Reid W V
World Resources Institute, Washington, DC 20006, USA.
J Ethnopharmacol. 1996 Apr;51(1-3):75-92. doi: 10.1016/0378-8741(95)01351-2.
The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity marks a basic change in the international status of genetic resources. Prior to the Convention, these resources were considered to be the "heritage of mankind.' Although the intent of this open access regime was to ensure the widespread availability of genetic resources for agriculture and industry, commercial use of the resources provided no additional economic incentive for conservation by source countries. The Biodiversity Convention corrects this policy failure by establishing that states have sovereign rights over their genetic resources, thereby enabling market incentives to complement various multilateral mechanisms that might directly fund biodiversity conservation. A number of obstacles face countries that are translating this broad right to regulate access into specific policies, laws, and regulations designed to meet conservation and development objectives. A review of these obstacles and of trends in technological development suggest that nations and developing country institutions should take a set of actions to develop access legislation and Material Transfer Agreements, establish biodiversity "cooperatives' and intermediary institutions to facilitate information exchange, develop minimum standards for access legislation, and require that prior informed consent of local communities be obtained by all biodiversity collectors.
1992年的《生物多样性公约》标志着遗传资源国际地位的根本转变。在该公约之前,这些资源被视为“人类遗产”。尽管这种开放获取制度的目的是确保遗传资源广泛用于农业和工业,但资源的商业利用并未为来源国的保护提供额外的经济激励。《生物多样性公约》通过确立各国对其遗传资源拥有主权权利来纠正这一政策失灵,从而使市场激励措施能够补充可能直接资助生物多样性保护的各种多边机制。在将这种广泛的获取监管权转化为旨在实现保护和发展目标的具体政策、法律和法规方面,各国面临一些障碍。对这些障碍以及技术发展趋势的审视表明,各国和发展中国家机构应采取一系列行动,以制定获取立法和材料转让协议,建立生物多样性“合作社”和中介机构以促进信息交流,制定获取立法的最低标准,并要求所有生物多样性采集者获得当地社区的事先知情同意。