Biocultural community
protocols and intellectual
property rights on animal
genetic resources
I
on animal genetic resources is a topic that is increasingly
discussed at the international level. This can be attributed to three major developments:
the increasing volume in trade in animal products; the scientific progress in animal breeding with the advances in genetic engineering; and the erosion of animal genetic resources
(Biber-Klemm and Temmermann, 2010).
NTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS
At present, policymakers and experts are still grappling with these issues and have not come
to any firm conclusions. But there appears to be consensus on the following:
•
Much of the world’s animal genetic resources diversity is held by small-scale, often poor,
livestock keepers (FAO, 2009a). The future of this diversity will depend on livestock
keepers being both able and motivated to continue raising traditional breeds.
•
Traditional breeds will retain their adaptive traits only for as long as they are kept in
their original production environment, i.e., conserved in-situ (Sponenberg and Bixby,
2007; Van der Werf et al., 2009).
•
Wide access to genetic resources and equitable frameworks for benefit sharing are a
prerequisite for sustainable use of livestock biodiversity, its further development and
continued availability for the generations to come (Hiemstra and Ivankovic, 2010).
•
There is a need to provide incentives to livestock keepers who keep local and indigenous
breeds (Hiemstra and Ivankovic, 2010; Tvedt et al., 2007).
•
Local livestock keepers have no means of protecting their resources while commercial
actors guard their innovations through patents and trade secrets (Köhler-Rollefson,
2010a).
Promoting biocultural protocols and endowing them with legal standing represents not only
a means of improving community empowerment, locally invoking “Livestock Keepers’
Rights”, but also a logical option and promising strategy for addressing these concerns
and for creating a more level playing field for local livestock keepers and to defend their
interests in this respect. By establishing local breeds “as prior art”, they should also contribute to protecting them from patenting and biopiracy, in case outsiders are interested in
their special features.
22