CHENNAI: In 2022, an important discussion to establish a new multilateral mechanism, including creating a global fund, was initiated by the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the Convention on Biological Diversity. The aim was to address the longstanding issue of inequitable benefit-sharing from genetic resources, particularly focusing on Digital Sequence Information (DSI) derived from plants, animals and microbes.
An ad hoc open-ended working group was formed for further development and commissioning of a study to analyse and model the extent to which a multilateral mechanism can induce benefit sharing from the use of DSI on genetic resources. It was also tasked to make recommendations to the COP16, to be held in Cali, Colombia later this year.
After two years of negotiations and consultations, the United Nations has published the documents, including a synthesis report containing a draft recommendation, which will be placed before nations when they meet in Montreal six weeks from now in August for final negotiations in the DSI intergovernmental negotiating group before the the matter comes up for decision at the UN biodiversity conference (COP16) in October in Colombia.
The UN documents, reviewed by TNIE, reveal that the global total revenue generated by sectors that use DSI on genetic resources is estimated to be $1,560 billion in 2024 and is likely to touch $2,331 billion by 2030.
DSI is a digital version of the DNA of plants, animals and microbes (such as bacteria). Scientists identify genes to help create or improve medicines, skincare products, foods and nutritional supplements, feed for animals, bioplastics, and textiles, among other products. Once a useful gene is found, scientists can create a version in the lab and insert it into microbes like bacteria or yeast, which then act like tiny factories, using the new genetic instructions to produce the desired compounds.
Reflecting on the study, the Co-Chairs of the negotiations, Mphatso Kalemba of Malawi and William Lockhart of the UK note the that sectors that depend most on DSI generate “one to a few trillion dollars annually” and even 0.1% of $1 trillion would yield $1 billion for the global fund; 1% would amount to $10 billion. It is important to take into account the rights of indigenous people and local communities, including with respect to the traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources that they hold. So, the envisioned uses of the funds, both monetary and non-monetary benefits arising from the use of DSI on genetic resources, should include supporting the conservation and sustainable use of nature, experts feel.
Who should pay?
Central to the proposed multilateral mechanism is a tiered approach to contributions, targeting large multinational corporations that derive significant revenue from DSI-dependent products. It proposes that these companies contribute a proportionate share of their earnings to the global fund. This approach, while ambitious, aims to strike a balance between encouraging participation and avoiding undue economic burdens that could stifle innovation or inflate consumer prices.
The synthesis report says, "While all producers of products developed through the use of DSI or all companies operating in sectors that are highly dependent on DSI would be encouraged to contribute, the main focus would be on large and transnational producers or companies.... The scale of the contributions to the fund should take into account the overall intended scale of the fund, the number of contributors, the degree to which revenue generated is dependent on the use of DSI, and the potential impact of the contribution on business activity and consumers.” The note adds that contributions should be “proportionate and reasonable, in the sense that businesses are not burdened with unsustainable costs, and that additional costs are not so significant that they are passed through to consumers in a way that might generate new inflationary pressures.”
David Cooper, Acting Executive Secretary of the CBD, said: "Until now, users of information on genetic resources have shared little of the profits generated from their use. We have faith that the goodwill and positive and constructive spirit of compromise Parties have shown to date on this issue will continue through the negotiations in Montreal and Cali.”
The proposal also addresses governance and disbursement mechanisms for the global fund. It outlines options for utilising the funds to support biodiversity conservation, enhance technology transfer, build research capacities, and foster partnerships between stakeholders. These initiatives are seen as critical not only for preserving natural ecosystems but also for empowering indigenous peoples and local communities who are often the custodians of these genetic resources.
Ahead of the final negotiations in Montreal and the subsequent COP 16 in Cali, Colombia, the global community is poised for rigorous debates and collaboration. The outcome of these discussions could shape the future of biodiversity conservation and sustainable development for generations to come. With the stakes high and the momentum building, all eyes are now on Montreal and Cali, where global leaders will convene to forge a path towards a more just and sustainable future.
Civil society organisations have also voiced support, urging for robust safeguards to ensure transparency and accountability in the management of the global fund. They argue that such measures are essential to build trust and ensure that the benefits of genetic resources are distributed equitably and effectively.