84
4 Institutional Frameworks for the Exchange and Utilization of PGRFA
international binding and non-binding agreements. This is to be discussed in the
next section.
4.3
Protection of Intellectual Property Rights as Enforcement
of the Exchange of PGRFA
The specific situation of PGRF A makes it necessary to discuss the exchange
system of PGRFA on the one side and the issue of property rights of PGRFA on
the other side. Genetic resources have, until recently, been regarded as the
"common heritage a/mankind" (UNEP, 1994a), which was specified in the CBD,
according to which the contracting parties reaffirm that the "... states have
sovereign rights over their own biological resources ... " (UNEP, 1994a,
Preamble). This reaffirmed national sovereignty does not, however, solve the
problem or propose any solution for the question of ownership of genetic
resources.
As discussed in Chapter 4.2, legal bodies influence policy decisions
concerning the conservation and utilization of PGRFA for all member countries
through adopted conventions and laws. The agreements have an influence on a
property rights solution for in situ and ex situ conserved genetic resources as well
as the exchange of genetic resources and products developed from their
utilization.
4.3.1
International Agreements and the Ownership of Genetic Resources
Meanwhile, so-called unimproved genetic material (wild species and traditional
varieties cultivated by farmers) are treated as a freely available resource in one of
two systems, while the other is governed by intellectual property rights, i.e.,
patents and plant breeders titles to newly bred plant varieties produced by
conventional breeders and biotechnology companies. Because of the increasing
trend towards the privatization and commercialization of research into genetic
resources, mainly in the biotechnology industry, there is a high demand for
efficient protection systems over the inventions (ODI, 1993).
On the one hand there has been the development of national and international
trade and commercial arrangements, determining property rights to genetically
and biochemically improved resources. The enactment of the US American
"Plant Patent Act" in 1930 was a starting signal, which permitted patent coverage
for asexually reproduced plants. Some European countries followed by
establishing some variety protection of titles to sexually reproduced plants in the
1940s. In 1970, the USA established the "Plant Variety Protection Act". (Reid et
al., 1993).
4 Institutional Frameworks for the Exchange and Utilization of PGRFA
international binding and non-binding agreements. This is to be discussed in the
next section.
4.3
Protection of Intellectual Property Rights as Enforcement
of the Exchange of PGRFA
The specific situation of PGRF A makes it necessary to discuss the exchange
system of PGRFA on the one side and the issue of property rights of PGRFA on
the other side. Genetic resources have, until recently, been regarded as the
"common heritage a/mankind" (UNEP, 1994a), which was specified in the CBD,
according to which the contracting parties reaffirm that the "... states have
sovereign rights over their own biological resources ... " (UNEP, 1994a,
Preamble). This reaffirmed national sovereignty does not, however, solve the
problem or propose any solution for the question of ownership of genetic
resources.
As discussed in Chapter 4.2, legal bodies influence policy decisions
concerning the conservation and utilization of PGRFA for all member countries
through adopted conventions and laws. The agreements have an influence on a
property rights solution for in situ and ex situ conserved genetic resources as well
as the exchange of genetic resources and products developed from their
utilization.
4.3.1
International Agreements and the Ownership of Genetic Resources
Meanwhile, so-called unimproved genetic material (wild species and traditional
varieties cultivated by farmers) are treated as a freely available resource in one of
two systems, while the other is governed by intellectual property rights, i.e.,
patents and plant breeders titles to newly bred plant varieties produced by
conventional breeders and biotechnology companies. Because of the increasing
trend towards the privatization and commercialization of research into genetic
resources, mainly in the biotechnology industry, there is a high demand for
efficient protection systems over the inventions (ODI, 1993).
On the one hand there has been the development of national and international
trade and commercial arrangements, determining property rights to genetically
and biochemically improved resources. The enactment of the US American
"Plant Patent Act" in 1930 was a starting signal, which permitted patent coverage
for asexually reproduced plants. Some European countries followed by
establishing some variety protection of titles to sexually reproduced plants in the
1940s. In 1970, the USA established the "Plant Variety Protection Act". (Reid et
al., 1993).