6 A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE NEGOTIATIONS ON THE INTERNATIONAL TREATY ON PLANT GENETIC RESOURCES FOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURE José Esquinas-Alcázar, Angela Hilmi and Isabel López Noriega

Caminante no hay camino, se hace camino al andar There is no road, you make your own path as you go along Antonio Machado, Proverbs and Songs

Introduction To understand the negotiations that resulted in the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA), it is necessary to understand the growing economic and social importance of these resources throughout the twentieth century, the historical framework of the negotiations, and the scientific and political climate in which they developed.1 Consequently, this chapter will discuss these factors over the various phases of the political debate that began in 1979. In a certain sense, the history of the exchange of genetic resources is the history of mankind. The struggle for access to useful plants for agriculture and food originating from other places has been one of mankind’s main motivations to travel since early times and has not only frequently led to encounters and alliances but also to conflicts and war between different cultures (Esquinas-Alcázar, 2005; Harlan, 1992; Parry, 1978; Vasey, 1992; Zohari, 2000). The history of the Treaty reflects these efforts to access and control genetic resources as well as concern for the future of mankind. The Treaty is a result of a long historical negotiation process that underwent technical, financial, political, institutional and economic phases (Cooper, 2002, 2; Kate and Lasen, 1997, 284–86; Mekour, 2002, 3–5; Rose, 2003). This chapter will illustrate the most salient features of this long process.

136 José Esquinas-Alcázar et al.

First phase: international technical and scientific discussions up to the start of the negotiations Ever since the 1950s, some international organizations, above all, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, have had serious concerns over the loss of the diversity of genetic resources in the world. In the early 1960s, the FAO (1961) held a technical meeting that led to the creation, in 1965, of a Panel of Experts in Plant Exploration and Introduction (FAO, 1969a, 1969b, 1970, 1973a, 1975a). From 1965 to 1974, this group met regularly to advise the FAO on this issue and to set international guidelines for germplasm collection, conservation and exchange (FAO, 1975b). Technical issues gradually emerged related to the assessment of biodiversity and genetic erosion, the identification of collecting sites, sampling techniques, germplasm conservation methods and assessment and documentation methods. In 1967, 1973 and 1981, the FAO held international technical conferences on plant genetic resources (FAO 1973b; FAO/IBP, 1967), each resulting in a publication (Frankel and Bennet, 1970; Frankel and Hawkes, 1975; Holden and Williams, 1984). Arising from the need to organize and finance new programmes to conserve these plant genetic resources, in 1967, the Crop Ecology and Genetic Resources Unit was created and a fund established. In 1972, the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), following up on the recommendations of the UN Conference on the Human Environment, which was held in Stockholm, Sweden, in June of the same year, and of its own Technical Advisory Committee, decided to create the International Board of Plant Genetic Resources (IBPGR, which is now known as Bioversity International) (CGIAR, 1972) – an organization with its own budget. The IBPGR would become part of the international programme of the CGIAR, and its Secretariat would be provided by the FAO’s Plant Genetic Resources Unit. The IBPGR was established in 1974, with its headquarters at the FAO in Rome, and, since then, it has promoted and carried out a number of activities for the collection, conservation, assessment, documentation and use of plant germplasm. In parallel with the FAO and IBPGR activities, and in some cases due to their role as catalyser, in the 1970s, international, regional, national and private organizations created or strengthened programmes aimed at safeguarding and using plant resources, especially ex situ resources. Among these initiatives, those of the Tropical Agricultural Research and Higher Education Centre (CATIE) deserve mention.

Second phase: political discussions and initial negotiations In 1979, at the FAO conference (the highest decision-making body in the organization, where all member countries are represented), the first political discussions began, which in only a few years led to the adoption of the non-binding International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (International Undertaking) and much later, negotiations and approval of the legally biding ITPGRFA.2 The questions raised by the developing countries during the 1979 conference reflect the basic

History of the International Treaty negotiations 137

outline of the difficult negotiations the following years and are the basis of the Treaty and its multilateral system of access and benefit sharing. These questions may be summarized as follows:  Plant genetic resources are found throughout the world, but the greatest diversity is in tropical and subtropical areas, where most developing countries are situated. When seeds are collected and deposited in germplasm banks, often in developed countries, to whom do these stored samples belong? The country where they are collected? The country where they are being stored? Humanity at large?  If the new varieties obtained are the result of applying technology to raw material or genetic resources, why are the rights of the providers of the technology recognized (plant breeders’ rights, patents and so on) and not the rights of the providers of genetic resources? The answers to these questions were neither clear nor convincing. At times, they opened the floor to strong, dialectic confrontations. During the 1979 FAO conference, the Spanish delegation proposed that, in order to solve these problems, an international agreement should be developed and a germplasm bank established under the jurisdiction of the FAO. Despite the strong support for the proposal during the conference, it did not result in a draft resolution (FAO, 1979). In the autumn of that same year, in the months prior to the FAO conference, Mexico, with the support of the Group of Latin America and Caribbean Countries (GRULAC) and the Group of 77,3 promoted a draft resolution, which included the two essential elements of the 1979 Spanish proposal (FAO, 1981a, 1981b):  a call for an international agreement on genetic resources and  a request for a germplasm bank or network of germplasm banks under the jurisdiction of the FAO. During the FAO conference in November 1981, the Mexican draft resolution, presented by the Group of 77, provoked intense discussions among the countries (FAO, 1981a, 1981b). A debate that had been planned to last two or three hours, actually lasted several days. Although some developed countries joined the developing countries’ proposal, others strongly opposed it. A working group, with the exceptional participation of the FAO’s director-general, was created to revise the draft resolution so that it would be acceptable to all. A consensus was reached on the basis of a diluted resolution (FAO, 1981c), in which the director-general was requested to carry out feasibility studies on an international agreement and a germplasm bank network under the jurisdiction of the FAO. The requested studies, presented in the spring of 1983 at the meeting of the FAO Committee on Agriculture (COAG) (FAO, 1983a, 1983b), reached the conclusion that the agreement was not necessary and the germplasm bank network was not technically feasible. The controversy raised from these conclusions ended with an offer by the Spanish government to place its national germplasm bank under the

138 José Esquinas-Alcázar et al.

jurisdiction of the FAO, thereby showing that the problem was not a question of technical feasibility but, rather, of political will. As a result, the COAG requested the director-general to prepare a new document on the basis of the Spanish proposal, which would be presented at the FAO conference that same year (FAO, 1983c, 1983d). In November 1983, the twenty-second session of the conference of the FAO witnessed long and difficult discussions in a strained atmosphere, in which political tensions were felt. Finally, on the last day, and after various voting sessions, and amid cries, applause, tears and a great ovation, both the International Undertaking and the permanent intergovernmental commission responsible for its monitoring were created. However, they were approved without consensus – eight countries expressed their reservations.4

Box 6.1 International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources The International Undertaking is the first comprehensive international agreement on plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. It was approved at the FAO Conference in 1983 (Resolution 8/83) as a non-binding instrument to promote international harmony and cooperation in matters related to plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. According to the approved text, the objective of the International Undertaking is to ensure that plant genetic resources of economic and/or social interest, particularly for agriculture, will be explored, preserved, evaluated and made available for plant breeding and for scientific purposes. The International Undertaking, with 11 articles, formally recognizes plant genetic resources, including improved and commercial varieties, as a common heritage of mankind, and seeks to guarantee its freedom of exchange without restrictions through a network of germplasm banks under the auspices and/or jurisdiction of the FAO. The International Undertaking is supervised by the participating countries through the FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (CGRFA).

The conference then requested the FAO Council to develop the statutes of the intergovernmental Commission on Plant Genetic Resources (renamed in 1995 as the Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture). In this commission, between 1983 and 1991, negotiations were held between the countries, which made it possible to reach agreed interpretations of the International Undertaking to make it acceptable to all, and later, from 1993 and 2001, renegotiations of the International Undertaking in order to transform it into a binding agreement, the ITPGRFA. From 1983, the newly established commission served as an intergovernmental forum where countries continued to debate on agreed interpretations of some of the provisions of the International Undertaking, which would allow the countries that had not joined to lift their reservations. This is how three resolutions were negotiated, which were integrated in the International Undertaking as annexes. In these

History of the International Treaty negotiations 139

resolutions, the concept of national sovereignty was introduced, and plant breeders’ rights and farmers’ rights were recognized in parallel and simultaneously. In this process, it was also agreed that farmers’ rights would be developed through an international fund. Some countries felt that this fund should comprise a percentage of the benefits derived from the use of the genetic resources, whereas most countries felt that it should be tied to the needs of the countries to ensure their conservation and sustainable use. A process began with the aim of quantifying these needs, which led to the fourth International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources, which was held in Leipzig in 1996. During the preparation of this conference, 155 countries drafted national reports on the situation of their genetic resources, needs and priorities. Moreover, over the course of 12 regional meetings, the respective regional reports were developed. This process culminated in the Leipzig Technical Conference, where the Declaration of Leipzig on the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture was adopted, the first State of the World’s Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture was launched (FAO, 1996a), and the first Global Plan of Action on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture was approved (FAO, 1996b). In addition, a document was prepared by the Secretariat, which quantified the necessary funds for projects, programmes and activities in line with the priorities defined in the Global Plan of Action. This plan later became the basis for Article 14 of the ITPGRFA, which recognizes the importance of the Global Plan of Action for the Treaty and encourages the contracting parties to promote its effective implementation. During the years following the adoption of the International Undertaking, major emphasis was put on the implementation of its Article 7 on the development of an ‘international network of base collections in gene banks under the auspices or the jurisdiction of FAO’.5 In compliance with this Article, on 26 October 1994, 12 International Agricultural Research Centres (IARCs) of the CGIAR signed agreements with the FAO, placing their ex situ collections in this international network under the auspices of the FAO.6 The agreements also recognized the intergovernmental authority of the CGIAR to set policies for these ex situ collections, while the commission and the FAO, on behalf of the international community, recognized the IARCs as ‘trustees’ of these international collections. Under these agreements, the IARCs made a commitment to provide the international community with the designated germplasm for the benefit of developing countries, in particular, in accordance with the International Undertaking. Through this agreement, the IARCs reaffirmed the principles of not claiming ownership over the designated germplasm and not seeking any intellectual property rights over the said germplasm or over related information. Since then, the agreements have been renewed every four years (SGRP, 2010). Following the approval of the ITPGRFA, these agreements were replaced by those signed by the centres on 16 October 2006, placing their germplasm collections under Article 15 of the Treaty. A similar agreement was signed by CATIE on the same day. Since then, agreements have also been signed by the International Coconut Genebank for Africa and the Indian Ocean, the International Coconut Genebank for the South Pacific, the Mutant Germplasm Repository of the FAO/IAEA Joint

140 José Esquinas-Alcázar et al.

Division, the International Cocoa Genebank and the Centre for Pacific Crops and Trees of the South Pacific Community.

Box 6.2 The agreements between the Governing Body of the Treaty and the International Agriculture Research Centres (IARCs) of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) In a ceremony held on World Food Day in 2006, the IARCs holding germplasm collections signed an agreement with the FAO acting on behalf of the Governing Body of the Treaty. The text of the agreement had previously been discussed and agreed on by the Governing Body at its first session. These agreements substituted the in-trust agreements signed between the IARCs and the FAO in 2004; reaffirmed the status of the ex situ collections held by the centres as global public goods; and put the collections under the auspices of the Treaty. Furthermore, through these agreements, the IARCs recognized the authority of the Governing Body to provide policy guidance relating to ex situ collections held by them and subject to the provisions of the Treaty. As of January 2007, in line with the conditions defined in the agreements, in order to transfer germplasm the IARCs began to use the Standard Material Transfer Agreement (SMTA) adopted by the Governing Body in its first session for the crops and forages included in Annex I of the Treaty. As of January 2008, following the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its second session, the IARCs have been using this same SMTA to also distribute plant germplasm held in the centres’ collections and not included in Annex 1 of the Treaty. For non-Annex 1 crops and forages, the IARCs agreed to inform the Governing Body of the transfer agreements that they enter into, and to deliver to the contracting parties to the Treaty, samples of plant genetic resources for agriculture and food that have been collected in in situ conditions.

It is appropriate here to emphasize the fundamental role played by the nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in the whole process. An important initiative of the NGOs was the International Keystone Dialogue Series on Plant Genetic Resources (1988–91), which brought together representatives from civil society, farmers, indigenous organizations, the private sector, governments of developed and developing countries and international research centres. This initiative served to identify the main constraints and possible areas of agreement that would then permit intergovernmental meetings of the CGRFA to reach consensus on many of the earlier-described agreements. The most important meetings of this initiative took place in Keystone, Colorado, in the United States in 1988, Madras, India, in 1990 and Uppsala, Sweden, and Oslo, Norway, in 1991. The meetings, which were chaired by M.S. Swaminathan, were vital in resolving some of the most engaging issues, such as farmers’ rights and the need to

History of the International Treaty negotiations 141

finance plant genetic resources conservation and use in support of poor farmers in developing countries. The needed funds were estimated at US $300–500 million. Another similar initiative was that of the Crucible Group. The Crucible Group met twice in 1993 in Uppsala, Sweden, and in Berne, Switzerland. The results of the conversations of the group were published in the book People, Plants and Patents: The Impact of Intellectual Property on Trade, Plant Biodiversity, and Rural Society.7 Due to its wide representativeness, the agreed recommendations of this group were very well received in the negotiation fora. Among the many resulting recommendations, the recommendation to place the ex situ collections of the CGIAR under the auspices of the FAO should be highlighted.

Third phase: a binding agreement for the agrarian sector – development of the Treaty In parallel with the processes described earlier, from 1988 to 1992, the first international binding agreement on biological diversity in general was negotiated in the United Nations Environment Programmeme (UNEP). The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was submitted for signature at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in June 1992.8 This agreement, which also includes agricultural biological diversity, does not sufficiently take into account the specific needs of the agricultural sector because this sector was weakly represented during the negotiation process. It was only in May 1992, at the last moment and at the last negotiation meeting in Nairobi, that it was possible to bring together the few representatives of countries who were directly or indirectly linked to the agriculture sector. This group managed to draft a resolution on agricultural biodiversity to be incorporated into the Nairobi Final Act, at which point the convention was approved. It became Resolution 3 of the Nairobi Final Act, which concerned the relationship between the CBD and the promotion of sustainable agriculture. It highlighted the importance of the agreements reached at the FAO headquarters and requested a revision to the International Undertaking in line with the CBD.

Box 6.3 Resolution 3 of the Nairobi Final Act and Resolution 7/93 of the FAO Conference In adopting the agreed text of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in May 1992, countries also adopted Resolution 3 of the Nairobi Final Act, which recognized the need to seek solutions to outstanding matters concerning plant genetic resources, in particular: (1) access to ex situ collections not addressed by the convention and (2) the question of farmers’ rights. It was requested that these matters be addressed within the FAO’s forum.

142 José Esquinas-Alcázar et al.

In 1993, the FAO Conference accordingly adopted Resolution 7/93 for the revision of the International Undertaking and requested the FAO to provide a forum in the CGRFA for the negotiation among governments, for: (1) the adaptation of the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, in harmony with the CBD; (2) consideration of the issue of access on mutually agreed terms to plant genetic resources, including ex situ collections not addressed by the CBD; and (3) the issue of the realization of farmers’ rights.

Soon after, in 1994, during the Uruguay Round (also with minimal participation from the agricultural sector), trade agreements were developed and approved in Marrakesh, Morocco. These agreements culminated in the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1994 and also concerned genetic resources for agriculture and food. They included the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement), in particular, Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreement, which required the contracting parties to provide for ‘the protection of plant varieties either by patents or by an effective sui generis system or by any combination thereof’. The approval of both the CBD and the TRIPS Agreement as binding agreements raised an alarm bell for the agricultural sector, which was locked between two binding agreements, without its specific needs being adequately taken into account. The International Undertaking, with its merely voluntary nature, lacked sufficient weight to be able to protect agricultural interests. Growing pressure from other sectors – and, in particular, the commercial and environmental sectors – on the agricultural sector, made it possible to achieve what seemed unimaginable just a little while ago – namely a united front of developed and developing countries, the seed industries and NGOs, working towards a common political objective. The objective was to turn the International Undertaking into a binding agreement, which would permit dialogue on an equal footing with the commercial and environmental sectors. It would also legally guarantee the conservation of important crop genetic resources for future generations and fair and equitable access to them for research and genetic improvement. Here began the last negotiation phase of what is today known as the ITPGRFA, in a highly constructive atmosphere. In 1995, the Conference of the Parties to the CBD provided an important support towards progress on this negotiating process, through Decision no. II/15, which was taken in Jakarta in 1995: ‘Recognizing the special nature of agricultural biodiversity, its distinctive features and problems needing distinctive solutions’ (UNEP/CBD, 1995). The formal negotiations, which started with the International Undertaking and its annexes and culminated in the adoption of the ITPGRFA, lasted for seven years (IISI, 1996, 1997a, 1997b, 1997c, 1998, 2000a, 2000b, 2001a, 2001b, 2001c, 2001d, 2002a, 2002b, 2006). In this period, from 1994 to 2001, the CGRFA was

History of the International Treaty negotiations 143

held in three regular sessions and six extraordinary sessions. A Contact Group chaired by Fernando Gerbasi, ambassador of Venezuela and president of the commission at that time, held six intermediate sessions to discuss controversial issues – in particular, the list of plants to include in the multilateral system of access and benefit sharing; the form and manner for sharing the monetary benefits derived from commercialization; intellectual property rights to the materials from the multilateral system; financial resources; genetic materials conserved in the IARCs; and the definition of key terms. The sixth Extraordinary Session of the CGRFA, which was held in Rome in June–July 2001, sought to conclude the negotiations. However, its delegates did not reach an agreement on various points: the definitions of ‘plant genetic resources for food and agriculture’ and ‘genetic material’; the application of intellectual property rights to the materials of the multilateral system; the relationship between the International Undertaking and other international agreements; and the list of plants to be included in the multilateral system. The pending issues were transmitted to the FAO Council, which finalized the negotiations at its twenty-first session in Rome from 30 October to 1 November 2001, making it possible to resolve them (FAO, 2001a).9 The negotiations concluded with the adoption of the ITPGRFA by consensus, with only two abstentions from Japan and the United States (FAO, 2001b), in a climate of widespread euphoria in the thirty-first session of the FAO Conference on 3 November 2001 (FAO, 2001c).

Box 6.4 Annex 1 of the Treaty One of the most complex and controversial issues in the formal negotiation process was the selection of the genera or crops to be included in the multilateral system and that appear in Annex 1 of the Treaty. With the aim of providing a solid technical and scientific basis for the negotiators, the following selection criteria were adopted: (1) the importance of the crop for world food security and (2) the interdependence of the countries with respect to the genetic resources of the crop of interest. The support of the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI) in the preparation of the technical documents was essential in this phase.

In compliance with Article 25, the ITPGRFA was open for signature at the FAO headquarters from 3 November 2001 to 4 November 2002, for all members of the FAO and any states that were not members of the FAO but were members of the United Nations, or any of its specialized agencies, or of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Under Article 26, the Treaty is subject to ratification, acceptance or approval, and, under Article 27, it has been open to accession, once closed to signature. The Treaty entered into force on 29 June 2004, 90 days following its ratification by 40

144 José Esquinas-Alcázar et al.

governments, and it became operative with the first session of its Governing Body in Madrid in June 2006. As part of the interim arrangements, the CGRFA (acting as the Interim Committee of the Treaty) met in order to: prepare the draft rules of procedure; draft the financial rules for the Governing Body of the Treaty and a budget proposal; propose procedures for its compliance; prepare draft agreements to be signed by the IARCs and the Governing Body; draft a material transfer agreement in order to facilitate access, including the terms for sharing commercial benefits; and initiate cooperation arrangements with the Conference of the Parties of the CBD. The first meeting of the Governing Body of the Treaty, which took place in Madrid, Spain, in June 2006, brought together 105 countries and the European Union, which up until then had ratified it. This meeting resolved important issues and approved a Standard Material Transfer Agreement (ITPGRFA, 2006, Appendix G), which determined the level, form and manner of monetary payments on commercialization under the multilateral system of the Treaty.10 During the meeting, the Relationship Agreement between the Governing Body of the Treaty and the Global Crop Diversity Trust, ‘an essential element of the Treaty funding strategy’, was signed (ITPGRFA, 2006, Appendix M), and the text of the agreements between the Governing Body and the IARCs and CATIE was adopted. It also achieved great advances towards resolving other issues, such as the mechanisms to promote compliance with the Treaty and its funding strategy. At its second (Rome, Italy, October 2007) and third sessions (Tunis, Tunisia, June 2009), the Governing Body made progress in the implementation of the funding strategy and the establishment of the principles and rules of the third party beneficiary (see Chapter 9 in this volume). During these sessions, the Governing Body also adopted important resolutions on farmers’ rights and on the functioning of the multilateral system (ITPGRFA, 2007, 2009). The fourth session took place in Bali, Indonesia, in March 2011. To date, the Treaty has been ratified by 126 countries and the European Union.

Box 6.5 The Standard Material Transfer Agreement The Standard Material Transfer Agreement (SMTA) was adopted at the first session of the Governing Body pursuant to Article 12.4 of the Treaty, which calls for the adoption of such an agreement to ensure facilitated access and benefit sharing in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty. The SMTA is a contract between two parties (the provider and the recipient of the material), which sets out the conditions for access to, and use of, all plant genetic resources for food and agriculture in the multilateral system, as well as the conditions for benefit sharing in the case that the recipient commercializes a product that incorporates material received through the SMTA. In this way, the SMTA is the legal instrument through which the multilateral system of access and benefit sharing under the Treaty will operate. The negotiations of the text of the SMTA were long and difficult. They began with the establishment of an expert group by the Commission on

History of the International Treaty negotiations 145

Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (CGRFA) at its first meeting, acting as the Interim Committee for the Treaty. This expert group met in Brussels, Belgium, on 4–8 October 2004, with the objective of developing and proposing recommendations on the terms of the SMTA. The outputs of the expert group were considered at the second meeting of the CGRFA, which decided to establish a Contact Group for the drafting of the SMTA. This Contact Group met twice, in Hamammet, Tunisia, on 18–22 July 2005, and in Alnarp, Sweden, on 24–28 April 2006. A Friends of the Chair Group, created at this last meeting, facilitated the resolution of the outstanding issues at the first session of the Governing Body, where the final text of the SMTA was approved.

Conclusion The ITPGRFA marks a turning point in the history of international cooperation and is an important instrument for combating hunger and poverty. Society will benefit from the Treaty in various ways: consumers will benefit from a greater variety of food and agricultural products as well as increased food security; farmers will benefit from the provisions of the Treaty on farmers’ rights; the scientific community will have access to crucial plant genetic resources for the improvement of plants and research; the IARCs will benefit because the Treaty recognizes their role and provides a legal framework for plant breeding, conservation and access to the collections they hold; and the public and private sectors will also benefit because they will be guaranteed access to a wider range of genetic diversity for agricultural development. The Treaty is the last step of a long journey that allowed humanity to develop a binding agreement that guarantees and regulates the conservation, sustainable use and access to genetic resources for agriculture and food as well as a fair and equitable sharing of the benefits derived from its use. The speed with which countries are ratifying the Treaty in their parliaments is very encouraging. The entry into force of the ITPGRFA is also the first step of a new path – its compliance. The Treaty is legally binding for countries that have ratified it. However, this is not enough – each country should develop the necessary regulations to put its provisions into practice and, in some cases, legislate or modify its national legislations in harmony with the Treaty. The new phase that we are now facing is characterized by a communications challenge – through the media, information and awareness raising. The laws and regulations will only be a paper exercise if the message of the importance of these resources and the need for their conservation and sustainable use does not reach all members of society. To achieve this awareness, it is necessary that children in school learn to recognize the value of, and to develop respect for, natural resources as an integral part of their home, the Earth, and that adults maintain this respect throughout their lives.

146 José Esquinas-Alcázar et al.

Notes 1 International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, 29 June 2004, www.planttreaty.org/texts_en.htm (last accessed 30 March 2011) [ITPGRFA]. 2 International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, 1983, www.fao.org/waicent/faoinfo/agricult/cgrfa/IU.htm (last accessed 30 March 2011) [International Undertaking]. 3 The Group of 77 is the largest intergovernmental organization of developing states in the United Nations. It currently has 131 member states. See www.g77.org (last accessed December 2010). 4 The delegation of New Zealand reserved its position on the text of the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources because there was no provision which took account of plant breeders’ rights. The delegations of Canada, France, Germany (Federal Republic of), Japan, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the United States of America reserved their positions with respect to the Resolution and the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources. These same seven countries and the Netherlands reserved their positions with respect to the establishment of a Plant Genetic Resources Commission. 5 International Undertaking, supra note 2, Article 7.1. 6 International Centre for Research in Agroforestry (ICRAF), International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT), International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), International Centre for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA), International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), International Network for the Improvement of Banana and Plantain (IPGRI/INIBAP), International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), International Potato Center (CIP), International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), West Africa Rice Development Association (WARDA) and World Agroforestry Centre. 7 This publication is available in English, French and Spanish at www.idrc.ca/en/ev93177-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html (last accessed December 2010). 8 Convention on Biological Diversity, 31 I.L.M. 818 (1992). 9 The documents of the Open-ended Working Group are available at www.fao.org/waicent/ faoinfo/agricult/cgrfa/docswg.htm (last accessed December 2010). 10 Standard Material Transfer Agreement, 16 June 2006, ftp://ftp.fao.org/ag/agp/planttreaty/ agreements/smta/SMTAe.pdf (last accessed 10 November 2010).

References Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) (1972) Fourth Meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, Report, 2–4 August 1972, Washington, DC, online: www.cgiar.org/corecollection/docs/cg7211c.pdf (last accessed November 2010). ——(2003a) ‘Joint Statement of FAO and the CGIAR Centres on the Agreement Placing CGIAR Germplasm Collections under the Auspices of FAO’, in Centre Policy Instruments, Guidelines and Statements on Genetic Resources, Biotechnology and Intellectual Property Rights, Booklet, version III, System-wide Genetic Resources Programme, Rome, Italy, online: www. sgrp.cgiar.org/sites/default/files/Policy_Booklet_Version3.pdf (last accessed November 2010). ——(2003b) ‘Second Joint Statement of FAO and the CGIAR Centres on the Agreement Placing CGIAR Germplasm Collections under the Auspices of FAO’, in Centre Policy Instruments, Guidelines and Statements on Genetic Resources, Biotechnology and Intellectual Property Rights, Booklet, version III, System-wide Genetic Resources Programme, Rome, Italy, online: www.sgrp.cgiar.org/sites/default/files/Policy_Booklet_Version3.pdf (last accessed November 2010). Cooper, H.D. (2002) ‘The International Treaty on Plan Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture’, Review of European Community and International Environmental Law 11(1): 1–16.

History of the International Treaty negotiations 147

Esquinas-Alcázar, J. (2005) ‘Protecting crop genetic diversity for food security: political, ethical and technical challenges’, Nature Reviews Genetics 6: 946–53. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (1961) Report of the Technical Meeting on Plant Exploration and Introduction (10–20 July 1961), FAO, Rome. ——(1969a) Report of the Third Session of the FAO Panel of Experts on Plant Exploration and Introduction, Rome, Italy, 25–28 March 1969, Plant Production and Protection Division, FAO, Rome. ——(1969b) Report of the FAO Panel of Experts on Plant Exploration and Introduction, 25–28 March 1969, third session, Plant Production and Protection Division, FAO, Rome. ——(1970) Report of the Fourth Session of the FAO Panel of Experts on Plant Exploration and Introduction, Rome, Italy, 14–17 April 1970, Plant Production and Protection Division, FAO, Rome. ——(1973a) Report of the Fifth Session of the FAO Panel of Experts on Plant Exploration and Introduction, Fifth Session, Rome, 8–10 March 1973, Plant Production and Protection Division, FAO, Rome. ——(1973b) Report of the Technical Conference on Crop Genetic Resources. Rome, 12–16 March 1973, Plant Production and Protection Division, FAO, Rome. ——(1975a) Report of the Sixth Session of the FAO Panel of Experts on Plant Exploration and Introduction, Rome, 3–5 December 1974, Plant Production and Protection Division, FAO, Rome. ——(1975b) ‘Proposed Standards and Procedures for Seed Storage Installations Used for Long-term Conservation of Base Collections’, in Report of FAO Panel of Experts on Plant Exploration and Introduction, Sixth Session, Rome, 3–5 December 1974, Plant Production and Protection Division, FAO, Rome. ——(1979) Verbatim Records of Commission II of the Twentieth Session of the FAO Conference, Rome, 10–28 November 1979, Meeting 12 of Commission II, 21 November 1979, Doc. C 79/11/PV/12, FAO, Rome. ——(1981a) Report of the Twenty-first Session of the FAO Conference, Rome, 7–26 November 1981, Doc. C 81/LIM/29, FAO, Rome. ——(1981b) Verbatim Records of Commission II of the Twenty-first Session of the FAO Conference, 16 November 1981, Doc. C 81/II/PV/8, FAO, Rome. ——(1981c) Resolution 6/81 (Plant Genetic Resources), adopted at the Twenty-First Session of the FAO Conference, November 1981, FAO, Rome. ——(1983a) Report of the Eighty-third Session of the FAO Council, Rome, 13–24 June 1983, FAO, Rome. ——(1983b) Report of the Seventh Session of the Committee on Agriculture (COAG), Rome, 21–30 March 1983, Doc. CL 83/9, FAO, Rome. ——(1983c) Plant Genetic Resources: Report of the Director-General, presented at the Twenty-Second Session of the FAO Conference, Doc. C83/25, FAO, Rome. ——(1983d) Report of the Twenty-second Session of the FAO Conference, Rome, 5–23 November 1983, FAO, Rome, online: www.fao.org/docrep/x5563E/X5563e0a.htm#e.%20plant% 20genetic%20resources%20(follow%20up%20of%20conference%20resolution%2068> 1 (last accessed December 2010) ——(1996a) Report on the State of the World’s Plant Genetic Resources, prepared for the International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources, Leipzig, Germany, 17–23 June 1996, online: www.fao.org/AG/aGp/agps/pgrfa/pdf/SWRSHR_S.PDF (last accessed December 2010) ——(1996b) Global Plan of Action for the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, adopted by the International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic Resources, Leipzig, Germany, 17–23 June 1996, FAO, Rome. ——(2001a) Document CL 121/5-Sup. of the Hundred and Twenty-first Session of the FAO Council. Rome, 30 October – November 2001, entitled The International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, Information provided according to Article XXI.1 of the General Rules of the Organization, FAO, Rome. ——(2001b) Verbatim Records of the Plenary Sessions of the Thirty-first Session of the FAO Conference, Rome, 2–13 November 2001, FAO, Rome.

148 José Esquinas-Alcázar et al.

——(2001c) Resolution 3/2001 (Approval of the International Treaty of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture and interim arrangements for its application) adopted at the Thirty-first Session of the FAO Conference, Rome, November 2001, FAO, Rome, online: www.fao.org/ DOCREP/MEETING/004/Y2650e/Y2650e01.htm#3 (last accessed January 2010). FAO/IBP (1967) Recommendations of the Technical Conference on the Exploration, Utilization and Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources. Rome, 18–26 September 1967, FAO, Rome, online: www.fao.org/docrep/006/85704E/85704E02.htm#ch21 (last accessed November 2010). FAO / UN Environment Programme / International Board for Plant Genetic Resources (1981) Report of the Technical Conference on Crop Genetic Resources. Rome, 6–10 April 1981, FAO, Rome. Frankel, O.H., and E. Bennet (1970) Genetic Resources in Plants: Their Exploration and Conservation. Blackwell Scientific, Oxford. Frankel, O.H. and J.G. Hawkes (1975) Crops Genetic Resources for Today and Tomorrow. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Harlan, J.R. (1992) Crops and Man. Crop Science Society of America, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL. Holden, J.H.W., and J.T. Williams (1984) Crop Genetic Resources: Conservation and Evaluation. Allen and Unwin, London. International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISI) (1996) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9 (40), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(1997a) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(66), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(1997b) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(68), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(1997c) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(76), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(1998) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(97), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(2000a) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(161), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(2000b) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(167), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(2001a) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(180), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(2001b) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(191), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(2001c) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(197), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(2001d) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(213), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(2002a) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(245), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(2002b) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(246), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). ——(2006) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 9(369), online: www.iisd.ca/vol09/ (last accessed 15 April 2011). International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) (2006) Report of the First Session of the Governing Body of the Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, Madrid, Spain, 12–16 June 2006, Doc. IT/GB-1/06/Report, FAO, Rome, online: ftp://ftp.fao.org/ag/agp/planttreaty/gb1/gb1repe.pdf (last accessed January 2011). ——(2007) Report of the Second Session of the Governing Body of the Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, Rome, 29 October–2 November 2007, Doc. IT/GB-2/ 07/Report, FAO, Rome. ——(2009) Report of the Third Session of the Governing Body of the Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, Tunis, 1–5 June 2009, Doc. IT/GB-3/09/Report, FAO, Rome.

History of the International Treaty negotiations 149

Kate, K., and C. Lasen (1997) ‘The Undertaking Revisited: A Commentary on the Revision of the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture’, Review of European Community and International Environmental Law 6: 284–86. Mekour, M.A. (2002) A Global Instrument on Agrobiodiversity: The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. FAO Legal Papers Online no. 24, January 2002, Rome, Italy. Parry, M.L. (1978) Climatic Change, Agriculture and Settlement. Archon Books, Hamden, CT. Rose, G. (2003) ‘International Law of Sustainable Agriculture in the 21st Century: The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture’, Georgetown International Environmental Law Review 15: 583–632. System-wide Genetic Resources Programme (SGRP) (2010) Booklet of CGIAR Centre Policy Instruments, Guidelines and Statements on Genetic Resources, Biotechnology and Intellectual Property Rights, Version III, August, Rome, online: www.sgrp.cgiar.org/sites/default/files/ Policy_Booklet_Version3.pdf (last accessed January 2011). UN Environment Programme (UNEP) / Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) / Conference of the Parties 2/19 (1995) Decision II/15: FAO Global System for Conservation and Utilization of Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. UNEP/ CBD, Montreal, Canada, online: www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/cop/cop-02/official/cop02-19-en.pdf (last accessed December 2010). Vasey, D.E. (1992) An Ecological History of Agriculture. Iowa State University Press, Ames, IA. World Bank (1992) World Development Report 1992: Development and the Environment. Oxford University Press, New York. World Trade Organization (WTO) (1994) Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, WTO, Geneva, online: www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/04-wto.pdf (last accessed January 2011). Zhu, Y., H. Chen, J. Fan, Y. Wang, N. Li, J. Chen, J. Fan, S. Yang, L. Hu, H. Leung, W. Mew, P.S. Teng, Z. Wang and C.C. Mundt (2000) ‘Genetic Diversity and Disease Control in Rice’, Nature 406: 718–22. Zohari, D. (2000) Domestication of Plants in the Old World: The Origin and Spread of Cultivated Plants in West Asia, Europe and the Nile Valley, Oxford University Press, Oxford.