Potential effects of the Nagoya Protocol on the exchange of non-plant genetic resources for scientific research: Actors, paths, and consequences

Ecological Economics

Volumn 86, Issue , 2013, Pages 136-147

  Welch, Eric W ^a   Shin, Eunjung ^a   Long, Jennifer ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^b UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT   (United States)

Author keywords

Genetic resources; Global policy; Material exchange; Nagoya Protocol

Indexed keywords

ACADEMIC RESEARCH; AGRICULTURAL APPLICATION; AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT; DATA ACQUISITION; GENETIC RESOURCE; INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS; NATIONAL STRATEGY; PROJECT DESIGN; RECIPROCITY; STATE ROLE;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 84871543345     PISSN: 09218009     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.11.019     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Anderies John M., Janssen Marco A., Ostrom Elinor A framework to analyze the robustness of social-ecological systems from an institutional perspective. Ecology and Society 2004, 9(1).
2. Anderson S., Centonze R. Property rights and the management of animal genetic resources. World Development 2007, 35:1529-1541.
3. Berman Evan M. The politics of federal technology policy: 1980-1988. Policy Studies Review 1991, 10(4):28-41.
4. Blau Peter Exchange and Power 1964, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
5. Bozeman Barry, Feeney Mary K. Rules and Red Tape: A Prism for Public Administration Theory and Research 2011, M.E. Sharpe, Armonk, N.Y.
6. Bulmer Jane Study on the Relationship Between and International Regime on Access and Benefit-Sharing and Other International Instruments and Forums that Govern Genetic Resources. Paper read at the Seventh Meeting of the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Working Group on ABS, at UNEP/CBD/WG-ABS/7/Inf/3/Part.1 2009.
7. Cock Matthew, van Lenteren Joop, Brodeur Jacques, Barratt Barbara, Bigler Franz, Bolckmans Karel, CÔnsoli Fernando, Haas Fabian, Mason Peter, Parra José Do new access and benefit sharing procedures under the Convention on Biological Diversity threaten the future of biological control?. BioControl 2010, 55(2):199-218.
8. Cook K.S., Whitmeyer J.M. Two approaches to social structure: exchange theory and network analysis. Annual Review of Sociology 1992, 18(1):109-127.
9. de Jonge B. What is fair and equitable benefit-sharing?. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 2011, 24(2):127-146.
10. de Solla Price Derek J. Networks of scientific papers. Science 1965, 149(3683):510.
11. Dedeurwaerdere Tom Self-governance and international regulation of the global microbial commons: introduction to the special issue on the microbial commons. International Journal of the Commons 2010, 4(1):390-403.
12. Eisenberg Rebecca S. Patents and data-sharing in public science. Industrial and Corporate Change 2006, 15(6):1013-1031.
13. Emerson R.M. Social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology 1976, 2(1):335-362.
14. Eyzaguirre P., Di Gregorio M., Meinzen-Dick R. Introduction to the special issue on "property rights, collective action, and local conservation of genetic resources". World Development 2007, 35(9):1481-1488.
15. Falcon W.P., Fowler C. Carving up the commons - emergence of a new international regime for germplasm development and transfer. Food Policy 2002, 27(3):197-222.
16. Fowler C. Accessing genetic resources: international law establishes multilateral system. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 2004, 51(6):609-620.
17. Ghijsen Huib Intellectual property rights and access rules for germplasm: benefit or straitjacket?. Euphytica 2009, 170(1/2):229-234.
18. Gollin D., Van Dusen E., Blackburn H. Animal genetic resource trade flows: economic assessment. Livestock Science 2008, 120(3):248-255.
19. Homans George C. Social behavior as exchange. The American Journal of Sociology 1958, 63(6):597-606.
20. Janssen Marco A., Ostrom Elinor Governing social-ecological systems. Handbook of Computational Economics 2006, Elsevier B.V. L. Tesfatsion, K.L. Judd (Eds.).
21. Jinnah S., Jungcurt S. Global biological resources: could access requirements stifle your research?. Science 2009, 323(5913):464-465.
22. Katz J.S., Martin B.R. What is research collaboration?. Research Policy 1997, 26(1):1-18.
23. Kirk Nicholas, Memon Ali Sustainable Governance of Marine Fisheries: A Socio-ecological Embeddedness Perspective. The 4th International Conference on Sustainability Engineering and Science 2010, New Zealand Society for Sustainability Engineering and Science, Auckland, New Zealand.
24. Koopman J. Reconciliation of proprietary interests in genetic and knowledge resources: hurry cautiously!. Ecological Economics 2005, 53(4):523-541.
25. Krackhardt David The strength of strong ties: the importance of philos in organizations. Networks and Organizations 1992, Harvard Business School Press, Boston. N. Nohria, R. Eccles (Eds.).
26. Lalitha N. Diffusion of agricultural biotechnology and intellectual property rights: emerging issues in India. Ecological Economics 2004, 49(2):187-198.
27. Lei Zhen, Juneja Rakhi, Wright Brian D. Patents versus patenting: implications of intellectual property protection for biological research. Nature Biotechnology 2009, 27(1):36-40.
28. Lin N. Social capital: a theory of social structure and action 2002, vol. 19. Cambridge University Press.
29. Long J., Blackburn H.D. The relationship between conservation policy and aquatic genetic resources. Cryopreservation in Aquatic Species 2011, World Aquaculture Society, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. T.R. Tiersch, C.C. Green (Eds.).
30. May P.J., Winter S. Regulatory enforcement and compliance: examining Danish agro-environmental policy. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 1999, 18(4):625-651.
31. Medaglia Jorge Cabrera The relationship between the access and benefit sharing international regimen and other international instruments: the World Trade Organization and the International Union For the Protection of New Varieties of Plants. Sustainable Development Law & Policy 2010, 10(3):24-53.
32. Merson John Bio-prospecting or bio-piracy: intellectual property rights and biodiversity in a colonial and postcolonial context. Osiris 2000, 15:282-296. (ArticleType: research-article / Issue Title: Nature and Empire: Science and the Colonial Enterprise / Full publication date: 2000 / Copyright © 2000 The University of Chicago Press).
33. Merton Robert C. The normative structure of science. Journal of Legal and Political Sociology 1942, 1:115-126.
34. Monge P.R., Contractor N.S. Theories of Communication Networks 2003, Oxford University Press.
35. Mowery David C., Ziedonis Arvids A. Academic patents and material transfer agreements: substitutes or complements?. The Journal of Technology Transfer 2007, 32:157-172.
36. Murdoch Jonathan, Marsden Terry, Banks Jo Quality, nature, and embeddedness: some theoretical considerations in the context of the food sector. Economic Geography 2000, 76(2):107-125.
37. Neimark Benjamin D. Industrializing nature, knowledge, and labour: the political economy of bioprospecting in Madagascar. Geoforum 2012, 43(5):980-990.
38. Nelson R.R. The market economy, and the scientific commons. Research Policy 2004, 33(3):455-471.
39. Olesen Ingrid, Rosendal G.Kristin, Tvedt Morten Walløe, Bryde Martin, Bentsen Hans B. Access to and protection of aquaculture genetic resources - structures and strategies in Norwegian aquaculture. Aquaculture 2007, 272(Supplement 1):S47-S61.
40. Ostrom Elinor Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action. The Political Economy of Institutions and Decisions 1990, Cambridge University Press, New York.
41. Ostrom Elinor A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 2009, 325(5939):419-422.
42. Ostrom Elinor Background on the institutional analysis and development framework. Policy Studies Journal 2011, 39(1):7-27.
43. Paavola J., Ropke I. Sustainability and environment. Elgar Companion to Social Economics 2008, Edward Elgar, London. J. Davis, W. Dolfsma (Eds.).
44. Pfeffer Jeffrey, Salancik Gerald R. The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective 1978, Harper & Row, New York.
45. Polanyi Michael The republic of science: its political and economic theory. Minerva 1962, 1:54-74.
46. Polski M. The institutional economics of biodiversity, biological materials, and bioprospecting. Ecological Economics 2005, 53(4):543-557.
47. Powell W.W., Koput K.W., SmithDoerr L. Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Administrative Science Quarterly 1996, 41(1):116-145.
48. Rodrigues Victor Merton and Ziman's modes of science: the case of biological and similar material transfer agreements. Science and Public Policy 2007, 34(5):355-363.
49. Rodriguez V., Janssens F., Debackere K., De Moor B. Material transfer agreements and collaborative publication activity: the case of a biotechnology network. Research Evaluation 2007, 16(2):123-136.
50. Rosendal G.K., Olesen I., Bentsen H.B., Walløe Tvedt M., Bryde M. Access and legal protection of aquaculture genetic resources - Norwegian perspectives. The Journal of World Intellectual Property 2006, 9:392-412.
51. Rosenthal Joshua P. Politics, culture and governance in the development of prior informed consent in indigenous communities. Current Anthropology 2006, 47:119-142. [With 10 commentaries and reply by author].
52. Rubenstein Kelly Day, Smale Melinda, Widrlechner Mark P. Demand for genetic resources and the U.S. National Plant Germplasm System. Crop Science 2006, 46(3):1021-1031.
53. Shibayama Sotaro, Baba Yasunori Sharing research tools in academia: the case of Japan. Science & Public Policy (SPP) 2011, 38(8):649-659.
54. Shiva Vandana Protect or Plunder?: Understanding Intellectual Property Rights 2001, Zed Books, London, UK.
55. Siebenhuner B., Suplie J. Implementing the access and benefit-sharing provisions of the CBD: a case for institutional learning. Ecological Economics 2005, 53(4):507-522.
56. Smith Bruce L.R. American Science Policy Since World War II 1990, Brookings Institution, Washington, D.C.
57. Smith S. Intellectual property protection for plant varieties in the 21st century. Crop Science 2008, 48:1277-1290.
58. Streitz W.D., Bennett A.B. Material transfer agreements: a university perspective. Plant Physiology 2003, 133(1):10-13.
59. ten Kate K. Global genetic resources - science and the convention on biological diversity. Science 2002, 295(5564):2371-2372.
60. ten Kate K., Laird S.A. Biodiversity and business: coming to terms with the 'grand bargain'. International Affairs 2000, 76(2):241-264.
61. The American Association for Public Opinion Research Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys 2011, AAPOR. 7th edition.
62. Tisdell C.A. Technology policy: options and priorities. Science and Technology Policy: Priorities of Governments 1981, Chapman and Hall, London; New York. C.A. Tisdell (Ed.).
63. Trommetter M. Biodiversity and international stakes: a question of access. Ecological Economics 2005, 53(4):573-583.
64. UN CBD Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and The Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising From Their Utilization 2011, The Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, Canada.
65. Van Overwalle Geertrui Protecting and sharing biodiversity and traditional knowledge: holder and user tools. Ecological Economics 2005, 53:585-607.
66. Wagner Caroline S. Six case studies of international collaboration in science. Scientometrics 2005, 62(1):3-26.
67. Walsh J.P., Cohen W.M., Cho C. Where excludability matters: material versus intellectual property in academic biomedical research. Research Policy 2007, 36:1184-1203.
68. Ziman J. Real Science: What It Is and What It Means 2000, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.