生物多样性 ›› 2017, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (11): 1147-1155.DOI: 10.17520/biods.2017232

• 《生物多样性公约》履约专题 • 上一篇    下一篇

遗传资源获取与惠益分享相关国际制度新进展

赵富伟1,*(), 蔡蕾2, 臧春鑫3   

  1. 1 环境保护部南京环境科学研究所, 南京 210042
    2 环境保护部自然生态保护司, 北京 100035
    3 中国环境科学研究院, 北京 100012;
  • 收稿日期:2017-08-31 接受日期:2017-11-20 出版日期:2017-11-20 发布日期:2017-11-20
  • 通讯作者: 赵富伟
  • 基金资助:
    环境保护部“生物多样性保护”专项、环保部南京环科所中央级公益性科研院所基本科研业务专项(GYZX170105)

Latest developments in international regimes relevant to access and benefit-sharing of genetic resources

Fuwei Zhao1,*(), Lei Cai2, Chunxin Zang3   

  1. 1 Nanjing Institute of Environmental Sciences, Ministry of Environmental Protection, Nanjing 210042
    2 Department of Nature and Ecology Conservation, Ministry of Environmental Protection, Beijing 100035
    3 Chinese Academy of Environmental Sciences, Beijing 100012
  • Received:2017-08-31 Accepted:2017-11-20 Online:2017-11-20 Published:2017-11-20
  • Contact: Zhao Fuwei

摘要:

遗传资源获取与惠益分享相关国际制度涉及生物多样性保护、粮食安全、公共健康、知识产权以及国际贸易等诸多领域。迄今, 《名古屋议定书》、《粮食和农业植物遗传资源国际条约》和《共享流感病毒以及获得疫苗和其他利益的大流行性流感防范框架》是这一领域最富成效的国际制度范式, 且相互具有可协调性。世界知识产权组织在相关领域的谈判虽然已经形成了遗传资源、传统知识和民间文艺表达3份案文, 但各方在术语使用、保护客体、保护范围等关键问题上分歧严重, 致使谈判举步维艰。世界贸易组织一直在讨论《与贸易有关知识产权协定》和《生物多样性公约》的相互关系, 发展中国家呼吁多年的来源披露等相关要求遭到发达国家抵制。近年来, 虽然世界贸易组织争端解决机制支持了多起援引“环境保护例外”条款起诉的案例, 但遗传资源提供国可以从中汲取的可操作经验有限。世界知识产权组织和世界贸易组织等相关多边机制与《名古屋议定书》之间存在显见的法理冲突, 制度上的变革与协调遥遥无期。相比之下, 区域贸易协定的双边模式更具现实操作空间, 可以纳入遗传资源获取与惠益分享规则, 给予缔约方国内立法更大的灵活性和自由度, 因而为协调这种冲突提供了一个新的思路。但我们也应当注意到部分自由贸易协定的获取与惠益分享规则对“私法合同模式”的肯定, 在一定程度上增加了《名古屋议定书》实施效力的不确定性。

关键词: 遗传资源, 粮食安全, 公共健康, 知识产权, 贸易

Abstract:

The international regimes regarding access and benefit-sharing of genetic resources (ABS) are closely related to multiple topics, including biodiversity, food security, public health, intellectual property, and international trade. Until now, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and World Health Organization (WHO) have developed some of the most effective model regimes separately in accordance with their respective mandates, namely, the Nagoya Protocol, the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) and the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework for the Sharing of Influenza Viruses and Access to Vaccines and Other Benefits (PIPF). These multilateral conventions enable parties to fulfill their respective obligations in a coordinated manner. With respect to intellectual property rights (IPRs), the members of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) have managed to produce three drafts regarding aspects of IPRs including conserving genetic resources, traditional knowledge, and folklore. However, negotiation progress has been hindered due to substantial divergence among members over key issues, such as terms of use, subject matter, and scope of protection. With regard to international trade, discussions under the framework of World Trade Organization (WTO) are still stuck on working out the complexities between CBD and the Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs), where developed members are steadfast in opposing developing countries’ proposals on disclosure of the origin of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge during the process of patent application. In recent years, although some appeals, which invoke exception clauses for environmental protection, have been sustained by WTO dispute settlement mechanisms, countries providing genetic resources still aren’t yet able to draw readily practical references. There are obviously some legal conflicts among the Nagoya Protocol, WIPO, WTO, and other multilateral systems, and resolving such complexities poses difficulties. In contrast, the bilateral approach within the framework of the regional trade agreement (RTA) proves to be more practical and flexible in terms of integrating ABS rules, and providing parties with more domestic legislative freedom and flexibility, which therefore have ushered in a novel way of thinking for coordinating such dilemmas. Nevertheless, we need to be fully aware of the fact that the “private contract mode” favored by few RTAs would inevitably increase the uncertainties for effectively implementing the Nagoya Protocol to a certain extent.

Key words: genetic resources, food security, public health, intellectual property rights, trade