Abstract
Over the past years, two passions have guided the academic efforts of the distinguished Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Reto M. Hilty as Director of the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition: the unfolding of the economic and innovative potential of Latin America and the solution of grand challenges to humanity. Few topics fit so well into the intersection of these endeavors as the protection of genetic resources. The unique biodiversity of Latin American countries not only needs to be protected in order for environmental goals to be achieved, but it also provides them with great potential for innovation and use of technologies. The realization of this untapped potential, however, requires appropriate regulations. By assigning countries sovereign rights over genetic resources and supporting the sharing of the benefits that arise from their use, the Convention on Biological Diversity and its Nagoya Protocol have opened an important gateway to this. Nevertheless, its objectives have not been achieved in the last decades. This article presents some of the main factors determining the failure of these international instruments and analyzes regulatory alternatives at the regional and plurilateral levels that countries interested in obtaining a fair and equitable benefit sharing for the use of their resources may adopt.
LL.M. (Munich); Research Fellow at the Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition, Munich
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Art. 3 CBD and Art. 6 (1) NP.
- 2.
Art. 15 (5) CBD and Art. 6 (1) NP.
- 3.
Art. 15 (4) and (7) CBD and Art. 5 (1) NP.
- 4.
Art. 1 and 15 (7) CBD and Art. 1 and 5 (1) NP.
- 5.
- 6.
On the complementary relation between biodiversity protection and sovereignty as grounds for the protection of genetic resources through ABS regulation, see for instance Tsioumani (2018), p. 111.
- 7.
Ecuador, for instance, requires that the State shall have at least an equal participation in the benefits achieved by any other person through the use of genetic resources. See Art. 73 of the Código Orgánico de la Economía Social de los Conocimientos, Creatividad e Innovación from 2016.
- 8.
- 9.
Art. 2 (1) und (4) EU ABS Reg.
- 10.
Cf. European Commission (2016), pp. 8 et seq.
- 11.
The national reports on the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol are available at the following link: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/biodiversity/international/abs/legislation_en.htm.
- 12.
Cf. Arts. 6, 7, 9 and 11 EU ABS Reg.
- 13.
Japanese Government (2017), Chapter I No. 3 (1) (5) and Chapter II No.1 (1).
- 14.
Japanese Government (2018).
- 15.
Japanese Government (2017), Chapter II No. 1 (1).
- 16.
Japanese Government (2017), Chapter II No. (3) (1) (1), 5 (1) (1) and 5 (1) (2). Despite an admonition if no report is submitted after five years, no sanction is provided by law.
- 17.
- 18.
- 19.
According to the definition of Art. 2 CBD, ex situ resources shall be understood as the “components of biological diversity outside their natural habitats”.
- 20.
Neither the CBD and the NP nor the Conventions on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Civil or Commercial Matters (1971 and 2019) have provisions on the recognition of foreign judgments in ABS matters.
- 21.
- 22.
Robinson (2015), p. 138.
- 23.
- 24.
For an example of legislations that require only information about genetic resources from a restricted territory, see Decision No. 391 of the Andean Community, Complementary Provisions No. 3; Art. 26 (h) of the Decision No. 486 of the Andean Community.
- 25.
- 26.
- 27.
GBIF What is GBIF? https://www.gbif.org/what-is-gbif.
- 28.
GBIF (2018) Big data for biodiversity: GBIF.org surpasses 1 billion species occurrences. https://www.gbif.org/news/5BesWzmwqQ4U84suqWyOQy/big-data-for-biodiversity-gbiforg-surpasses-1-billion-species-occurrences.
- 29.
The individual contributing institutions are also listed on the GBIF website. See https://www.gbif.org/publisher/search.
- 30.
GBIF (2021), pp. 4 et seq.
- 31.
GBIF (2021), pp. 3 et seq.
- 32.
GBIF (2021) Documentation Guidelines. https://docs.gbif.org/documentation-guidelines/en/gbif-documentation-guidelines.en.pdf.
- 33.
See Decision V/9 of the CBD Conference of the Parties (COP) 5, Global Taxonomy Initiative: Implementation and Further Advance of the Suggestions for Action, Nairobi, 2000, available under https://www.cbd.int/decision/cop/?id=7151.
- 34.
Annex to the NP, No. 2 (a), (b), (f) and (g).
- 35.
See Sect. 1 above.
- 36.
These problems were pointed out, for instance, by different Latin American authorities and experts in the I Workshop on Genetic Resources of the Initiative Smart IP for Latin America, which took place in Bogotá (Colombia) on June 12, 2023.
- 37.
See introduction to Sect. 3 above.
- 38.
Art. 13 CBD and Art. 21 NP.
- 39.
The controversial draft IGC documents on an international agreement in this field can be found through the following link: https://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/topic.jsp?group_id=110.
- 40.
Detailed information about this treaty – including its text – can be found at the following link: https://www.fao.org/plant-treaty/en/.
References
Apte T (2006) A simple guide to intellectual property rights, biodiversity and traditional knowledge. Kalpavriksh, New Delhi
Correa CM (2020) Trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights – a commentary on the TRIPS agreement, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
European Commission (2016) Guidance document on the scope of application and core obligations of Regulation (EU) No 511/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the compliance measures for users from the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilisation in the Union. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52016XC0827%2801%29. Accessed 26 January 2024
Fedder B (2013) Marine genetic resources, access and benefit sharing – legal and biological perspectives. Routledge, Abingdon
Federle C (2005) Biopiraterie und Patentrecht. Nomos, Baden-Baden
GBIF (2018) Big data for biodiversity: GBIF.org surpasses 1 billion species occurrences. https://www.gbif.org/news/5BesWzmwqQ4U84suqWyOQy/big-data-for-biodiversity-gbiforg-surpasses-1-billion-species-occurrences. Accessed 26 January 2024
GBIF (2020) Twenty years of GBIF: independent review charts successes and challenges. https://www.gbif.org/news/1QfpUlGByxjqBktiYAfyIK/twenty-years-of-gbif-independent-review-charts-successes-and-challenges. Accessed 26 January 2024
GBIF (2021) Documentation guidelines. https://docs.gbif.org/documentation-guidelines/en/gbif-documentation-guidelines.en.pdf. Accessed 26 January 2024
GBIF What is GBIF? https://www.gbif.org/what-is-gbif. Accessed 26 January 2024
Glowka L, Normand V (2013) Innovations on international environmental law. In: Morgera E, Buck M, Tsioumani E (Hrsg) The 2010 Nagoya protocol on access and benefit-sharing in perspective – implications for international law and implementation challenges. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden and Boston, S 21–51
Godt C (2004) Von der Biopiraterie zum Biodiversitätsregime – Die sog. Bonner Leitlinien als Zwischenschritt zu einem CBD-Regime über Zugang und Vorteilsausgleich. ZUR:202–213
Godt C, Šušnjar D, Wolff F (2020) Umsetzung des Nagoya-Protokolls in EU- und nationales Recht – Ein Alternativvorschlag zur Umsetzung der EU VO 511/2014. Nomos, Baden-Baden
Hilty RM, Kur A, Peukert A (2006) Statement of the Max Planck institute for intellectual property, competition and tax law on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Criminal Measures Aimed at Ensuring the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights. IIC: 970–977
Ho CM (2003) Disclosure of origin and prior informed consent for applications of intellectual property rights based on genetic resources: a technical study of implementation issues. UNEP, UNEP/CBD/WG-ABS/2/INF/2. https://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/abs/abswg-02/information/abswg-02-inf-02-en.pdf. Accessed 26 January 2024
Japanese Government (2017) Guidelines on access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their utilization. http://abs.env.go.jp/pdf/english_guidelines.pdf. Accessed 26 January 2024
Japanese Government (2018) ABS implementation in Japan – overview. http://abs.env.go.jp/pdf_04/180928_English_ol_light.pdf. Accessed 26 January 2024
Lochen T (2007) Die völkerrechtlichen Regelungen über den Zugang zu genetischen Ressourcen. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen
Louafi S, Schloen M (2013) Practices of exchanging and utilizing genetic resources for food and agriculture and the access and benefit-sharing regime. In: Kamau EC, Winter G (Hrsg) Common pools of genetic resources – equity and innovation in international biodiversity law. Routledge, Abingdon, S 193–223
Milieu Law & Policy Consulting (2020) Analysis of implications of compliance with the EU ABS regulation for research organisations and private sector companies. https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/3f466d71-92a7-49eb-9c63-6cb0fadf29dc/library/1c43b336-bddb-4482-9382-ed6ef9982131/details?download=true. Accessed 26 January 2024
Morgera E, Geelhoed M (2016) Consultancy on the notion of ‘utilisation’ in the Nagoya protocol and the EU ABS regulation for upstream actors. University of Edinburgh
Oduardo-Sierra O (2015) Case study II – lepidium meyenii under “bounded openness”. In: Ruiz Muller M (Hrsg) Genetic Resources as natural information – implications for the convention on biological diversity and Nagoya protocol. Routledge, Abingdon, S 110–117
Rengier R (2021) Strafrecht Allgemeiner Teil, 13th edn. C.H. Beck, München
Robinson DF (2015) Biodiversity, access and benefit-sharing – global case studies. Routledge, Abingdon
Sarnoff JD (2004) Compatibility with existing international intellectual property agreements of requirements for patent applicants to disclose origins of genetic resources and traditional knowledge and evidence of legal access and benefit sharing, memorandum for the Public Interest Intellectual Property Advisors, Inc. (PIIPA)
Tsioumani E (2018) Beyond access and benefit-sharing: lessons from the law and governance of agricultural biodiversity. J World Intellect Prop:106–122
Wallot M (2016) The proportionality principle in the TRIPS agreement. In: Ullrich H, Hilty RM, Lamping M, Drexl J (Hrsg) TRIPS plus 20 – from trade rules to market principles. Springer, Berlin and Heidelberg, S 213–243
Yu PK (2009) The objectives and principles of the TRIPS agreement. Houston Law Rev:979–1046
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 Der/die Autor(en), exklusiv lizenziert an Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE, ein Teil von Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Batista, P.H.D. (2024). The Protection of Genetic Resources: Potential for Regional Cooperation. In: Thouvenin, F., Peukert, A., Jaeger, T., Geiger, C. (eds) Kreation Innovation Märkte - Creation Innovation Markets. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-68599-0_43
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-68599-0_43
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-68598-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-68599-0
eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)