Argentina and the PCT: an opportunity to boost innovation

Argentina is one of the few countries in the region that has not yet joined the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), an international system that enables the simplification, unification, and deferral of the costs of protecting inventions in more than 150 countries. This lack of adherence limits the tools available to local researchers, universities, and startups that develop technology with the potential to scale to other markets. Today, those who innovate from Argentina face more barriers than their peers in neighboring countries, not because of technical issues, but because of a pending political decision.

As Argentina is not part of this system, those who develop technology locally—universities, research centers, startups, SMEs—cannot file international PCT applications themselves, and in practice, this means higher costs, greater complexity, and fewer possibilities for protection for local developments with global potential.

Contrary to what many believe, the PCT does not change the underlying rules for granting patents in each country, nor does it limit the ability to examine and decide according to local laws. Its purpose is to simplify the process of international protection of inventions, facilitating a unified filing stage that defers costs, reduces bureaucracy, and allows for better strategic decisions along the way.

Joining the PCT is an opportunity to strengthen local actors. Public research institutions, many national universities, and technology entrepreneurs could benefit greatly from a more agile, centralized, and predictable pathway to obtaining rights abroad. Even well-established industrial sectors with export potential could find advantages in a system that organizes and facilitates processing in multiple jurisdictions.

The treaty allows for the deferral of the filing and processing of applications with national offices for up to 30 months, which not only alleviates the initial economic impact but also provides time to seek partners, validate markets, and decide in which territories to move forward. In addition, it allows for the centralization of certain procedures that would otherwise have to be repeated country by country—such as name changes, assignments, and priority documents—reducing associated costs, and also enables the access to an international search report and a patentability opinion prior to national filings. In this sense, the PCT also acts as a planning tool. It allows research and development teams to plan for the longer term, protect intermediate results, and assess in which markets it makes sense to invest patenting efforts. This flexibility is especially valuable for projects arising from academic or public institutions, where development times are often longer and resources more limited.

In terms of costs, the difference can also be significant. Initiating an international filing without the backing of the PCT requires simultaneous expenditures in multiple countries, in addition to managing different versions of the same application adapted to each jurisdiction. The current system imposes an administrative and economic burden on Argentine innovators that peers in other countries do not face. This structural disadvantage discourages early internationalization and often limits the scope of inventions with high potential.

In the current global context, where technological developments circulate at high speed and international collaborations are increasingly frequent, joining the PCT can represent a competitive advantage. It is not only a matter of facilitating filings, but also of expanding the options available to those who are creating value from Argentina.

In the regional scenario, the case of Uruguay is particularly interesting. The country joined the PCT in 2024. Although companies in the neighboring country are generally smaller than ours, they operate in an environment that provides more advantages to foreign investment. This combination of scale and openness has allowed Uruguay to take a step that better positions its ecosystem for opportunities for technology transfer and international collaboration.

Finally, it is worth mentioning that joining the PCT is not an isolated reform, but part of a set of possible measures to modernize the intellectual property ecosystem in the country. For years, various technical and academic voices have been proposing improvements in the digitization of procedures, greater predictability in deadlines, and support mechanisms for those who embark on the path to patenting. Joining the PCT system would be a step in that direction: a concrete improvement in line with the challenges currently faced by science, technology, and knowledge production in Argentina.

For the above-mentioned reasons, it is worth opening the debate from a constructive perspective. To consider how to add tools that strengthen the local ecosystem, with clear and predictable rules, aligned with international standards. Joining the PCT could be one of them: a decision that does not replace national mechanisms for granting patents, but rather complements them and multiplies opportunities for those who are already working on the present—and future—of Argentine innovation.