Biodiversity conservation, access and benefit sharing (ABS), and protection of intellectual property rights (IPR) linked to biotechnologies are all internationally agreed—but not necessarily compatible—objectives. The Convention on Biological Diversity aims for a balance between the needs and interests of owners of genetic resources and technology owners. Can current proposals for handling existing IPR legislation, such as disclosure of origin and certificates of legal provenance, contribute to finding a balance between the interests? Will the growing concern for legitimacy in international transactions with genetic resources be helpful to countries providing genetic resources for technological innovation or are the benefits too few? The article concludes that the success of establishing a multilateral system for access and benefit sharing still depends on compatible legislation in user and provider countries to counterbalance strengthened patent protection systems worldwide. Moreover, it is necessary to overcome the old schism between wildlife conservation and access issues in agricultural biodiversity to boost overall implementation efforts.
Adhikari, R. (2005). International treaty on plant genetic resources for food and agriculture: Implementation challenges for Nepal. Bridges, 9(2), 21-21.
2.
Andersen, R. (2006). Governing agrobiodiversity: Plant genetics and developing countries. Aldershot, United Kingdom: Ashgate.
3.
Barton, J., & Berger, P. (2001). Patenting agriculture: Issues in science and technology. Retrieved June 8, 2006, from http://www.issues.org/17.4/barton.htm.
4.
Barton, J., & Siebeck, W. E. (1992). Intellectual property issues for the international agricultural research centres: What are the options?Washington, DC: Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research.
5.
Chambers, J. (2002). Patent eligibility of biotechnological inventions in the United States, Europe, and Japan: How much patent policy is public policy?George Washington International Law Review, 34, 223-223, 237-239.
6.
Choudry, A. (2005, January). Corporate conquest: Global geopolitics. Intellectual property rights and bilateral investment agreements. Seedling, pp. 7-13.
7.
Correa, C. M. (1999). Access to plant genetic resources and intellectual property rights. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture.
8.
Crespi, R. S. (1988). Patents: A basic guide to patenting in biotechnology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Dutfield, G. (2001). Biotechnology and patents: What are developing countries doing about article 27.3(b)?Bridges (Post-Doha Ministerial Issue), 5(9), 17-18.
10.
Egziabher, T.B.G. (1999). The TRIPs agreement of the WTO and the Convention on Biological Diversity: The need for co-ordinated action by the South. Third World Resurgence, 106, 4-7.
11.
El-Said, M. (2005). The road from TRIPS-minus, to TRIPS, to TRIPS-plus: Implications of IPRs for the Arab world. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 8(1), 53-62.
12.
Ernst & Young. (2005). Beyond borders: A global perspective. New York: Author.
13.
Fauchald, O. K. (2001). Patenter og allmenningens tragedie (Patents and the tragedy of the commons). Lov og Rett. Norsk juridisk tidsskrift (Norwegian Journal of Legal Affairs), 40, 399-412.
14.
Fernández, J. C. (2004). Elements for the design of a certificate of legal provenance. International Expert Workshop on Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing. Record of Discussion, Cuernavaca, Mexico, October 24-27.
15.
Food and Agriculture Organization. (FAO). (1998). The state of the world's plant genetic resources for food and agricultureRome: Author.
16.
Fowler, C. (2001). Protecting farmer innovation: The convention on biological diversity and the question of origin. Jurimetrics, 41(4), 477-488.
17.
Gebhart, M. (1998). Sustainable use of biodiversity by the pharmaceutical industry?International Journal of Sustainable Development, 1(1), 63-72.
18.
Gehl Sampath, P. (2005). Regulating bioprospecting: Institutions for drug research, access and benefitsharing. New York: United Nations University.
19.
Gleckman, H. (1995). Transnational corporations' strategic responses to sustainable development. In H. O. Bergesen, G. Parmann, & Ø. B. Thommessen (Eds.), Green globe yearbook. Oxford, UK: The Fridtjof Nansen Institute and Oxford University Press.
20.
Grajal, A. (1999). Biodiversity and the nation state: Regulating access to genetic resources limits biodiversity research in developing countries. Conservation Biology, 13(1), 6-10.
21.
Haas, P. M., Keohane, R. O., & Levy, M. A. (Eds.). (1993). Institutions for the earth: Sources of effective international environmental protection. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22.
Haefner, B. (2003). Drugs from the deep: Marine natural products as drug candidates. Drug Discovery Today, 8(12), 536-544.
23.
Hansenclever, A., Mayer, P., & Rittberger, V. (1996). Interests, power, knowledge: The study of international regimes. Mershon International Studies Review, 40, 177-228.
24.
Hendrickx, F., Koester, V., & Prip, C. (1993). Convention on biological diversity: Access to genetic resources. A legal analysis. Environmental Policy and Law, 23(6).
25.
Heywood, V. H. (1995). Global biodiversity assessment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Kloppenburg, J. R. (2004). First the seed (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
27.
Kloppenburg, J. R., & Kleinman, D. L. (1987). The plant germplasm controversy. BioScience, 37(3).
28.
Koester, V. (1997). The biodiversity convention negotiation process and some comments on the outcome. Environmental Policy and Law, 27(3), 175-192.
29.
Laird, S. A. (2000). Benefit-sharing “best practice” in the pharmaceutical and botanical medicine industries. In H. Svarstad & S. S. Dhillion (Eds.), Bioprospecting: From biodiversity in the South to medicines in the North (pp. 89-99). Oslo: Spartacus forlag.
30.
Laird, S., & Wynberg, R. (2005). The commercial use of biodiversity: An update on current trends in demand for access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing and industry perspectives on ABS policy and implementation. UNEP/CBD/WGABS/4/INF/5.
31.
Medecins Sans Frontieres. (MSF). (2001). Fatal imbalance: The crisis in research and development for drugs for neglected diseases. MSF Access to Essential Medicines Campaign and the Drugs for Neglected Diseases working group. Retrieved September 2001 from www.accessmed-msf.org.
32.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. (MEA). (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: Biodiversity synthesis (Report of the MEA). Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
33.
Miller, M.A.L. (1995). The Third World in global environmental politics. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
34.
Mooney, P. R. (1983). The law of the seed: Another development and plant genetic resources. Development Dialogue. Uppsala, Sweden: Dag Hammarskjøld Foundation.
35.
Najam, A. (2005). Developing countries and global environmental governance: From contestation to participation to engagement. International Environmental Agreements, 5, 303-321.
36.
Oberthür, S., & Gehring, T. (2006). Institutional interaction: Enhancing cooperation and preventing conflicts between international and European environmental institutions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
37.
Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy. (PRI). (2005). Biotechnological and pharmaceutical research and development investment under a patent-based access and benefit-sharing regime. San Francisco: Author.
38.
Pistorius, R., & van Wijk, J. (1999). The exploitation of plant genetic information. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
39.
Porter, G. (1993). The United States and the biodiversity convention. International Conference on the Convention on Biological Diversity, African Centre for Technology Studies, Nairobi, Kenya, January 26-29.
40.
Raustialia, K., & Victor, D. G. (2004, spring). The regime complex for plant genetic resources. International Organization, 58, 277-309.
41.
Rosendal, G. K. (1989). A sustainable development for plant genetic resources: The output of the debate in FAO. A Sisyphean victory for an environmental organisation? (R:010-1989). Lysaker, Norway: Fridtjof Nansen Institute.
42.
Rosendal, G. K. (1991). International Conservation of Biological Diversity: The quest for effective solutions (R:012-1991). Lysaker, Norway: Fridtjof Nansen Institute.
43.
Rosendal, G. K. (2000). The convention on biological diversity and developing countries. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
44.
Rosendal, G. K. (2001). Impacts of overlapping international regimes: The case of biodiversity. Global Governance, 7(1), 95-117.
45.
Rosendal, G. K. (2006a). The convention on biological diversity: Tensions with the WTO TRIPS agreement over access to genetic resources and the sharing of benefits. In S. Oberthür & T. Gehring (Eds.), Institutional interaction: Enhancing cooperation and preventing conflicts between international and European environmental institutions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
46.
Rosendal, G. K. (2006b). Regulating the use of genetic resources between international authorities. European Environment.
47.
Ruiz, M. (2005). A review of the IP negotiations in the US-Andean Free Trade Agreement. Bridges, 9(2), 20-20.
48.
Safrin, S. (2004). Hyperownership in a time of biotechnological promise: The international conflict to control the building blocks of life. The American Journal of International Law, 98, 641-685.
49.
Schroeder, R. A. (2000). Beyond distributive justice: Resource extraction and environmental justice in the tropics. In C. Zemer (Ed.), People, plants and justice. New York: Colombia University Press.
50.
Sell, S. K. (2002). Private power, public law: The globalization of intellectual property rights. Paper prepared for the International Studies Association annual meeting, New Orleans, March 24-27.
51.
Schram Stokke, O. (2000). Managing straddling stocks: The interplay of global and regional regimes. Ocean and Coastal Management, 43, 205-234.
52.
Sheldon, J. W., & Balick, M. J. (1995). Ethnobotany and the search for balance between use and conservation. In T. M. Swanson (Eds.), Intellectual property rights and biodiversity conservation (pp. 45-64). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
53.
Støen, M. A., Dhillion, S., & Rosendal, G. K. (in press). Bioprospecting under different technological, biological and regulatory settings: Trends and challenges. Environmental Science and Policy.
54.
Svarstad, H., & Dhillion, S. S. (Eds.). (2000). Bioprospecting: From biodiversity in the South to medicines in the North. Oslo: Spartacus forlag.
55.
Swanson, T. (1995). Intellectual property rights and biodiversity conservation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
56.
Tolba, K. M. (1998). Global environmental diplomacy. Negotiating environmental agreements for the world, 1973-1992. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
57.
ten Kate, K., & Laird, S. A. (1999). The commercial use of biodiversity: Access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing. London: Earthscan.
58.
ten Kate, K., & Laird, S. A. (2000). Biodiversity and business: Coming to terms with the grand bargain. International Affairs, 76(2), 241–264.
59.
Tvedt, M. W. (2005). How will a substantive patent law treaty affect the public domain for genetic resources and biological material?Journal of World Intellectual Property, 8(3), 311-344.
60.
Tvedt, M. W. (2006). Elements for legislation in user countries to meet the fair and equitable benefit-sharing commitment. Journal of World Intellectual Property, 9(2), 189-212.
61.
United Nations Development Programme. (UNDP). (2005). Human development report. New York: Author.
62.
United Nations Environment Programme. (UNEP). (1995). Global biodiversity assessment. New York: Author.
63.
United Nations Environment Programme. (UNEP). (1998). Synthesis of case studies on benefit sharing. UNEP/CBD/COP/4/Inf.7.
64.
Williams, M. (2005). The Third World and global environmental negotiations: Interests, institutions and ideas. Global Environmental Politics, 5(3), 48-69.
65.
Wilson, E. O. (Ed.). (1988). Biodiversity. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
66.
World Commission for Environment and Development. (WCED). (1987). Our common future. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
67.
World Intellectual Property Organization. (WIPO). (2005). Intellectual property and traditional knowledge (Booklet No. 2). Publication No. 920(E).
68.
World Resources Institute. (WRI). (1993). Biodiversity prospecting. Baltimore: Author.
69.
Young, O. R. (1991). Political leadership and regime formation: On the development of institutions in international society. International Organization, 45(3), 281-308.
70.
Young, O. R. (1996). Institutional linkages in international society: Polar perspectives. Global Governance, 2(1), 1-24.
