Genetic Resources, Equity and International Law (original) (raw)
Related papers
2010
See for example Elfrieda Pschorn-Strauss and Rachel Wynberg 'The seeds of neo-colonialism: genetic engineering in food and farming' (2002) GroundWork, and Mariam Mayet 'The new green revolution in Africa: Trojan horse for GMOs?' (2007). 17 See in this regard the European Group on Ethics in Science and new Technologies to the European Commission 'Ethics of modern developments in agriculture technologies Opinion No 24' (17 December 2008) and the COGEM Report 'Socio-economic aspects of GMOs: building blocks for an EU sustainability assessment of genetically modified crops' CGM/090929-01. 18 This is referred to as the concept of dual knowledge in which a single 'discovery' may contribute to both scientific research and to a useful commercial application. Dual knowledge is often exploited in what is known as patent-paper pairs in which a publication is coupled with the patent. Empirical research shows a citation rate decline for such papers after formal IP rights have been granted, thus suggesting that IP rights may have a negative impact on the diffusion of scientific knowledge. Murray, Fiona and Stern, Scott 'Do formal intellectual property rights hinder the free flow of scientific knowledge? An empirical test of the anti-commons hypothesis' (2007) 63 Journal of Economic Behaviour & Organization 648-687. The pursuit of a dual knowledge strategy was enabled in the US by the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 and is likely to become the practice in South Africa once the Intellectual Property Rights from Publicly Financed Research and Development Act 51 of 2008 becomes operational. Researchers in the developing world already face a host of barriers to effective research. See for example Forero-Pineda, Clemente and Jaramillo-Salazar, Hernan 'The access of researchers from developing countries to international science and technology' (2002) 54 International Social Science Journal 129-140. '[P]lant germplasm is a resource that reproduces itself, and a single 'taking' of germplasm could provide the material base upon which whole new sectors of production could be elaborated.' Jack R Kloppenburg First the seed: the political economy of plant biotechnology (1988) at 154 cited in 'Weeds, seeds & deeds' (note 25) at 262. 28 Mgbeoji questions the applicability of the common heritage concept during the colonial era, as the 'transfer of germ plasm from the colony to the mother country was more or less perceived as "an internal affair" of the colonial empires'. Ikechi Mgbeoji 'Beyond rhetoric: state sovereignty, common concern, and the inapplicability of the common heritage concept to plant genetic resources' (2003) 16 Leiden Journal of International Law 821 at 823. 29 The implications of the burgeoning regime for developing countries and for public sector research are discussed in Wright and Pardey 'Changing IP regimes: implications for developing country agriculture' (2006) 2 Int J Technology and Globalisation 93-114. broader environment (soil, water supply, etc). 37 From a social and economic perspective, there are concerns about food security and safety, cultural heritage, freedom of choice, and economic welfare. 38 These concerns are diverse and are often regulated in seemingly discreet areas of law which together spin an intricate web of rules, a complex regulatory regime, around PGRs. 39 1.2.2 A complex regulatory regime A proliferation of international organisations and instruments over the past few decades has given rise to 'an array of partially overlapping and nonhierarchical institutions governing a particular issue-area.' 40 These 'regime complexes' are in turn reflected in the provisions of domestic law.
Drake Journal of Agricultural Law, 2006
This article examines the international legal framework in which traditional farmers and agricultural biotechnology (agro-biotech) protect their knowledge and plant genetic resources. Traditional farms and agro-biotech both play significant roles in enhancing global food security and biodiversity. Legal measures to protect the knowledge of agro-biotech and traditional farmers were deployed by nations with a head start in the agro-biotech industry. The resulting system of utility patents and the sui generis concept of plant breeders' rights often subordinates the claims of farmers under those of agro-biotech. The author argues the current regime under the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) is inadequate to moderate the inequities created by intellectual property in plant genetic resources. Agro-biotech alone cannot ensure global food security and sustainable agriculture, nor can an intellectual property system that undermines local and traditional agriculture. Traditional farming knowledge is indispensable to ensuring that culturally acceptable food is accessible around the globe. A two-pronged approach to inequities in the current intellectual property system is possible. First, developing countries can use national legislation to comprehensively define farmers' rights beyond the ITPGRFA. Second, the governing body of the treaty can prioritize interpreting Article 12.3(d) of the Treaty with regard for the expectations of developing countries.
2015
Published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License * Senior research fellow, Fridtjof Nansen Institute. Tvedt has published extensively in the area of biological resources law and intellectual property in recent years (see www.fni.no for a complete list of publications). The most important monograph regarding genetic resources he co-authored with Tomme R. Young, Beyond Access:Exploring Implementation of the Fair and Equitable Sharing Commitment in the CBD. IUCN Environmental Policy and Law Paper No. 67/1 (available in English, Spanish and French, www.fni.no/publ/biodiversity.html). Tvedt is currently working on a monograph on patent law and the sui generis option in the plant sector for developing countries. He wants to thank Professor Trygve Berg at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences for valuable comments and discussions, and Research Professor G. Kristin Rosendal for useful input. The research for this article was funded by the Norwegian Research Council under the ELSA Programme and forms part of the three-year project 'Biotechnology in agriculture and aquaculture-effects of intellectual property rights in the food production chain'. The same topic is presented in the section by Tvedt in Medaglia and others. The Interface between the Nagoya Protocol on ABS and the ITPGRFA at the International Level-Potential Issues for Consideration in Supporting Mutually Supportive Implementation at the National Level.
Leeway to Operate with Plant Genetic Resources
Ortiz, R., Eriksson, D., Visser, R. G. F., Prieto, H., Vallés, J. A. V., eds. (2020). Leeway to Operate With Plant Genetic Resources. Lausanne: Frontiers Media SA. doi: 10.3389/978-2-88966-008-7, 2020
The plant genetic resources (PGR) regulatory frameworks that are relevant for research and breeding have become increasingly detailed and complex over the past few decades. This includes international agreements and conventions on 1) the access and benefit-sharing (ABS) of genetic resources, 2) national/regional biosafety legislation related to the technologies for managing and improving the genetic material, and 3) intellectual property (IP) systems including plant breeders' rights (PBR) and patents as well as competition law issues specific to the plant innovation sector. This Research Topic addresses the leeway to operate with PGR from a multitude of perspectives. This includes the various policy and regulatory aspects that researchers and breeders have to relate to when accessing PGR, working on the PGR material in order to manage agriculturally relevant traits, and protecting the outcome of their investments. The following topics are therefore covered here: General - Opportunities and obstacles for plant researchers and breeders considering national and international PGR agreements and conventions - “Open access” in a PGR context (concerning both ABS and IP) - Is there a looming risk of a policy bottlenecks for crop genetic diversity? - Governing options of digital sequence information, and synthetic biology - The perspectives of various stakeholder groups in relation to the PGR frameworks Access and Benefit-Sharing - PGR from common heritage to national heritage - Digital sequence information and/or synthetic biology in an ABS context - Consequences of the Nagoya protocol for international research collaborations - Impact of the Nagoya protocol and/or the International Treaty on PGR conservation and use - Impact of the Nagoya protocol and/or the International Treaty on innovation Biosafety - The relevance of risk assessment in the context of old and new gene technologies in plant breeding and its impact on the seed chain - Consequences of international disagreements on regulatory frameworks for breeding - Definitions in the context of policies and regulatory frameworks for precision breeding - Reassessment of the legal principles on biosafety in the light of the experience acquired in the last decades and the new challenges brought by the new breeding techniques - Synthetic biology Plant Innovation - IP protection for plant innovations, and other potentially protective frameworks and competition law related aspects - The emerging patent landscape associated with new breeding techniques, and its consequences - Comparative analyses of the impact of patent versus plant breeders rights - “Open source seed” - “Essentially biological process” in the context of patent legislation - “Essentially derived variety” in the context of emerging directed mutagenesis techniques - Competition law issues related to market concentration in the seed sector Interdisciplinary co-authors teams are highly encouraged, as well as cross-cutting manuscripts that interlink and integrate various regulatory aspects related to the governance of PGR. Manuscripts on the regulatory and policy aspects are welcome, as well as Reviews, and Original Research that is relevant in a PGR regulatory context. Creative and forward-looking proposed solutions to existing issues and problems are particularly encouraged.
Bibliography on access to plant genetic resources and intellectual property rights
2019
Plant genetic resources constitute the biological foundation of humankind. Research systems and agricultural production also depend on them. Plant genetic resources result from natural evolution and human intervention, and are considered patrimony of the nations. Although their conservation, use and exchange are among the objectives of the Convention of Biological Diversity and have been recognized internationally, the threats against their safety continue to increase. This bibliography, which contains work published all over the world since 1984, intends to contribute to IPGRI's goal on plant genetic resources policy. It contains 433 references with local descriptors. The records are organized in 2 subjects-access to plant genetic resources (91) and intellectual property rights (342). It includes references on the status of intellectual property rights in several countries, the application of farmers' rights to local varieties and the consequences of limiting access in the ...
Examining the Interface between Intellectual Property Rights And Plant Genetic Resources
Intellectual property rights have been created to ensure protection against unfair trade practices. Owners of intellectual property are granted protection by a state or country under varying conditions and periods of time. The need for Intellectual Property Rights has arisen because the concept of property has changed over the years. Intellectual property can be loosely defined as creations of the human mind. These could be incorporated in creative or inventive works, including distinctive signs or marks. Examples are books, paintings or other literary and artistic works, inventions, designs and trademarks. Intellectual property rights (IPRs) are legal rights governing the use of such creations.This term covers a bundle of rights, such as patents, trademarks or copyrights, each different in scope and duration with a different purpose and effect. The potential knowledge as a creator of wealth is gaining currency all around the world. The biological diversity of the earth which is primarily concentrated in the tropics, i.e. developing countries, which is the raw material for biotechnology i.e. genes, folk varieties, land races, which can be used to develop new varieties by biotechnology.The research and development in biotechnology is principally confined to developed countries, particularly in private hands (mainly with MNCs). For their research and development they generally fall back on the genetic resources provided by developing countries, which were available to them free of charge till recently from the farmers and plant breeders from developing countries. The products or plant varieties, particularly created or developed from these genetic resources are protected through patents and plant breeder’s rights (PBR) in developed countries and are not freely accessible to developing countries.
The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 2007
The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) entered into force in 2004. It is the most recent piece in the current regime complex on plant genetic resources. However, wherever there are several legally binding international agreements dealing with at least partially overlapping issues, a conflict between them may arise. Such conflicts narrow the leeway that parties to more than one of the treaties have for implementation and may thus also reduce the treaties' potential for reaching their objectives. Against this backdrop, this article investigates the legal relationships between the ITPGRFA, on the one hand, and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, the Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) on the other. It arrives at the conclusion that there are no conflicts between the ITPGRFA and any of those treaties at present, while negotiations conducted currently in the framework of the World Intellectual Property Organization and the CBD need carefully to avoid creating such legal conflicts.
2007
This chapter outlines the range of plant variety protection regimes that currently exist internationally, including the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. The chapter commences with a history of intellectual property laws affecting plant breeding and the genetic modification of plants. It explores the trend toward the harmonization of international standards and concludes with an examination of the impact of these developments upon germplasm exchange, international agricultural research, and food security. HANDBOOK OF BEST PRACTICES | 01 Given the state of technology in 1883, the inclusion of these agricultural subjects within the Paris Convention was for the purpose of protecting trademarks and indications of source. The first inclusion of biological agri...