Patents and biodiversity issues came under critical scrutiny when representatives of sometimes conflicting viewpoints stated their cases at panel discussions on intellectual property issues and plant genetic resources on the opening day of the CGIAR International Centers Week 1993. Discussions took place against the background of the current debate on these issues within the international development community.

Many commentators view the problems as "North/South" issues - - with the rich industrial or developed countries of the north cashing in on genetic material originally found in the developing countries of the south. Others see the trends surrounding this debate as inevitable: a situation that countries must acknowledge and join in, or be left behind.

The CGIAR took the opportunity to hear a range of views on these subjects. Acknowledged experts exchanged views on topics, programs, and trends directly relevant to the CGIAR.

Expert Panelists Represent Wide Range of Opinions

Intellectual Property Issues - - John Barton (Stanford), Simon Best (Zeneca A.V.P. Seed Company), David Cooper (NGO representative), Norah Olembo (Kenya), and Lukas Brader (IITA).

Plant Genetic Resources - - Geoffrey Hawtin (IBPGR), Pat Mooney (RAFI), Norah Olembo (Kenya), R. S. Rana (India), and Henry Shands (USDA).

The first panel on intellectual property rights, presented a wide range of information and viewpoints that lead to an equally diverse and interesting discussion.

Issues included what the" era of patents" might mean for the CGIAR, how developing country governments are responding to the changes of doing business with private industry and the appropriate role for the CGIAR. The NGO presentation urged that CGIAR centers should serve as advocates against the patenting of genetic resources. This would further champion the well being of the small scale farmer. Private industry countered with examples of different forms of collaboration between developed and developing countries, which serve to the advantage of both. Reference was also made to the advancements in science which lead to the patenting of genes.

Diverging Views

Whether one likes it or not, the era of patents has come. Important materials are being patented and it will be necessary to ensure that the centers have access to them. The issue is not whether one argues for or against patents, but rather how to operate effectively in this new era to ensure that developing nations benefit from the most useful technologies. Barton

The concept of free access to genetic materials is noble, and in the past has assisted developing countries to acquire materials from CGIAR centers for their food programs. But what will happen if plant material is obtained by a developed country company from the CGIAR centers, is genetically improved, and then protected through patents? This protected, modified form of plant material would then be accessible to the original country at a cost. So what went out free, would return with a price tag. This is going to be the crux of the matter and should be critically investigated. Olembo

Complex Issues and Arguments

On behalf of the CGIAR, Lukas Brader (IITA) said that center directors were continuing to examine the many complex issues involved, in consultation with national agricultural research systems in developing countries and NGOs. Center directors had adopted a set of principles which affirm that the centers hold plant genetic material in trust for the world community; that the centers adhere to the principle of unrestricted availability; and that the centers will not seek protection for naturally occurring genes.

The centers have been discussing for some time the possibility of bringing their collections within the FAO framework of ex- situ base collections. This would confirm that the collections are part of the worldwide efforts to conserve plant genetic resources and would provide additional security for their safety. It is anticipated that this process will be completed in the course of 1994.

The discussion among the CGIAR members which followed was lively and as broad in scope as the panelists' presentations. Statements were made by regional representatives confirming the dilemma that developing countries confront when negotiating licensing rights from companies holding specific patents. In many cases this is difficult, as shown by recent patents on cotton (that were referred to by a panelist). One member asked the CGIAR to make guidelines available for countries that have not yet developed their own policies.

Several speakers said that they oppose the patenting of food crops, and would like to see the CGIAR support this position. Further discussion was given to gene patenting. As one member put it, "Genes can be discovered, and discovered genes can be combined, but genes cannot be invented, and if they cannot be invented, then a very basic condition for patenting is just not there."

Barton responded to this argument by citing the example of a firm that identifies a particular gene in some background, sequences it and claims that gene. "If you look at those patents," he said, "what is actually claimed, the actual monopoly, is the gene sequence. These patents do not effect the gene in its natural background. There is nothing that keeps breeders from using it, as use in this form is not considered novel."

The use of material transfer agreements was suggested as an effective means for the CGIAR to engage in research with both developed and developing country partners.

Second Panel Focuses on Plant Genetic Resources

The presentations from the second panel members on plant genetic resources addressed the global role of the CGIAR in preserving the genetic material held in centers genebanks. This material has been freely accessible to all, over the last 20 years. It represents years of collaborative collecting by the centers and the national programs.

The dynamics of this relationship were discussed in light of the changes taking place in several international bodies such as FAO and the now ratified and effective Convention on Biological Diversity.

The panelists challenged the CGIAR to consider its role, given these and future changes. Henry Shands asked what can the centers do to ensure the safety and free access of the genetic material in the next 28 years and beyond? How will the CGIAR take on added responsibilities within the international community, given the decreasing funding available for international agricultural research?

Pat Mooney pointed out that despite all the work that went into the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development (UNCED), the world's population at large still does not realize the importance of plant genetic resources within the context of biological diversity.

Regarding the Convention on Biodiversity:

"Somehow the world community ended up with a Convention which encourages bilateralism, encourages the bartering of biological diversity and the beggaring of most developing countries as they face off against an international company or group of companies - in order to try to get some advantage for the biological diversity they think might have some value." Mooney

Mooney urged both the CGIAR and NGOs to work out more effective modes of cooperation. He urged too that the CGIAR come together as a system in a more transparent way, and take its place at tables with FAO and other intergovernmental bodies - to solve the problems of misunderstanding on genetic resources.

The CGIAR Response

Geoff Hawtin (IPGRI, formally IBPGR) provided a summary of recent events within the CGIAR system. He agreed that the CGIAR has a way to go as a "system". He reported that a meeting of the intercenter working group on genetic resources took place in Addis Ababa earlier this year. The group looked at its own mandate and came to the conclusion that it should look beyond plant genetic resources to include biodiversity issues of livestock and fish as well as plants, including forestry. In the future this working group will address all issues related to genetic resources.

In addition, the CGIAR plans to participate in the FAO Conference on Plant Genetic Resources due to be held in either 1995 or 1996. (please see box this page)

During the ensuing discussion, members of the CGIAR said they were pleased that important issues on genetic resources and biodiversity were being discussed in an open forum. Others were glad to hear that the work of the system will now include the genetic resources of fish and animals. One member hoped to see a coordinated effort by the system on three levels: first, a system- wide policy on plant genetic resources and intellectual property rights that goes beyond the broad guidelines; second, a coherent implementation of such a policy; and last, a strong presence by the CGIAR as an apolitical institution in international negotiations.

The viewpoints expressed will be taken into account at discussions within the CGIAR as it develops its policies in both areas.