a(broad) perspective
Today’s post is the sixth in a series on a recent CPR white paper, Reclaiming Global Environmental Leadership: Why the United States Should Ratify Ten Pending Environmental Treaties. Each month, this series will discuss one of these treaties. Previous posts are here.
International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture Adopted by the Food and Agriculture Organization on November 3, 2001
Entered into Force on June 29, 2004 Number of Parties: 127
Signed by the United States on November 3, 2002 Sent to the Senate on July 7, 2008 Reported favorably by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on December 14, 2010
As the world’s population continues to grow, global production of food must grow with it. The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) predicts that farmers will have to increase production by at least 70 percent by 2050 to satisfy the demand for food due to the world’s growing population, urbanization, and rising incomes. To meet the food demands of a future global population of 9 billion people, significant advances in plant genetics are needed.
The food security of the United States, as well as the world as a whole, depends in large part on the ability of researchers to continue to develop crops with new traits. Plant breeders and farmers rely on the genetic resources of plants around the world as the raw material for new crop varieties. All countries effectively depend on access to the genetic banks of others. However, there is a tension between the desire to ensure that these raw genetic materials remain in the public domain and the belief that, as a matter of fairness and motivating investment and researches, intellectual property rights in the genetic material and its products should be recognized.
To balance this tension, the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture requires each Party to take specified steps to protect its plant genetic resources and promote their sustainable use. It also encourages, but does not require, each Party to protect and promote the rights of farmers and indigenous communities. Most importantly, the Treaty establishes a Multilateral System to facilitate qualified access to plant genetic resources and to pay royalties from the benefits arising from their use.
The Treaty quickly attracted more than 125 Parties, including Canada, France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. In the United States, the Treaty has received consistent bipartisan support. It was negotiated initially by the Clinton Administration and was finalized, signed, and submitted to the Senate by the George W. Bush Administration. The Obama Administration has urged the Senate to give its advice and consent. Ratification would require no changes in U.S. law. Indeed, the United States has for many years freely distributed the information covered by the Treaty through the National Plant Germplasm System within the USDA Agricultural Research Service.
The Treaty helps to ensure the continued development of food and agricultural resources on which the world’s population depends. In addition to the general benefits accruing to the United States as well as other countries from promoting global food security, the establishment of “a stable, legal framework for international germplasm exchanges . . . benefits both research and commercial interests in the United States,” in the words of Kerri-Ann Jones, Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs. The Treaty has received support from major U.S. stakeholders, including the American Seed Trade Association, National Farmers Union, the American Soybean Association, the National Association of Wheat Growers, the National Corn Growers Association, the Biotechnology Industry Organization, and the Intellectual Property Owners of America.
The widespread support and benefits from ratification provide ample reasons for the United States to adopt the Plant Genetic Resources Treaty. The Senate should give its advice and consent without delay.
Showing 2,834 results
| July 26, 2012
a(broad) perspective Today’s post is the sixth in a series on a recent CPR white paper, Reclaiming Global Environmental Leadership: Why the United States Should Ratify Ten Pending Environmental Treaties. Each month, this series will discuss one of these treaties. Previous posts are here. International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture Adopted […]
Rena Steinzor | July 25, 2012
CPR Member Scholar John Knox has been appointed the U.N. Human Rights Council’s first Independent Expert on Human Rights and the Environment. The position was created in March with a mandate to study the relationship of human rights and the environment, and prepare a series of reports to the Human Rights Council over the next […]
Robert Adler | July 24, 2012
The relentless heat wave that has plagued much of the country this summer, along with an accompanying paucity of rain, have plunged vast swaths of the United States into the most crippling drought in decades. Corn crops and now soy crops are withering, and commodity prices have risen dramatically. That could signal a sharp rise […]
Daniel Farber | July 23, 2012
Cross-posted from Legal Planet. On Tuesday, the D.C. Circuit decided American Petroleum Institute (API) v. EPA, an interesting case dealing with nitrogen oxide (NO2) levels. The standard is supposed to include a margin of safety.Under the Clean Air Act, EPA sets National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for airborne substances that endanger human health or […]
Thomas McGarity | July 19, 2012
The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 is one of the surviving monuments of the era of progressive social legislation (extending from the mid-1960s through the mid-1970s) during which Congress enacted the nation’s foundational health, safety and environmental laws. That statute empowered the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to write safety and health […]
Aimee Simpson | July 18, 2012
Yesterday, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced that it would amend an existing food additive regulation to prohibit the use of Bisphenol A (BPA) in “infant feeding bottles (baby bottles) and spill-proof cups, including their closures and lids, designed to help train babies and toddlers to drink from cups (sippy cups).” BPA, a […]
Ben Somberg | July 18, 2012
The White House’s message on its program for retrospectively reviewing existing regulations just shifted a little further away from recognizing the need for protective regulations for health, safety, and the environment. First the White House said it was interested in “expanding” certain existing regulations, if appropriate. Then it said it was interested in hearing ideas […]
Daniel Farber | July 17, 2012
Cross-posted from Legal Planet. In some situations, voluntary efforts leads other people to join in, whereas in others, it encourages them to hold back. There’s a similar issue about climate mitigation efforts at the national, regional, or state level. Do these efforts really move the ball forward? Or are they counterproductive, because other places increase their […]
Alexandra Klass | July 13, 2012
In a CPRBlog post in May 2011, I discussed the lawsuits filed on behalf of children against all 50 states and several federal agencies alleging that these governmental entities have violated the common law public trust doctrine by failing to limit greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change. The suits were filed by Our […]