4.3 Protection of IPR as Enforcement of the Exchange of PGRFA
87
of the concept of Farmers' Rights (Esquinas-Alcazar, 1996). The concept of
Farmers' Rights must be understood more as an expression of the principle of
global responsibility to conserve landraces and in recognition of the farmers'
contribution over time than a legally binding document (Hardon et aI., 1994). The
implementation of Farmers' Rights, however, is hampered by the lack of
international funds for a general compensation approach as well as by the delay in
the negotiations of joint property rights. IUPGR was negotiated and agreed upon
by the former Commission on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture
(CPGRFA), as an intergovernmental global forum hosted by FAO. CPGRFA was
established in 1983 and broadened its scope in 1995 to include other sectors of
genetic resources for food and agriculture, beginning with livestock. As part of
FAO's Global System for the Conservation and Utilization of PGRFA (see Chap.
4.4), CPGRFA consisted of 138 members in August 1995.
At the legal binding Convention on Biological Oiversity (CBO) became
effective in December 1993, recognizing the considerations of equity and shared
responsibility for genetic resources conservation, a number of challenging
implications on the International Undertaking emerged. These implications relate
to the consideration of ownership and accessibility of PGRFA in existing ex situ
collections, the realization and implementation of Farmers' Rights, and the
establishment of a global ex situ collection network (FAO, 1997b). Consequently,
IUPGR must be renegotiated by CGRFA, with the objective to harmonize it with
CBO's standard.
4.3.2
International Agreements and Their Coherence
Although CBO and IUPGR advocate the suppliers of genetic resources in their
objective of benefit sharing, TRIPS and UPOV generally support the demand side
- the breeders and biotechnology industry. Because of differences in the
alignment, the lack in coherence between the different agreements has emerged,
complicating the development and adoption of an exchange system for PGRFA
(see Fig. 4.2)
UPOV is taking a strong position in the breeder's exemption, while weakening
the farmer's privilege. A prerequisite for future successful breeding is the free
availability of plant germplasm for further research and development. This
existing UPOV principle is doubly contradictory: it demands free access to
PGRFA in situ and ex situ as well as the free and unrestricted availability of
protected varieties for further research and development. Consequently, UPOV's
principle offends the Farmers' Rights of the International Undertaking as well as
CBO's country's sovereignty over genetic resources in general. On the other
hand, UPOV's objective of free access of protected varieties for research and
development conflicts with TRIPS' patent system.
87
of the concept of Farmers' Rights (Esquinas-Alcazar, 1996). The concept of
Farmers' Rights must be understood more as an expression of the principle of
global responsibility to conserve landraces and in recognition of the farmers'
contribution over time than a legally binding document (Hardon et aI., 1994). The
implementation of Farmers' Rights, however, is hampered by the lack of
international funds for a general compensation approach as well as by the delay in
the negotiations of joint property rights. IUPGR was negotiated and agreed upon
by the former Commission on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture
(CPGRFA), as an intergovernmental global forum hosted by FAO. CPGRFA was
established in 1983 and broadened its scope in 1995 to include other sectors of
genetic resources for food and agriculture, beginning with livestock. As part of
FAO's Global System for the Conservation and Utilization of PGRFA (see Chap.
4.4), CPGRFA consisted of 138 members in August 1995.
At the legal binding Convention on Biological Oiversity (CBO) became
effective in December 1993, recognizing the considerations of equity and shared
responsibility for genetic resources conservation, a number of challenging
implications on the International Undertaking emerged. These implications relate
to the consideration of ownership and accessibility of PGRFA in existing ex situ
collections, the realization and implementation of Farmers' Rights, and the
establishment of a global ex situ collection network (FAO, 1997b). Consequently,
IUPGR must be renegotiated by CGRFA, with the objective to harmonize it with
CBO's standard.
4.3.2
International Agreements and Their Coherence
Although CBO and IUPGR advocate the suppliers of genetic resources in their
objective of benefit sharing, TRIPS and UPOV generally support the demand side
- the breeders and biotechnology industry. Because of differences in the
alignment, the lack in coherence between the different agreements has emerged,
complicating the development and adoption of an exchange system for PGRFA
(see Fig. 4.2)
UPOV is taking a strong position in the breeder's exemption, while weakening
the farmer's privilege. A prerequisite for future successful breeding is the free
availability of plant germplasm for further research and development. This
existing UPOV principle is doubly contradictory: it demands free access to
PGRFA in situ and ex situ as well as the free and unrestricted availability of
protected varieties for further research and development. Consequently, UPOV's
principle offends the Farmers' Rights of the International Undertaking as well as
CBO's country's sovereignty over genetic resources in general. On the other
hand, UPOV's objective of free access of protected varieties for research and
development conflicts with TRIPS' patent system.