Cultural Integrity versus Intellectual Property: Constructing a "Dual-Track" International Legal Framework for Traditional Chinese Medicine Protection
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70088/ta1nbf87Keywords:
traditional medicine, intellectual property, traditional knowledge, benefit sharing, cultural heritage, legal frameworkAbstract
The international protection of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) is currently fractured between two institutional systems with fundamentally incompatible logics. The UNESCO intangible cultural heritage framework treats TCM as a communally held cultural practice warranting active safeguarding, while the WIPO-administered intellectual property system conceptualizes TCM-derived innovations as exclusive sources of proprietary rights. This article argues that neither system alone adequately protects the multifaceted interests of TCM: the cultural heritage approach lacks enforceable economic mechanisms, while the intellectual property approach risks commodifying living traditions. Drawing on comprehensive doctrinal analysis, comparative institutional analysis, and normative theory—including insights from knowledge governance and postcolonial scholarship—we propose a dual-track framework that functionally differentiates TCM knowledge dimensions according to their predominant governance needs. Codified pharmacological knowledge is assigned to a revised intellectual property track with broadened disclosure and benefit-sharing obligations; embodied clinical practices and philosophical foundations are assigned to an enhanced cultural heritage track with strengthened cooperation mechanisms. Institutional articulation mechanisms—including cross-referencing obligations and a novel cultural integrity impact assessment—ensure coherence across tracks. Situated within the evolving governance landscape shaped by the 2024 WIPO Treaty on Genetic Resources and the 2022 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, this framework addresses the broader challenge of governing traditional knowledge in a rapidly and increasingly globalized economy.References
T. Cottier and M. Panizzon, "Legal perspectives on traditional knowledge: The case for intellectual property protection," Journal of International Economic Law, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 371–399, 2004.
G. Dutfield, Intellectual Property, Biogenetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge. London, UK: Earthscan, 2010.
G. Dutfield, "Traditional knowledge, intellectual property and pharmaceutical innovation: What's left to discuss," in The SAGE Handbook of Intellectual Property, 2017, pp. 649–664.
A. Wellington, "Intellectual Property Rights, Indigenous Cultural Expression and Traditional Knowledge," in Encyclopedia of Global Justice. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2026, pp. 1–6.
L. T. Smith, Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. London, UK: Zed Books, 1999.
M. Laborda Pemán and T. De Moor, "A tale of two commons. Some preliminary hypotheses on the long-term development of the commons in Western and Eastern Europe, 11th–19th centuries," International Journal of the Commons, vol. 7, no. 1, 2013.
O. R. Young, The Institutional Dimensions of Environmental Change: Fit, Interplay, and Scale. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
B. Diamond et al., "Performing protocol: indigenous traditional knowledge as/and intellectual property," in Ethnomusicology: A Contemporary Reader, Volume II. New York, NY: Routledge, 2017, pp. 17–34.
J. Boyle, "The second enclosure movement and the construction of the public DOMAIN," 2003. [Online]. Available: https://www.law.duke.edu/journals/dlj/boyle. Accessed: Oct. 15, 2020.
C. Antons, Ed., *Traditional Knowledge, Traditional Cultural Expressions, and Intellectual Property Law in the Asia-Pacific Region*, vol. 14. Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands: Kluwer Law International BV, 2009.
F. H. Fernández, "The WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources, and Associated Traditional Knowledge: Miracle or Mirage?," Canadian Yearbook of International Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international, pp. 1–27, 2026.
K. I. Arens, J. P. Gaudillière, H. Madhavan, and E. Nouguez, "Commons and the Political Economy of Access: Generics, Neo-traditional Formulations and the Dominant Intellectual Property Regime of Medicines," in Capitalism, Innovations, and Health after Covid-19: An Asian Perspective. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2026, pp. 389–425.
C. Oguamanam, *The Protection of Traditional Knowledge: Towards a Cross-Cultural Dialogue on Intellectual Property Rights*. Ottawa, ON: University of Ottawa Press, 2004.
T. Kongolo, Unsettled International Intellectual Property Issues. Alphen aan den Rijn, Netherlands: Kluwer Law International BV, 2008.
F. Fuad, A. Firmansyah, E. Sunaryo, and A. Machmud, "Legal culture of intellectual property rights protection of traditional medicine business performers," Journal of Law and Sustainable Development, vol. 12, no. 5, p. 7, 2024.
C. Oguamanam, "Patents and traditional medicine: Digital capture, creative legal interventions, and the dialectics of knowledge transformation," Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 489–528, 2008.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Aidong Hu (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
