Several UN policy processes are embracing a calcified approach to conservation and equity in science

No abstract

No abstract

This article addresses how open access to DNA, RNA and amino acid sequences might be reconciled with the benefit-sharing obligations under the United Nations' Convention on Biological Diversity and its Nagoya Protocol, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations' International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, and the World Health Organization's Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework for the Sharing of Influenza Viruses and Access to Vaccines and Other Benefits. Tracing the evolution of open access databases, the article posits models for reconciling open access and benefit sharing; the article concludes, however, that none of the proposed solutions-monitoring and tracing, the contract model, and the copyright and database right model-provides a perfect solution. Each model does, however, suggest that open access to these sequences might be at least partially reconciled with benefit sharing.

The United Nations’ Convention of Biological Diversity (and the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization), the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations’ International Treaty for Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, and the World Health Organisation of the United Nations’ (WHO) Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework all set out schemes for access and benefit sharing (ABS) some biological materials. This article addresses the apparent conflict between the general obligations in these agreements to disclose and exchange information and dealing with information as a resource derivative within the ABS transaction. This latter dealing is a closed domain for information under the ABS schemes where information is a resource derivative that is a part of the ABS transaction. Treating information as a resource derivative within the ABS transaction is likely to impose unnecessary and inefficient burdens on ABS transactions. After reviewing the recent developments, the article postulates a risk framework for valuing information as a part of the ABS transaction, or alternatively, a charge, tax, or levy to externalize the costs so that information remains available to be disclosed and exchanged promoting more and better science and research.