Emerging and Enduring Issues of Genetic Resource Protection - A Ugandan Perspective

Otim Enoch

Assistant Lecturer, Department of Public and Comparative Law, Faculty of Law, Victoria University, Kampala, Uganda. Mobile line +256703977097. Email address: [email protected]

?

Abstract

The study adopts a comprehensive approach to the analysis of the emerging and enduring issues of genetic resources. It aims at providing policy recommendations for future betterment in genetic resource conservation and management in the country. The specific objectives of this study are the identification of the existing legal and institutional arrangements for genetic resources conservation and management in Uganda; to assess the relevance of those arrangements in the effective conservation and management of genetic resources in Uganda, and to establish the efficiency and effectiveness of the current practices of genetic resources conservation and management in the country. The study also aims to investigate the state of knowledge about the genetic sources of traits of interest to breeders in Uganda. The knowledge is going to be obtained through technology transfer, and collaborative and research partnerships between developed and developing countries under the TRIPS agreement. Last but not least, the study also aims to analyze the impact of genetic resources on economic development and their prospects for economic development and commercialization in the country. This is intended to shed more light on the importance of effective policy development and public awareness and participation in the conservation and sustainable utilization of genetic resources. Hence, through achieving these objectives, the study findings will be able to provide meaningful information that could be used to steer the much-needed policy and law reform about genetic resource conservation and sustainable utilization in Uganda. Given the wide biological diversity of the country, the findings are also expected to enrich the development of a pro-efforts proactive, and comprehensive biodiversity bill.

1. Introduction

Resource protection in the international community has grown over the years. For instance, the FAO was founded in 1945. Since then, it has begun preliminary work on preparing international agreements for the protection of plant genetic resources. Recently, many delegates have agreed on the possible vital and vulnerable state of our genetic resources. The FAO also notes that ensuring food security in an ever-changing environment will be dependent on the nature of the genetic resources at our disposal. Other reasons for the growth in genetic resources protection are the growth in technology and the science of genetics. As our knowledge and understanding of genetics has grown over the years, it has become evident that the manipulation and creation of new genes has the potential to be harmful to the environment and mankind. This is particularly relevant to environmental modification. An international example would be the controversy over gene-spliced food products. Globalization has also brought about an interconnectedness between countries. There is a higher likelihood of the exploitation of genetic resources from one nation to another for the benefit of the exploiter's interests. Thus, the international community sees a greater need for genetic resource protection. An important fact to note is that, as compared to the past, many third-world countries now recognize the potential value of their genetic resources to the future generations of their own country and humanity (Loskutov, 2020). This is important because, although the third world is often associated with a large quantity of genetic resources, they have often been seen as having little actual ownership and potential from these resources. Looking at all this, we see a future full of emerging issues related to genetic resources protection. This concept is a very broad one representing the basic resources of genetics and life. This essay will focus mainly on plant genetic resources. At this point, it will be worth considering the definition of plant genetic resources. These are any genetic material of plant origin that is of value. This includes material from actual plants and also material such as wood or leaves (Mulesa and Westengen2020).

1.1. Background of Genetic Resource Protection

A genetic resource is any material of plant, animal, microbial, or other origin that contains genes. Genetic resources serve as the raw material for future genetic improvement and biological scientific research. There are two types of genetic resources: germplasm and wild species. Germplasm includes seeds, cuttings, and other propagules of plants including biotechnological products. Sperm, eggs, and embryos of animals also are included in germplasm. Wild species contain the diversity of plant and animal life on the planet and may be native to a particular country or may be distributed worldwide. During the last several decades, there has been increased international concern about genetic resources, in part driven by the dramatic advances in genetic engineering and biotechnology. In response to these advances, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was adopted by over 150 governments at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. This treaty has three main goals: the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of the components of biological diversity, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources. At the heart of the CBD is the concept of national sovereignty over genetic resources. This concept is enshrined in Article 15 which states that "The States have sovereignty over their genetic resources, and such resources are subject to national legislation" and it has been strongly supported by developing countries. National sovereignty over genetic resources grants countries the right to control access to their genetic resources and the right to determine the terms under which access should be granted. These sovereign rights are tempered by the need to achieve the three goals of the CBD and many developing countries feel that they lack the capacity to reconcile their sovereign rights with the demands from developed countries and industry to access genetic resources. This perception has led to a situation where there is a strong demand for capacity building and technology transfer in the field of genetic resources and the CBD includes a provision for the same in Article 18 (Koh et al., 2022).

1.2. Importance of Genetic Resource Protection in Uganda

The value of biodiversity to human survival and development, in both modern and ancient times, has not been widely contested, and the question of who benefits from and who should pay for biodiversity conservation has been used to oppose the strict policies of biodiversity-rich nations like Uganda. This opposition has relied on the assertion that human culture and resource-poor nations derive more benefit from the derived products of biodiversity than from the conservation of biodiversity itself. This belief has led to the formation of many international agreements that have sought to legitimize and provide a legal framework for this type of "low-cost" conservation through development, resulting in the compensation of those providing biodiversity with the income generated through sales of its derived products (He & Jiao, 2022). These agreements have been opposed by the argument that purely looking for the highest short-term economic gain is not in the best interests of the global population and that responsible use and conservation of biodiversity and genetic resources is more sustainable in the long term. This, in essence, is a moral argument for conservation and sustainable use, stating that "the right way to do it is the best way to do it." An argument that depends on almost every facet of it, on the relative importance of conserving the diversity of genetic resources.

2. Legal Framework for Genetic Resource Protection

In liabilities published to the CBD, the concept of damage caused to genetic resources within another country is dealt with under international law. This will be discussed in further detail within international genetic resource issues. Full understanding and knowledge of these laws are fundamental to the implementation of conservation strategies and sustainable use of genetic resources (Baslar, 2024).

Many countries are implementing conservation strategies and policies such as protected areas, in-situ and ex-situ conservation, and rehabilitation of habitats and degraded landscapes. This legislation often needs provision for funding, which may come from various sources, including foreign donors or debt-for-nature swaps. The funding may be in the form of development aid to implement conservation strategies or a debt swap may free up financial resources to allocate to conservation. (Essers et al., 2021)

The legal framework for genetic resource protection falls under two categories: the national legislation of a country and the international agreements and conventions to which they are signatories. The development of laws and regulations on a national scale is the initial step in protecting genetic resources (Hoban et al.2020). Legislation regarding genetic resources can cover a broad range of resources and organisms or may focus on specific key resources. Laws and regulations can also vary from being very general to highly detailed. Particular aspects of protection might vary from restricted access and removal of genetic resources from their natural habitat to providing for sustainable utilization of such resources.

The protection of genetic resources is not only an important concept, but it is also a very real concern for many countries. To facilitate such discussion and efforts, the legal framework for genetic resource protection is crucial in both the understanding and access to such resources. This may be on both a national and/or international level (Hudson et al.2020).

2.1. National Legislation on Genetic Resource Protection

In 1986, the Uganda government established the National Agricultural Research Organisation (NARO), which was charged with the responsibility of improving crop varieties through plant breeding. In 1991, it became evident that NARO was planning to embark on a collaborative research program with the International Agricultural Research Centres involving the exchange of germplasm and the use of exotic varieties in crop improvement. In taking concrete measures to halt these activities, the Uganda government imposed a moratorium on germplasm collection and crop introduction by NARO in 1994. This was to be a temporary measure to prepare formal strategies to regulate and control germplasm flows. It was widely recognized within the country and abroad as a proactive step to prevent genetic erosion and the further loss of indigenous crop genetic resources. This measure was based on and justified by the Convention on Biological Diversity which the Uganda government agreed to and ratified in 1993 (Kagorora et al., 2021).

Access to and retention of genetic resources has long been recognized as an issue crucial to the South. The Uganda NBSAP recognizes agriculture as the mainstay of the economy. 90% of the population is involved in subsistence farming and derives its income from rain-fed agriculture. There are over 100,000 varieties of crops that have been developed and maintained by farmers over thousands of years (Kondwakwenda et al.2022). These genetic resources are considered vital to attaining sustainable development for the nation. These resources are threatened by the increasing trend to introduce modern and exotic varieties of crops to the country. Often these genetically uniform varieties do not perform well under local conditions and marginalize the traditional crop varieties. This, in turn, can lead to food insecurity, a loss of agro-biodiversity, and the genetic erosion of plants. This compelled the government to begin taking measures to protect indigenous crop genetic resources.

2.2. International Agreements and Conventions

The basic purpose and theme of these agreements is the sustenance of genetic resources and traditional knowledge to ensure that the various sectors are on a platform that benefits all and improves the quality of life for all people in an environment where the fear of losing resources or being deprived of them is not a concern. The question is whether these agreements have begun to alleviate the strain of emerging problems are there still enduring issues, and are there any major differences in the situation for the developing countries compared to the rest?

The most recent is the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture 2001. This is an entity of the FAO and aims to govern activities for sustainable and food-secure agriculture to eliminate world poverty and hunger. The Treaty, which has over 150 member countries, has come into force as of June 2004 and has a Governing Body to review and implement measures for the achievement of the Treaty's aims. This Treaty created a multilateral system that forms a common pool of the world's plant genetic resources, and access to these resources is based on the exchange of germplasm. The Treaty promotes international information sharing and germplasm sharing, including access to modern technologies and the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources in an equitable manner (Mulesa and Westengen2020).

The most dramatic and controversial agreement was the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) 1995. This was the first time that intellectual property rights (IPRs) became a truly global issue. Since the vast majority of genetic resources are in the South and the North is where most research and development activities are carried out, it is not surprising that there was a call for some form of IPRs to promote the development of new technologies. TRIPS aimed to protect IPRs universally. This means that even the poorest least developed country with no technology or resources must establish a similar IPR system to the rest. From developed countries' viewpoint, this is fair as it protects their products against easier imitation. However, for the countries, this is questionable because it will bring higher costs and more difficult access to technology. IPRs were divided into patents, the most comprehensive form of IPRs which has the right to prevent others from utilizing the invention, and such technologies must be disclosed and can be used after a certain period, and others. These moves caused concern about biopiracy. The joint FAO, CBD, and WTO secretariats prepared a report on TRIPS and its relationship to genetic resources, which recommended the issue be discussed at an intergovernmental level. (Urias & Ramani, 2020)

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 1992 was the first international agreement that gave recognition to the sovereign rights of states to their genetic resources. According to CBD, the country holding the resource has to give consent and should be the one benefiting from any use of its genetic resources or associated TK. This was followed by the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, which is a legally binding international agreement that aims at the sustainable conservation and utilization of the world's plant genetic resources for food and agriculture and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from their use. It has since been integrated into the FAO and its member states (Uprety et al.2020).

3. Challenges in Genetic Resource Protection

The conservation of Uganda's genetic resources is compromised by the existence of several challenges. These challenges concern the awareness and understanding of the existing legislative framework, inadequate capacity for enforcement, and illegal exploitation and biopiracy. This legislation, encompassed in the National Environment Statute (1995), provides the legal regime for the protection of Uganda's genetic resources. However, there has been insufficient dissemination and explanation of the legislation to stakeholders, a factor exacerbated by low literacy rates and limited access to legal documents. Despite this, there is recognition of the importance of traditional laws and practices in maintaining the conservation and sustainable use of genetic resources, and these provide an additional layer of protection. Moreover, the current expansion of the NEMA to the district level and trials to integrate environmental law into primary education is a positive step for the future (Humphries et al., 2021).

3.1. Lack of Awareness and Understanding

Genetic resource protection efforts are hindered by a prevailing lack of awareness and understanding of the true value of genetic resources and the objectives of genetic resource protection laws. The majority of genetic resources are collected from rural farmers, whose motivation to conserve genetic resources is often low. The importance of conserving on-farm genetic diversity is not fully understood or appreciated by the societies in which genetic resources originated. This can be partly attributed to the fact that agriculture in rural communities, including that utilizing genetic resources, is often born out of necessity rather than choice. Farmers faced with poverty and food insecurity are less likely to be concerned with conserving genetic resources than those who are better off. Measures to improve awareness among local communities about the importance of genetic resources and the role of genetic resource protection laws may help to address this problem. However, such measures should tread carefully so as not to change the attitudes of farmers in such a way that they will be less likely to share genetic resources in the future. There is also a general lack of understanding of the objectives and principles of genetic resource protection laws (Tran et al., 2020). This is true both for national laws and international agreements which are often the instruments through which national laws are influenced. The laws themselves are often complex and in many cases are based on still-developing concepts, making them hard to interpret. The lack of understanding of laws is further compounded by a lack of understanding of the sometimes nebulous concepts of genetic resources and traditional knowledge, which are the objects of protection. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the lack of knowledge about laws or what constitutes a genetic resource has in some cases led to the conservation of genetic resources becoming de facto ex-situ to avoid their use and thus potential legal issues (Taft et al.2020).

3.2. Limited Capacity for Enforcement

The current national framework for the enforcement of access and benefit-sharing legislation is primarily administrative. There is no specific institutional capacity set up for the enforcement of legislation. This sort of approach requires the understanding and cooperation of the stakeholders to work. If this is achieved, then it may be a suitable way forward. However, experience would show that in the absence of a specific enforcement agency, compliance will be limited to those who appreciate the objectives of the legislation. Unfortunately, this is often not the case, and it would be all too easy for exploitation to continue or for parties to claim they did not know the legislation existed. The result is that it is likely to be largely ineffective. For example, in the U.K., species and habitat conservation is a legislative requirement. However, many landowners with SSSIs on their land are unaware of their obligations, and it requires close monitoring and frequent reminders from the enforcing agency to ensure compliance. In the absence of these monitoring provisions, it is unlikely the desired objectives will be achieved. In terms of genetic resource protection, unless local communities are aware of their rights and entitlements, it is more than probable that exploitative access will occur on the pretext of informed consent. This will ultimately hold no benefit for the local communities, but the damage may well be irreparable. It is feasible that Uganda's resources may be the subject of theft or biopiracy by foreign individuals or corporations (Kegamba et al.2022). Uganda by itself will quite simply not have the negotiating or diplomatic powers to be able to enforce the return of the resource or claim damages. It would be preferable that disputes are resolved at an international or tribunal-type level to avoid the exploitation of small developing nations by multinational companies. These companies may often possess considerable influence over the policies and decision-making of developing countries, and it would be all too easy for the case to be tried in the defendant's country with a judgment unfavorable to the victim. Unfortunately, the act of enforcing a judgment may be difficult (Kegamba et al.2022).

3.3. Illegal Exploitation and Biopiracy

The problem of biopiracy is particularly acute in Uganda. Because of its diverse climate, Uganda has a correspondingly diverse range of genetic resources. Moreover, its genetic resources are only just beginning to be exploited as Ugandans use these resources to develop new agricultural and industrial products. In consequence, many foreign companies have perceived Uganda as a rich source of genetic resources and have attempted to obtain these resources through secretive and often illegal means. This is illustrated by the case of the National Research Council (NRC) of Italy, which in 1991 is reported to have obtained 400 lines of cassava from Uganda. Although Italy claims that these cassava lines are a gift to the international community, it has commercialized some of these lines and has brought them under national property rights. All this has been done without proper agreement from Uganda, and one Italian scientist has been quoted as saying that UG15R, a popular Ugandan-bred cassava variety, is "the best of the best and we intend to get it" (Bagley et al.2020).

These definitions capture the essential element of the illegality associated with biopiracy. It is a global problem that is particularly acute in developing countries, precisely because many genetic resources are to be found in these countries and the cost of developing new products based on these resources is high. It has been estimated that biological resources from developing countries are worth US$40 billion per year to the pharmaceutical industry and that this figure is set to double in the next decade (Gupta et al., 2022). The vast majority of this money will not be used to develop products that are useful to the communities that were the custodians of the original resources. In many cases, foreign companies have located and obtained plant varieties or lines from developing countries and then produced goods elsewhere. In others, companies have taken out patents on processes or products that are based on genetic material taken from a developing country.

The Biodiversity Convention defines biopiracy as "the prospecting, patenting, or commercialization of indigenous peoples' knowledge of biodiversity and its biological resources without their consent." Another definition is "patenting of an invention based on biological material or traditional knowledge without proper consent from the country of origin." (Suriyaprakash, 2021)

4. Conservation and Sustainable Use of Genetic Resources

The fact that genetic resources are the key to development, at the end of the day, the third world should emphasize conservation and sustainable use. Conservation and sustainable use are two sides of the same coin. We have to utilize the resource because underutilization can also lead to loss. What is essential is that utilization is within the bounds of sustainability. Research has shown that sustainable use is best achieved when the resource user is the owner, this is particularly so with local communities (Wang et al., 2020). This could result in a transfer of ownership from the state to the local communities. The implications of this would be considerable and would require many changes in legislation. An indirect way of promoting sustainable use is by enhancing the value of a standing resource in comparison to the value of a degraded resource. This could lead to sustainable use of forests, for example, instead of the present policy which often results in the destruction of a resource as the best way of obtaining compensation. This has clear implications for genetic resources, with the present emphasis being shifting cultivation to access funds from felling timber. An underlying factor in the process of sustainable use and conservation is education. The development of an understanding of the factors to maintain a resource is essential to provide and develop the global ethic necessary to halt and reverse degradation. This is a huge task, which would involve inputs from many sectors including governments, NGOs, and education institutions on a global scale (Maxted et al., 2020).

4.1. Biodiversity Conservation Strategies

Biodiversity is the variety and variability among living organisms and the ecological complexes in which they occur. It encompasses the variety of genes and species and also the variety of ecosystems. The conservation of biodiversity is complementary to Uganda's economic development. Since the economy depends on resources, most of which are biological, it is evident that the rich biodiversity provides the country with its comparative advantage. It also contributes to the environment and local communities in numerous ways. It is thus clear that to develop, it is necessary to conserve the environment, which is the basis of resources for the country. The conservation of biodiversity is important to ensure that resources and life-supporting systems will be available to future generations (Pilling et al.2020). The rich genetic resources, which are the source of crop breeds and animal varieties, will not exist for future use if they are not conserved today. This will result in the loss of various medicinal plants and other herbs, which are of great importance to both the local communities and the country at large.

4.2. Sustainable Utilization of Genetic Resources

For a country where most of the population depends on subsistence agriculture, the sustainable utilization of genetic resources is of vital importance. The environment in Uganda is threatened by the over-exploitation of natural resources due to the rapidly increasing population, poverty, and the lack of awareness of sustainable farming methods. Recognizing the importance of its genetic resources for food and agriculture, Uganda has recently drafted a National Policy on Agricultural Biotechnology, which aims to employ the best available science to improve upon the crop varieties and livestock species used by subsistence farmers. Article V of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture is an agreement that Uganda is a contracting party to and directly supports the sustainable use of plant genetic resources. By employing in situ and on-farm conservation methods, it is hoped that the degradation of the environment caused by land clearing for cultivation and the overuse of agrochemicals can be slowed and even reversed. This will ensure that the genetic resources continue to be available for future generations and also improve the livelihoods of local farmers (Ongu et al.2023).

4.3. Benefit-Sharing Mechanisms

Benefit-sharing is usually seen as a practical way to fulfill the necessity to achieve equity in access to genetic resources and equity in the distribution of benefits. The CBD sets out clear provisions on benefit sharing. In its preamble, it states that genetic resources are a resource of 'vital interest to humanity' and Article 1, states that one of the objectives of the CBD is the 'fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources'. This is further endorsed in Article 15, which is devoted specifically to the subject of access and benefit sharing. This part demands that states who are party to the treaty will be required to provide or enact laws that give effect to the non-discriminatory and mutually agreed terms for access to genetic resources. Benefit-sharing mechanisms are incredibly varied. Sectoral attempts have been made by international organizations. For instance, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources for Meals and Agriculture are the main international settlements involved with the conservation and utilization of plant genetic resources. It has an extremely designated phase on benefit sharing through in-situ and ex-situ conservation and the transfer of germplasm(Laird et al.2020). This settlement is non-binding and is managed through the FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture.

5. Traditional Knowledge and Genetic Resource Protection

Furthermore, the secretive and oral form of traditional knowledge is not suited to the public domain, written documentation, and individual inventor requirements of conventional intellectual property rights. Patenting and other forms of exclusive rights may lead to misappropriation and loss of traditional knowledge. Therefore, there is a need for alternative sui generis systems for traditional knowledge, which are developed with the full participation of traditional knowledge holders. Such systems must recognize the customary laws and effective access and benefit-sharing rights of indigenous and local communities. They must prevent biopiracy and provide mechanisms for prior informed consent and the disclosure of the origin of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. This is vital in ensuring that traditional knowledge is preserved and continues to provide benefits for the knowledge holders and all of humanity (Byron).

The complex and dynamic nature of traditional knowledge presents several specific issues for recognition and protection (Reid et al.2021). These particularities have been overlooked in the development of intellectual property systems, and as a result, traditional knowledge has been seriously eroded and abused. Intellectual property rights systems have been developed from a Western linear worldview and are inadequate for recognizing and protecting the communal, collective, and often intangible nature of traditional knowledge (Borrell et al.2020).

Traditional knowledge may be defined as the knowledge, innovations, and practices of indigenous and local communities around the world. It is often the basis for identifying and deriving plants for medicines, health, and agriculture. This knowledge is passed on from generation to generation and is an integral part of a culture. It often underpins the use and development of a specific genetic resource (Passero et al.2021).

5.1. Recognition and Protection of Traditional Knowledge

Qualitative evidence and assertive policy measures are needed to recognize and protect traditional knowledge. For the information to be recognized by national and international bodies, communities should be provided with rights of ownership to their knowledge. These rights should be similar to those secured under intellectual property rights, thus it should be recognized as a tradeable commodity (Dupuy et al.2022). However, this requires an in-depth understanding of intellectual property rights by the local communities, which is often very limited. Therefore, education programs need to be established to provide communities with the necessary knowledge to utilize this system. This may be a difficult process, and some may argue that traditional knowledge cannot be effectively protected under conventional intellectual property rights. In this case, alternative sui generis systems for the protection of traditional knowledge must be developed, as has been attempted to do so by the international community in forums such as WIPO and CBD. To date, these attempts have been largely unsuccessful and have been criticized for the inclusion of Western ideologies and inapplicability to traditional knowledge systems, mainly due to the lack of involvement of the knowledge holders

5.2. Traditional Knowledge in Genetic Resource Management

The timing and methods of resource utilization may be encoded in traditional knowledge. For example, the Konda Reddi people of Andhra Pradesh in India have a highly sophisticated system of resource management for their agro-biodiversity. They grow over 90 types of crops, 60 of which are millets. The millet fields are sown sequentially, and each type is harvested and stored separately. All of the cropping activities are planned according to a detailed knowledge of the seasonal climate and its interaction with the crop ecologies. The Konda Reddi crop management system is based on a complex understanding of the suitability of different ecological and climatic conditions to particular crop types. This traditional knowledge has enhanced the agro-biodiversity of the Konda Reddi and enabled them to prosper in marginal environments.

In many cases of genetic resource loss, such as the erosion of plant genetic diversity on-farm or the endangerment of local breeds and varieties, there are numerous examples of how traditional knowledge has contributed to the enhanced utilization and preservation of genetic resources. In situ, conservation is widespread and has occurred over long periods in association with human habitation. Information on the locations and ecological requirements of specific genetic resources has often been passed down through generations and provides the basis for resource management decisions.

In the management and preservation of genetic resources, traditional knowledge embodies the wisdom, experience, and accumulated knowledge about their utilization and preservation. It relates to how societies and cultures have conserved and enhanced genetic resources, and to the cultural practices, institutions, and beliefs associated with genetic resources. Traditional knowledge may be a significant factor in the continued success of certain genetic resource management systems.

6. Intellectual Property Rights and Genetic Resource Protection

As the possession of genetic resources has become a matter of increasing urgency on the international agenda, the use of intellectual property rights in this area has become a subject of controversy. Patents play a pivotal role in the modern global economy, and the incentivized system created by a patent is thought to be particularly important in the field of genetic engineering and biotechnology. Consequently, the view of the issue of whether the granting of a patent on an invention derived from a genetic resource should confer rights over the resource itself is an area of intense debate. Innovation in the field of biotechnology leads to the creation of new varieties of plants, improved methods of diagnosis and treatment of disease, as well as new drugs and pharmaceuticals. This innovation can only occur if there is an investment, and those seeking to obtain these inventions will obtain the necessary investment only if they are reasonably certain of obtaining an economic return. The prospect of a patent provides such a return, and without that prospect, the research and development phase may not take place. However, the relationship between innovation and patent protection is one built on assumption, and the effects of patents on genetic resources are far from straightforward. Patents on inventions that use or relate to genetic resources can have a broad-ranging impact and are not always the most effective means for stimulating invention and research. The TRIPS agreement defines a patent as being available for any inventions, whether products or processes, in all fields of technology, provided they are new, involve an inventive step, and are capable of industrial application. The presence of patents can cause restrictions to subsequent research and development, and the absence of readily available genetic resources can affect the cost and pace of research (Ma et al., 2022). This is particularly harmful to developing countries, who may lack the infrastructure and resources to have a strong biotechnology industry but have a wealth of genetic resources. High biodiversity countries with little technology industry fear that a strong form of patent protection could lead to a drain of resources to more developed countries and discourage the investment of foreign biotechnology firms who will seek to avoid patent infringement suits. In the worst-case scenario, the resource may become depleted and the country may have little to show in terms of research results or technology transfer. A more subtle effect of patents may occur through the displacement of public research with private research. The willingness to invest in genetic resource-related research is directly tied to the potential for patent protection, and research conducted to freely diffuse its results into the public domain is less likely to occur.

6.1. Patents and Genetic Resources

Patents could potentially represent a major means of protecting genetic resources, therefore it is vital to understand the possible opportunities and threats provided by the patent system. A patent is a set of exclusive rights granted by a state to an inventor or their assignee for a fixed period in exchange for a disclosure of an invention. The exclusive rights provided by a patent would allow the owner to prevent others from using the invention without his consent. Therefore, if a company or a research institute were to discover an important and useful gene within a local crop and were to subsequently patent that gene, it could prevent the inhabitants of the country of origin of the genetic resource from gaining access to seeds or planting material required to utilize that gene. This is because a patented invention would not be available for others to use unless the owner of the patent is willing to grant a license. Therefore, it would be up to the patent owner whether access is gained to the patented genetic resource. This situation of exclusion would be to the detriment of the country of origin of the genetic resource and global society. This is because two of the main purposes of the CGIAR System and international agricultural research are to 'alleviate poverty and hunger' and to 'achieve food security in developing countries' through research aimed at increasing the crop productivity of developing regions. To achieve that increase in crop productivity, plant breeders in developing countries must have access to the latest scientific knowledge and technology with minimum costs. A lack of access to genetic resources would hinder such knowledge and technology. Furthermore, while the patent owner could certainly benefit from the exclusive rights provided by a patent through increased market power and high returns on investment, it is unlikely that the granting of patents on genetic resources would aid the diffusion of knowledge and technology essential to further research on crop improvement in developing countries. Since patents have time and scope limitations, we can assume that once a country is more economically developed and has the resources to conduct significant research in the field of crop improvement, they would prefer to have a patent on their invention, as opposed to an invention based on a genetic resource from a poorer country. Thus, they would be less likely to disclose it. This means that patent-based research and development in the field of crop improvement will tend to move towards inventions using non-patented genetic resources and away from resources that would be less profitable due to shared rights with poorer countries. At the same time as presenting a threat to access, patents can be seen as a means of protecting against biopiracy and the misappropriation of genetic resources. This is because to be patentable, an invention must fulfill the criteria of being new, involving an inventive step, and being capable of industrial application. In the field of genetic resources, a patented invention should be based on some form of knowledge or technology relating to a specific gene or characteristic found within a species of plant or animal. By providing a system of exclusive rights, it is possible that patents could discourage the theft of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, which is often done by taking samples of seeds or other planting material out of a country and conducting research in a third country (Panis et al., 2020).

6.2. Access and Benefit-Sharing in Intellectual Property Rights

Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) are crucial components of protecting genetic resources within the intellectual property rights (IPR) regime. This aspect holds significant importance for developing countries, providing the means for them to gain benefits and transfer technology that results from the use of their genetic resources. ABS is considered to be an exchange between providers and users of genetic resources, based on taking and giving of access and sharing the benefits that arise from the use of resources, fairly and equitably. This is mainly a reference to monetary and non-monetary benefits and the concept that is by sustainable development. It should be noted that ABS applies to all forms of genetic resources and is not restricted to the utilization of specific resources for commercial, along with research and development (R&D) purposes. ABS provisions aim to provide incentives to conserve and sustainably use genetic resources, thus promoting the equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of such resources, building on traditional practice and knowledge, and ensuring that IPR provisions do not become a barrier to resource conservation and sustainable development (Michiels et al.2021). Therefore, it is seen that between ABS and IPR, there are clear objectives that can work in harmony to protect genetic resources and sharing of benefits, albeit the current IPR regime is seen to conflict with these ABS objectives.

7. Biotechnology and Genetic Resource Protection

A 'living organism' that is altered by the process of biotechnology and which is new, possessing a unique combination of genetic material obtained through the use of modern biotechnology is called a "genetically modified organism" (GMO). This includes plants that are used directly as food or food ingredients. Today, the application of modern biotechnology has also come to include the cloning of living organisms, a development with many implications. This has both direct and indirect effects on the conservation of genetic diversity. For countries rich in biodiversity, the potential damage that could occur to native species from the escape of GMOs into the environment is a great concern. Introducing alien genes into related wild species or local varieties through gene flow poses a threat of extinction or genetic assimilation of the native strains. A well-documented example in recent years involved the introgression of genes from hybrid sunflowers with wild perennial species in the USA, which resulted in a drastic reduction of the wild species' population. Another study reported that transgenic squash plants had a toxic effect on larval forms of native butterflies when these insects fed on the leaves of the modified squash plants. Indirectly, the monoculture of GMOs can have an adverse effect of displacing traditional cropping systems further pushing agro-diverse small-scale farmers to modernize their farming methods or continue the same method because it may be the only way they could compete with larger-scale agriculture. This would be detrimental to countries with rich genetic resources, as the food crops of small-scale farmers are an important component of the agro-biodiversity in many regions. (Liu et al., 2020)

7.1. Biotechnology Advancements and Challenges

Biotechnology is seen as a key sector in Uganda since its potential benefits to the country are immense. Progress is being made in many areas of biotechnology, most of which have clear links to both the conservation and use of genetic resources. Recent achievements include the progression from traditional to modern biotechnology, the mapping of the rice genome, and the production of a prototype vaccine for East Coast Fever. The link between biotechnology and genetic resource protection is most obvious in those areas which concern crop and livestock improvement. Although it is clear that modern biotechnology has the potential to help many resource-poor farmers and consumers, there are also numerous concerns about the long-term impacts of biotechnology products and processes. These concerns could potentially have a detrimental effect on the conservation of both the crop and livestock biodiversity and the genetic resources of small-scale farming communities (Charlton2023). The implications of these concerns are not limited to Uganda or the global south but also affect the import/export of genetic resources and biotechnology products between developed and developing countries. An area where Uganda is particularly concerned is the potential effect that new biotechnology products could have on UPOV decisions and the TRIPS agreement and the implication this could have on the rights and needs of local farmers and breeding communities.

7.2. Ethical Considerations in Biotechnology

These were never fulfilled, but they provide the basis for a sound and more universally acceptable approach to biotechnology. They represent values that are held by a wide and diverse range of nations and societies and justify the opportunity cost of foregoing research potential usefulness of moratoria on certain techniques during a defined period. While we can accept that moratoria or bans and restrictions of GM produce developed in certain countries may be detrimental to prosperity, these have been small steps in the right direction from the standpoint of many value-based. The production and consumption of GM produce is a programmable and reversible process, and the petition from a diverse coalition of NGOs for a five-year moratorium on all (Kuzma).

In considering an ethically sound approach to biotechnology, it is useful to recall the stringent set of criteria that were recommended for evaluation and decision-making on the new plant breeding techniques during the early days of genetics. These include:

i)?????????????????? The public at large should be informed of the new possibilities in a manner sufficiently clear for them to realize what may be at stake for them individually, utilize freedom of choice, and express opinions.

ii)???????????????? The development of new techniques should be redirected to help the poorest and to relieve the suffering of those who are most disadvantaged.

iii)?????????????? There should be open discussion of the potential risks as well as the anticipated benefits.

iv)?????????????? The decision should be based on relevant democratic decision-making and encompass agreement to an amendment of the course as long as the results of the new techniques and decision prove to be adverse to what.

Serious question marks concerning the implications of biotechnology on the future security of the world's food supplies and intellectual about these values and priorities are renewed in the context of biotechnology. What is required is an approach to biotechnology assessment and management that embodies the concerns and priorities shared by all countries and attempts to balance the benefits and risks of biotechnology on an ongoing responsive basis.

8. Institutional Framework for Genetic Resource Protection

Several government ministries, departments, and agencies have an impact on the conservation and use of genetic resources. The National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) is responsible for coordinating, regulating, supervising, and monitoring all activities in the field of environmental management. NEMA has the responsibility of assessing and monitoring the impact of any activity on the environment and advising the government on appropriate environmental management measures. Although NEMA is not specifically focused on genetic resources, the decisions and policies implemented by NEMA in the area of environmental management will have an impact on genetic resource conservation and use. An example would be a policy relating to land use change that has the potential to impact genetic resources (Shahab et al.2022).

The main goal of the Ugandan government in the area of genetic resource protection is to effectively coordinate the conservation of genetic resources and biodiversity, sustainable use, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources in the global arena. The overall objective of the institutional framework includes poverty eradication, promotion of sustainable livelihoods, and economic development.

8.1. Role of Government Agencies

During the mid-1980s, the global focus on conservation had a significant impact on member countries of the United Nations. In several forums held in Nairobi, participants negotiated policies and relevant legal instruments to ensure that the conservation of the environment was not jeopardized by economic development and that sustainable utilization of natural resources could only be achieved if countries, especially those with a high level of biological diversity, took appropriate measures to protect their natural resources. One of the major outcomes of the various meetings was the 1980 report of the World Conservation Strategy organized by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) in cooperation with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF). This extensive report made several recommendations for the conservation of living resources including the establishment of protected areas, development of in situ and ex situ conservation methods, inventory and monitoring of living resources, and the sustainable utilization of resources outside protected areas. These recommendations were further elaborated in a Biodiversity Action Plan for the next 10 years which was adopted by the IUCN general assembly in October 1988. The World Conservation Strategy and the Biodiversity Action Plan were significant impetus for countries, especially those rich in biological diversity, to develop their national policies and legislations for the conservation of living resources. In keeping with the Plan, the IUCN also prepared a draft Law of the Environment and Natural Resources. This draft law, though not legally binding, provided useful guidance to countries in developing or revising their national laws for environmental conservation including the conservation of genetic resources. As a result, the services of government institutions in many countries either directly or indirectly linked with agriculture and the environment became the focal point for developing national programs for the conservation of genetic resources. These activities were mostly initiated and sometimes even funded with the assistance of international organizations like FAO, UNEP, UNESCO, and the World Bank (Job et al.2020).

8.2. Collaboration with Indigenous Communities

Since the Ugandan legal framework for genetic resource protection recognizes communal ownership of the genetic resources and promotes equitable sharing of the benefits derived from their utilization, it provides a good foundation for collaboration with the indigenous communities. This can be further reinforced by the domestication of the international law of indigenous people within the national legal framework. At the international level, Uganda has already shown a positive approach to the issue of protection of genetic resources and traditional knowledge, as demonstrated by its active participation in negotiations for the development of international law in this field. This contrasts with many other countries where active participation in the negotiations has occurred despite an avowed position to safeguard the vested interests of the pharmaceutical and biotech MNCs (Halewood et al.2021).

Collaboration with the indigenous communities must be set in the wider legal framework which is favorable to the indigenous communities and should encourage and support indigenous values and institutions, and their distinctive way of life, and where they can exercise genuine autonomy over the management of the genetic resources, through their decision-making institutions. Since the root of the genetic resources is in the distinct ways of life practices and cultures of these communities, the best way to protect them is to protect the distinct way of life that has given rise to them. Therefore, the protection of genetic resources and the preservation of indigenous cultures are inseparably interlinked (Tran et al., 2020). The more the legal and policy framework for genetic resource protection aligns with the values and interests of the communities, the more it will earn their trust and their autonomous efforts to protect these resources. This will in turn gradually reduce the dependency of these communities on the state and other external agencies for the protection of these resources. Therefore, the best strategy for the state and other external agencies to collaborate with these communities is to build a bridge between the broader legal framework for genetic resource protection and the one that protects the interests and values of these communities.

8.3. International Cooperation and Support

International cooperation has already been alluded to in the Uganda experience in plant genetic resource management. This has been manifested in joint projects and exchange visits in collaboration with organizations such as the International Plant Genetic Resource Institute (IPGRI now Bioversity International), Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO), and World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Such collaboration is hoped to be strengthened to include wider support from non-government organizations working in the same field to avoid unnecessarily duplicating work and promote coordination for more effective results. However, it is felt that foreign support for the protection of genetic resources has been lacking due to competing national priorities and pressure from multinational corporations. These bodies have often held the view that funds are better spent on capacity building in biotechnology and plant breeding for economic crop improvement rather than the preservation of traditional crop varieties. This problem was recognized at the Ministerial Conference on Environment and Development in Uganda, in 1993, where it was agreed that money generated from bioprospecting activities would be allocated to the conservation of genetic resources and the environment in general. This is highly significant for Uganda with the current and future potential prospecting of its rich genetic resources often without the informed consent of the country of origin and an equitable sharing of benefits as in the case of the Basmati patent (Galluzzi et al.2020)(Humphries et al., 2021).

References:

Loskutov, I. G. (2020). Vavilov Institute (VIR): Historical aspects of international cooperation for plant genetic resources. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution.

Mulesa, T. H., & Westengen, O. T. (2020). Against the grain? A historical institutional analysis of access governance of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture in Ethiopia. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 23(1-2), 82-120.

Koh, N. S., Ituarte-Lima, C., & Hahn, T. (2022). Mind the compliance gap: how insights from international human rights mechanisms can help to implement the convention on biological diversity. Transnational Environmental Law.

He, S. & Jiao, W. (2022). Adapting traditional industries to national park management: A conceptual framework and insights from two Chinese cases. Journal of Cleaner Production.

Baslar, K. (2024). The concept of the common heritage of mankind in international law.

Essers, D., Cassimon, D., & Prowse, M. (2021). Debt-for-climate swaps: Killing two birds with one stone? Global Environmental Change.

Hoban, S., Bruford, M., Jackson, J. D. U., Lopes-Fernandes, M., Heuertz, M., Hohenlohe, P. A., & Laikre, L. (2020). Genetic diversity targets and indicators in the CBD post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework must be improved. Biological Conservation, 248, 108654.

Hudson, M., Garrison, N. A., Sterling, R., Caron, N. R., Fox, K., Yracheta, J., & Carroll, S. R. (2020). Rights, interests, and expectations: Indigenous perspectives on unrestricted access to genomic data. Nature Reviews Genetics, 21(6), 377-384.

Kagorora, J. P. K., Kansiime, M. K., Owuor, C., & Tumwine, J. (2021). A review of some aspects of Uganda's crop agriculture: challenges and opportunities for diversified sector output and food security.

Kondwakwenda, A., Mutari, B., Simango, K., Nchanji, E. B., Chirwa, R., Rubyogo, J. C., & Sibiya, J. (2022). Decades of cultivar development: A reconciliation of maize and bean breeding projects and their impacts on food, nutrition security, and income of smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa. In Food Security for African smallholder farmers (pp. 3-26). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.

Urias, E. & Ramani, S. V. (2020). Access to medicines after TRIPS: Is compulsory licensing an effective mechanism to lower drug prices? A review of the existing evidence. Journal of International Business Policy.

Uprety, Y., Oli, K. P., Paudel, K. C., Pokharel, D. M., Thapa, P., & Chaudhary, R. P. (2020). Accessing genetic resources and sharing the benefits: the implications for research on biodiversity. Plant Biodivers Nepal. Botanical Society of Nepal, Kathmandu, 206-224.

Humphries, F., Rabone, M., & Jaspars, M. (2021). Traceability approaches for marine genetic resources under the proposed ocean (BBNJ) treaty. Frontiers in Marine Science.

Taft, H. R., McCoskey, D. N., Miller, J. M., Pearson, S. K., Coleman, M. A., Fletcher, N. K., ... & Barbosa, S. (2020). Research–management partnerships: An opportunity to integrate genetics in conservation actions. Conservation Science and Practice, 2(9), e218.

Tran, T. C., Ban, N. C., & Bhattacharyya, J. (2020). A review of successes, challenges, and lessons from Indigenous protected and conserved areas. Biological Conservation.

Kegamba, J. J., Sangha, K. K., Wurm, P., & Garnett, S. T. (2022). A review of conservation-related benefit-sharing mechanisms in Tanzania. Global Ecology and Conservation, 33, e01955.

Bagley, M., Karger, E., Perron-Welch, F., Thambisetty, S., Souza, L. D., Frere, T., & Rourke, M. (2020). Fact-finding study on how domestic measures address benefit-sharing arising from commercial and non-commercial use of digital sequence information on genetic resources and address the use of digital sequence information on genetic resources for research and development. Ad hoc Technical Expert Group on Digital Sequence Information on Genetic Resources, 10.

Gupta, J., Kumari, M., Mishra, A., Akram, M., & Thakur, I. S. (2022). Agro-forestry waste management review. Chemosphere.

Suriyaprakash, T. N. K. (2021). Intellectual property rights: bioprospecting, Biopiracy and protection of traditional knowledge-an Indian perspective. Intellectual Property.

Maxted, N., Hunter, D., & Ríos, R. O. (2020). Plant genetic conservation.

Wang, W., Feng, C., Liu, F., & Li, J. (2020). Biodiversity conservation in China: A review of recent studies and practices. Environmental Science and Ecotechnology.

Pilling, D., Bélanger, J., Diulgheroff, S., Koskela, J., Leroy, G., Mair, G., & Hoffmann, I. (2020, August). Global status of genetic resources for food and agriculture: challenges and research needs: global status of genetic resources for food and agriculture. In Genetic Resources (Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 4-16).

Ongu, I., Olayide, P., Alexandersson, E., Mugwanya Zawedde, B., & Eriksson, D. (2023). Biosafety regulatory frameworks in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda, and Sweden and their potential impact on international R&D collaborations. GM Crops & Food, 14(1), 1-17.

Laird, S., Wynberg, R., Rourke, M., Humphries, F., Muller, M. R., & Lawson, C. (2020). Rethink the expansion of access and benefit sharing. Science, 367(6483), 1200-1202.

Byron, I. P. (). The protection of traditional knowledge under the sui generis regime in Nigeria. International Review of Law.

Borrell, J. S., Goodwin, M., Blomme, G., Jacobsen, K., Wendawek, A. M., Gashu, D., & Wilkin, P. (2020). Enset‐based agricultural systems in Ethiopia: A systematic review of production trends, agronomy, processing and the wider food security applications of a neglected banana relative. Plants, People, Planet, 2(3), 212-228.

Reid, A. J., Eckert, L. E., Lane, J. F., Young, N., Hinch, S. G., Darimont, C. T., ... & Marshall, A. (2021). “Two‐Eyed seeing”: An Indigenous framework to transform fisheries research and management. Fish and Fisheries, 22(2), 243-261.

Passero, L. F. D., Brunelli, E. D. S., Sauini, T., Amorim Pavani, T. F., Jesus, J. A., & Rodrigues, E. (2021). The potential of traditional knowledge to develop effective medicines for the treatment of leishmaniasis. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 12, 690432.

Dupuy, K., Palik, J., & ?stby, G. (2022). No right to read: National regulatory restrictions on refugee rights to formal education in low-and middle-income host countries. International Journal of Educational Development, 88, 102537.

Ma, Q., Tariq, M., Mahmood, H., & Khan, Z. (2022). The nexus between the digital economy and carbon dioxide emissions in China: The moderating role of investments in research and development. Technology in Society.

Panis, B., Nagel, M., & Van den Houwe, I. (2020). Challenges and prospects for the conservation of crop genetic resources in field genebanks, in in vitro collections, and/or in liquid nitrogen. Plants.

Michiels, F., Feiter, U., Paquin-Jaloux, S., Jungmann, D., Braun, A., Sayoc, M. A. P., & David, B. (2021). Facing the harsh reality of access and benefit sharing (ABS) legislation: An industry perspective. Sustainability, 14(1), 277.

Liu, Z., Gu, W., Seiler, G. J., & Jan, C. C. (2020). A Unique Cytoplasmic–Nuclear Interaction in Sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) Causing Reduced-Vigor Plants and the Genetics of Vigor Restoration. Frontiers in Plant Science.

Charlton, A. (2023, March). Acceptance of bio-degradable Stoverpack among agricultural products market actors in Kampala and Wakiso districts. In 3rd NARO-MAK Conference: Innovations for enhancing productivity and agro-industrialization (p. 85).

Kuzma, J. (). Governance of gene-edited plants: Insights from the history of biotechnology oversight and policy process theory. Science.

Shahab, Y., Gull, A. A., Rind, A. A., Sarang, A. A. A., & Ahsan, T. (2022). Do corporate governance mechanisms curb the anti-environmental behavior of firms worldwide? An illustration through waste management. Journal of Environmental Management, 310, 114707.

Job, H., Becken, S., & Lane, B. (2020). Protected Areas in a neoliberal world and the role of tourism in supporting conservation and sustainable development: an assessment of strategic planning, zoning, impact monitoring, and tourism management at natural World Heritage Sites. In Protected areas, sustainable tourism and neo-liberal governance policies (pp. 1-22). Routledge.

Halewood, M., Bedmar Villanueva, A., Rasolojaona, J., Andriamahazo, M., Rakotoniaina, N., Bossou, B., & Nnadozie, K. (2021). Enhancing farmers’ agency in the global crop commons through the use of biocultural community protocols. Agriculture and Human Values, 38, 579-594.

Galluzzi, G., Seyoum, A., Halewood, M., Lopez Noriega, I., & Welch, E. W. (2020). The role of genetic resources in breeding for climate change: The case of public breeding programs in eighteen developing countries. Plants, 9(9), 1129.

Humphries, F., Laird, S., Wynberg, R., Morrison, C., Lawson, C., & Kolisnikova, A. (2021). Survey of access and benefit-sharing country measures accommodating the distinctive features of genetic resources for food and agriculture and associated traditional knowledge.

?

?