Navigating Convergence and Conflict: A Literature Review on Intellectual Property in the Commonwealth

As the world becomes more connected, the digital revolution happens, and the political landscape changes, intellectual property (IP) legislation in the Commonwealth has become more important. However, the different socioeconomic conditions in Commonwealth countries have led to differences in IP protection, enforcement, and harmonisation. This difference is a big problem: how can Commonwealth countries combine their obligations under international treaties with their own objectives, which include cultural preservation, sustainable development, and equal access to information? The present study aims to address the issue by analysing academic literature on intellectual property across the Commonwealth, emphasising points of consensus, dissent, and emerging challenges in managing IP rights. From 19 to 31 August 2025, the study conducted a literature review using Scopus AI. The Summary, Expanded Summary, Concept Map, Topic Expert, and Emerging Themes tools in Scopus AI were used to examine the relevant papers found with a well-crafted Boolean search phrase. This enabled the study to identify important themes, highlight new and long-standing contributions to the field, and define jurisdictional patterns. According to the findings, Commonwealth IP law is influenced by four primary factors: legal structures, intellectual property rights forms, global considerations, and challenges and issues. New topics, such as the function of preferential trade agreements, demonstrate how intellectual property is becoming increasingly significant in both economic and geopolitical policy. Themes from the past, such as IP in the digital age and global inequality, demonstrate that issues with access and enforcement persist. These results imply that the Commonwealth's IP regimes converge around common legal traditions and simultaneously change in response to regional contexts and developmental needs. There are two implications of this study. It backs up the idea that intellectual property involves both conflict and cooperation. In actuality, it emphasises the necessity of cross-border collaboration, capacity building, and situation-appropriate adjustments to ensure that intellectual property frameworks support not only trade and innovation but also equity, cultural preservation, and sustainable development across the Commonwealth.