110 



In the rush to promote exclusive mechanisms for rewarding plant breeders 

 and developers of new agricultural biotechnologies, there has been little or no 

 consideration for the impact of intellectual property rights on the future 

 conservation and exchange of biological resources. 



The danger is that intellectual property rights, without reciprocal benefits 

 and meaningful compensation for developing nations, could set up formidable 

 barriers to access to the world's genetic resources. In the wake of new plant 

 patenting proposals, and strengthening of breeders' rights, developing nations 

 are questioning the notion of full and free access to their biological resources. 

 Why, they ask, are patented seeds, ultimately of Third World origin, bringing 

 profits to multinational seed corporations without corresponding compensation 

 for the developing world? 



Although we hear little about this controversy in the U.S., the issue is 

 extremely controversial in the developing world. Consider, for example, the 

 recent protests of 500,000 farmers in India. These farmers do not want the Indian 

 government to accept the imposition of plant intellectual property rights in their 

 country as a result of the recently concluded General Agreement on Tariffs and 

 Trade (GATT) trade accord. Indian farmers are angry because they don't want to 

 pay royalties on seeds and other products that they believe were developed using 

 their own genetic resources and knowledge. 



International tension over ownership and control of genetic resources will 

 intensify if the United States ratifies an international treaty that does not 

 guarantee the right of farmers to save seed. Again, the danger is that developing 

 nations will restrict future access to genetic resources, the cornerstone of modern 

 plant breeding. Issues related to control, ownership and access to plant genetic 

 resources are far from being resolved. These issues will be the subject of ongoing 

 international negotiations, including the upcoming Intergovernmental 

 Committee of the Convention on Biological Diversity, to be held in Nairobi next 

 month. Given that inter-governmental negotiations are still underway, RAFI 

 believes it is premature for the US Congress to ratify the 1991 UPOV Convention- 

 an action that may jeopardize negotiations in other fora related to biodiversity and 

 intellectual property rights. 



The PVPA f"Mi "th«r Vnn; nf plflpt JntalWtnal pmpartv right* will 



milnlmfljflMJUg "ncourage and CTnaperaie pgnKfawna of crop gBBfltlC *"t*irm 



Genetic erosion is an unintended consequence of modern plant breeding. To 

 the extent that a seed company produces a successful variety, it can displace 

 genetic material needed for future breeding programs. Historically, the single 

 greatest cause of crop genetic erosion in Third World centers of diversity has been 

 the introduction new, uniform cultivars that replace farmers' traditional 

 varieties. The strengthening of plant breeders' rights internationally, and the 

 promotion of plant breeders' rights in developing nations, will further accelerate 

 genetic erosion in Third World centers of diversity. 



