Critical Review of the Increasing Complexity of Access and Benefit-Sharing Policies of Genetic Resources for Genebank Curators and Plant Breeders–A Public and Private Sector Perspective

Abstract

Plant breeders develop competitive, high-yielding, resistant crop varieties that can cope with the challenges of biotic stresses and tolerate abiotic stresses, resulting in nutritious food for consumers worldwide. To achieve this, plant breeders need continuous and easy access to plant genetic resources (PGR) for trait screening, to generate new diversity that can be built into newly improved varieties. International agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) and the Nagoya Protocol recognised the sovereign rights of countries over their genetic resources. Under the CBD/Nagoya Protocol, countries are free to establish specific national legislations regulating germplasm access and benefit-sharing to be negotiated bilaterally. Consequently, access to PGR became increasingly restricted and cumbersome, resulting in a decrease in germplasm exchange. The ITPGRFA attempted to ease this situation by establishing a globally harmonised multilateral system (MLS). Unfortunately, the MLS is (still) restricted to a limited number of food and forage crops, with very few vegetable crops. Easy and continuous access to genetic diversity combined with equitable and fair sharing of derived benefits is a prerequisite to breeding new varieties. Facilitated access contributes to sustainable crop production and food and nutrition security; therefore, access to and, consequently, use of PGRFA needs to be improved. Thus, the authors recommend, among others, expanding the scope of the ITPGRFA to include all PGRFA and making them and all related information accessible under a Standard Material Transfer Agreement (SMTA) combined, if necessary, with a subscription system or a seed sales tax. Such a transparent, functional and efficient system would erase legal uncertainties and minimise transaction costs for conservers, curators and users of genetic resources, thus aiding plant breeders to fulfil their mission.

Collaboration between Private and Public Genebanks in Conserving and Using Plant Genetic Resources

“…During the first part of the 20th century, plant introduction centres were established for single crops, like potatoes, or multiple crops [ 4 ]. To ensure the continued availability of sufficient genetic diversity to select from, breeders typically establish working collections of genotypes of a given crop that would correspond with their breeding objectives [ 5 ].…”

How Can We Strengthen the Global Genetic Resources’ Conservation and Use System?

“…Under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its related Nagoya Protocol, access to PGR became increasingly restricted and cumbersome, resulting in a decrease in germplasm exchange, potentially threatening the future of plant breeding. After a critical review of current access and benefit-sharing regulations regarding PGRFA, Ebert et al [ 23 ] recommended, among others, expanding the scope of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) to include all PGRFA and making them and all related information accessible under a Standard Material Transfer Agreement (SMTA), combined with a subscription system or a seed sales tax, if necessary. Such a transparent, functional, and efficient system would erase legal uncertainties and minimise transaction costs for conservationists, curators, and users of genetic resources, thus aiding plant breeders in fulfilling their mission.…”

“…Gradually, not only did the reproductive organ of the genetic resource become a legal ‘substance’, but also its genetic components as well as digital sequence information derived from germplasm. This has made arrangements to share this essential resource with others quite complex, resembling a ‘legal jungle’ [ 13 , 23 ].…”

“…The ITPGRFA attempted to ease this situation by establishing a globally harmonised multilateral system (MLS). Unfortunately, the MLS is (still) restricted to a limited number of food and forage crops, with very few vegetable crops [ 23 ].…”

“…Furthermore, adjustments to the current texts of national legal instruments regarding ABS regulation under the Nagoya Protocol (preferably in a common universal language) are needed to ensure legal certainty and strengthen access to genetic resources. According to Ebert et al [ 23 ], expanding the scope of the ITPGRFA to include all PGRFA, as well as related organisms like pathogens and pests, and making these genetic resources and all related information accessible under a Standard Material Transfer Agreement (SMTA) would greatly benefit the use of new germplasm in breeding and lead to the creation of improved varieties that can cope with climate change challenges and will contribute to more sustainable forms of agriculture. To facilitate benefit-sharing arrangements, the SMTA could stipulate a subscription system or a seed sales tax.…”