In Brief

CIVIL SOCIETY PROTESTS PATENTING OF NON-GM SEEDS AND FARM ANIMALS

A coalition of global environmental and development NGOs and farmers' organisations recently launched an initiative against a push by the European Patent Office (EPO) to broaden the scope of patentability by allowing patents for seeds, conventional plant varieties and animal species.

Launched on 26 March, the "Global Appeal Against Patents on Seeds and Farm Animals" is directed at the EPO, and seeks to raise public discussion and political pressure ahead of a key test case this year. Greenpeace, Swissaid and the Berne Declaration, along with farmers' groups from Brazil, India, Argentina and Italy are among the sponsors of the initiative. It aims to provide a voice to farmers, who are expressing their disbelief at the way intellectual property rights are affecting their livelihoods.

Under the European Directive on Biotechnological Inventions, plant and animal varieties are not patentable. However, the scope of patentability has been broadened by provisions that grant patents to inventions that cover more than one variety or species. This means that multinational corporations are increasingly able to obtain patents on conventional plants, in addition to genetically modified plants, and to control the market in plants and seeds. These practises restrict farmers' rights to save, exchange and sell seeds that they have cultivated over generations.

A controversial patent on broccoli (EP1069819B1), granted to Plant Bioscience Ltd by the EPO in 2002, has been challenged by plant breeding companies Limagrain and Syngenta. The case is due to be heard by the Enlarged Board of Appeal (the highest court within the EPO) later this year, and is seen as a test case for the validity of patents on conventional seeds and breeding methods. Since Syngenta itself is applying for similar patents -- for instance in relation to rice -- the case is expected to clarify rather than reject the criteria for patentability of conventional seeds.

The organisations behind the Global Appeal argue that the broccoli patent should be revoked, as the patent does not refer to a genetically modified plant but rather covers conventional seeds and breeding methods. This contravenes the European Patent Convention (while such patents are granted in the US). If the broccoli case became precedent-setting, a mere genetic description of a plant or animal would suffice for patenting a plant or animal as well as the methods for their production.

The initiative further rejects the patenting life and urges policy makers and patent offices to stop granting patents on gene sequences or methods for the conventional breeding of plants and animals. The Global Appeal also urges companies not to apply for any patents of this kind.

Additional resources

The Global Appeal against patents on conventional seeds and farm animals is available at http://www.no-patents-on-seeds.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1&Itemid=27.

ICTSD reporting.

CHINA TIGER BREEDERS URGE END TO TRADE BAN

Tiger breeders in China are lobbying for the legalisation of domestic sales of tiger parts -- a deeply controversial issue that has outraged conservationists.

Chinese traditional medicine makes use of tiger parts for a number of remedies, and the country used to be the largest consumer. Chinese authorities stopped the sale of tiger parts in 1993. However, there are ca 4000 tigers that have been bred on farms. Following the 1993 ban, the breeders opened their facilities to the public in the form of tiger parks. However, the breeders are making economic losses and are now calling for the legalisation of the sale of tiger parts.

"If legal channels exist and patients can legally get their wanted materials of tiger bone in their medicine, the motivations to purchase tiger bones from illegal sources can be greatly minimised," said Wang Ligang, general manager of the Heilongjiang Siberian Tiger Park said on 29 March.

Environmental groups disagree. They argue that any legal trade would lead to great increases in illegal trade of the critically endangered species. Animal rights activists further claim that the tigers that are bred have no chance of natural survival, and the practice should be banned. Any tiger parts coming from the parks would further be more expensive than those from illegal sources.

"Reopening any legal trade in tiger parts would be an enormous step backwards for tiger conservation," said Leigh Henry of wildlife monitoring network TRAFFIC. "A legal market in China would muddy the waters for enforcement officials and provide smugglers with a convenient cover for laundering wild tigers since farmed and wild products are indistinguishable," he added.

TRAFFIC recently released a report on the potential effects of lifting the domestic sales ban on tiger products, entitled "Taming the Tiger Trade: China's Markets for Wild and Captive Tiger Products Since the 1993 Domestic Trade Ban." There are only 2500-7000 tigers left in the wild, mostly in India.

India, for its part, is looking to strengthen its legislation to combat illegal sale of tiger parts, as required under the Convention for International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).

Additional resources

The TRAFFIC report "Taming the Tiger Trade: China's Markets for Wild and Captive Tiger Products Since the 1993 Domestic Trade Ban" is available at http://www.traffic.org/content/842.pdf.

"China to farm tigers, India wakes up," TIMES OF INDIA, 30 March 2007; "China Breeders Urge Lifting of Tiger Parts Ban," REUTERS, 30 March 2007; "China Urged to Uphold Domestic Tiger Trade Ban," ENS, 13 March 2007; "Lifting Chinese tiger trade ban a death sentence for wild tigers say WWF and TRAFFIC," WWF RELEASE, 12 March 2007; "Wild Tigers Face A New Threat From China," THE STRAITS TIMES, 21 March 2007.

G-8 ENVIRONMENT MINISTERS SET STAGE FOR HIGH-LEVEL MEET

The environment ministers from the G-8 industrialised nations as well as the five largest emerging economies -- Brazil, Mexico, China, India and South Africa -- met in Potsdam, Germany from 15-17 March. While they did not reach any binding outcomes, they agreed a number of measures to stop biodiversity loss, and set the stage for heads-of-state discussions on climate change at the G-8 Summit, to be held in Heiligendamm from 6-8 June this year.

On biodiversity, the group decided to initiative a global study outlining the costs of biodiversity protection of loss, similar to the Stern review detailing the costs related to climate change. They also agreed, among other, to strengthen scientific research and step up biodiversity financing.

Regarding climate change, German environment minister Sigmar Gabriel said "Potsdam was another important step for the climate year 2007." He added that "We have discussed with the most important international partners, in a very open and constructive atmosphere, how we can make progress in the climate negotiations. After this meeting, I am confident that we will be able to enter into comprehensive negotiations on the future of climate policy at the end of this year in Bali."

Germany, France, the UK, Italy, Japan, Canada, the US and Russia make up the G-8 states. Germany heads the G-8 this year.

Additional resources

The Potsdam Initiative: Biodiversity 2010.

"Environment Ministers Agree on a Potsdam Initiative on Biological Diversity and Identify a Common Base for Climate Protection," G8 RELEASE, 17 March 2007; "G8 + 5 Environment Ministers Confer on Climate, Biodiversity," ENS, 16 March 2007; "Climate on the World's Agenda," DER SPEIGEL, 16 March 2007; "G8 assesses cost of species loss," BBC, 16 March 2007.