The benefit-sharing principle in international law

Medaglia, Jorgé Cabrera; Perron-Welch, Frédéric

doi:10.1093/jiplp/jpy162

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…More recent literature is similarly unable to clarify why benefit sharing has not developed incentives for biodiversity conservation over the years (Lawson et al., 2018). One possible reason is the lack of a clear definition for benefit sharing under international law (Morgera, 2016), which creates misunderstanding as to what benefit sharing is and what it ought to achieve (Cabrera Medaglia & Perron‐Welch, 2019). Notwithstanding this realization, the link created between access to genetic resources and benefit sharing necessarily means that the greater the number of accesses, the more likely larger benefits will flow back.…”

Section: Modalities Of Dsi Use and The Abs Rationale In The Pgrfa Casementioning

confidence: 99%

Bringing access and benefit sharing into the digital age

Aubry

Frison

Medaglia

et al. 2021

Plants People Planet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Societal Impact Statement Reading and writing DNA is now possible with an unprecedented speed and ease. To catch up with digitization of genetic resources, scientists need to join with all relevant stakeholders and design new global governance mechanisms for digital sequence information. We propose the establishment of a Multi‐stakeholder Committee on the Governance of Digital Sequence Information (DSI). This multi‐disciplinary body will be dedicated to mitigate governance issues associated with the digitization of genetic resources. Solving the DSI conundrum is sorely needed given the forthcoming multilateral meetings of the Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) framework (the next CBD COP is scheduled in 2021) that are central to tackle the global loss of biodiversity, global warming, pandemic risk and food insecurity. Summary Contemporary research is increasingly data‐centric and the rise of genomics revolutionized our approach and use of genetic resources. However, genomics developed relatively independently from the international instruments on the conservation of biological diversity, in particular the Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) framework. The legal and political status of Digital Sequence Information (DSI) derived from genetic resources emerged recently as a contentious point in the various ABS instruments dealing with genetic resources. In view of the multiple parallel and uncoordinated debates that occurred in various forums dealing with plants, animals, terrestrial, microbial, marine and agricultural biodiversity, we propose here to take a step back in the discussion. We argue that DSI should be considered as an overarching issue to be addressed through a coordinated and inclusive Multi‐stakeholder Committee that would assess its position and role within the existing ABS regime complex. This Multi‐stakeholder Committee on the Governance of Digital Sequence Information, that may run under the auspices of the United Nations, will be dedicated to mitigate global governance issues associated with the digitization of genetic resources. In this paper, we sketch this body as a transversal and inclusive tool to facilitate long‐term coherence in all ABS policy forums.

show abstract

Section: Modalities Of Dsi Use and The Abs Rationale In The Pgrfa Casementioning

confidence: 99%

Bringing access and benefit sharing into the digital age

Aubry

Frison

Medaglia

et al. 2021

Plants People Planet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such an authorized body would need to provide legal certainty to stakeholders and consider the types, size, and timing of benefits, the cost of benefit sharing, be enforceable, implementable and inclusive (Sun, 2019), and be competent to negotiate permits on a case-by-case basis (Voigt-Hanssen, 2018). BBNJ research analyzes international law regimes, including the International Seabed Authority (ISA) (Tvedt and Jørem, 2013;Voigt-Hanssen, 2018), the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its Nagoya Protocol (Harden- Davies, 2017a;Medaglia and Perron-Welch, 2019;, the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) (Drankier et al, 2012;Voigt-Hanssen, 2018;Medaglia and Perron-Welch, 2019), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Treaty (Drankier et al, 2012), the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) (Drankier et al, 2012), and UNCLOS and regional agreements (Medaglia and Perron-Welch, 2019).…”

Section: Lack Of Regulation Of Marine Genetic Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Voice of Science on Marine Biodiversity Negotiations: A Systematic Literature Review

Wysocki

Vadrot

2020

Front. Mar. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over one hundred governments are currently negotiating a new legally binding instrument for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ). The new agreement is to address four broad themes: marine genetic resources (MGRs); area-based management tools (ABMTs), including marine protected areas (MPAs); environmental impact assessments (EIAs); and capacity building and the transfer of marine technology (CB&TT). Although a large corpus of scientific BBNJ literature exists, a comprehensive overview and critical analysis of the academic debate is currently missing. This systematic review seeks to fill this gap by examining the main priority topics and recommendations in a sample of 140 multidisciplinary, geographically diverse publications. As an up-to-date summary and analysis, it is intended for researchers from diverse academic disciplines in the natural and social sciences, policy-makers, and practitioners. It untangles the complex BBNJ negotiations, highlights the policy relevance of existing work, and facilitates links between science, policy, and practice. It presents recommendations made in the literature sample for each of the four package elements of the future treaty and identifies four overarching themes: ocean connectivity, institutional design, the role of science, and digital technology. This paper identifies two important gaps that need to be addressed if we are to conserve marine biodiversity in international waters: the science-policy interfaces and the need for transformative change.

show abstract

“…We develop the outlines of an international regime for NEA mining centered on the fair and equitable sharing of benefits. Benefit‐sharing is an emerging principle of international law and has been operationalized in various treaties on the environment and natural resources (Cabrera Medaglia & Perron‐Welch, 2019; Morgera, 2016). The principle broadly implies an obligation to share commercial and other benefits that derive from the exploitation and use of certain resources with entitled entities, such as indigenous and local communities, states or even humanity as such.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sharing the Benefits of Asteroid Mining

Butkevičienė

Rabitz

2022

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Near‐Earth asteroids (NEAs) hold metal reserves that could sustain global consumption for millennia. Unresolved questions of technological and economic feasibility notwithstanding, NEA mining could ensure the accessibility and affordability of key strategic resources, contribute to sustainability transitions and displace environmentally and socially harmful terrestrial mining. Based on implicit and explicit normative commitments towards the common heritage principle in international space law, we develop the outlines of a regime for the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits resulting from NEA mining. For doing so, we analyze the linkages between institutional design and regime effectiveness for benefit‐sharing regimes in the areas of deep‐sea mining and plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. Attempting to control for differences in problem structure, we transpose this analysis to the case of NEA mining, where an effective benefit‐sharing regime would revolve around the following elements: standardized exploration and exploitation contracts, back‐end benefit‐sharing as a percentage of commercial profits, research exemptions, compliance mechanisms for preventing and reducing space pollution, as well as a reserve banking system for mining claims. For the contemporary political debate on space resources, we thus aim to provide a feasible alternative to the exclusive appropriation of space resources through private property rights.

show abstract

The benefit-sharing principle in international law

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Bringing access and benefit sharing into the digital age

Bringing access and benefit sharing into the digital age

The Voice of Science on Marine Biodiversity Negotiations: A Systematic Literature Review

Sharing the Benefits of Asteroid Mining

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About