	20%	2	Accurately cites TRIPS-CBD interface, Nagoya Protocol, India's Patent Act 1970 (Section 3d), and specific institutional gaps (TTOs, BIRAC, SIDBI) with precise causal chains	Generic mention of 'strong laws' or 'weak implementation' without naming specific statutes, protocols, or systemic mechanisms; factual errors on India's rank or regime	Confuses life patents with copyright/trademarks; incorrect claims about India's patent ranking or misrepresents global IPR architecture
Structure & flow	20%	2	Crisp 150-word architecture: 30 words global context → 90 words on India's 4-5 layered reasons → 30 words forward-looking conclusion; seamless logical transitions	Unbalanced word allocation (overweight on global scene or underweight on reasons); bullet points without integration; abrupt shifts between themes	Disorganized stream-of-consciousness; no paragraph breaks; exceeds word limit significantly or falls far short; missing conclusion
Examples / case-law / data	20%	2	Deploys at least two specific anchors: data point (India's 2nd rank in filings, <1% commercialization), case-law (Turmeric/Neem biopiracy, Monsanto vs. Nuziveedu), or institution (BIRAC, CSIR-Tech transfer)	Vague reference to 'some biopiracy cases' or 'low commercialization' without names, numbers, or institutional specifics; generic global north-south framing	No examples, data, or case references; or factually wrong examples (e.g., citing copyright cases for patent question)
Conclusion & analytical edge	20%	2	Synthesizes with specific actionable insight: need for India's own Bayh-Dole Act, strengthening TTOs, or Atal Innovation Mission linkage; avoids generic 'government should do more'	Generic concluding statement ('need better policies') without specificity; mere summary of points already made	No conclusion; or contradictory conclusion suggesting more patent filings will automatically solve commercialization; purely aspirational without analytical grounding

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →