|
|
[For the Dutch version, see the ABS Focal Point website.] Welcome to the eighth ABS Focal Point newsletter! In this newsletter we take a look at animal breeding in the context of the EU ABS Regulation, provide an update about the ongoing discussion about digital sequence information (DSI) and ABS, listen to the Nagoya Bites podcast with Martin Brink of the ABS Focal Point as a special guest, and discuss the new FAO survey on ABS country measures. This newsletter contains:
|
|
Animal breeding and the EU ABS RegulationBreeding companies, farmers, and hobby breeders use animals and animal reproductive material in their breeding programmes, with the animals and material sometimes introduced from abroad. When are their activities in scope of the EU ABS Regulation? We take a closer look at ABS legislation on animal breeding in the EU. When determining whether animal breeding activities are subject to access and benefit-sharing rules, it is important to assess if the breeding activities are in scope of the EU ABS Regulation (Regulation (EU) 511/2014). The revised EU Guidance document helps to answer these questions for animal breeding by providing additional information on the scope of the EU ABS Regulation, on what is considered to be utilisation, and on which user obligations apply. In all cases, national ABS rules of the provider country may remain applicable, as well as veterinary and other applicable regulations.
Scope of the EU ABS Regulation
The EU ABS Regulation can only apply when the three following conditions are met:
If all three conditions are met, your activities with genetic resources may be in scope of the Regulation. Breeding animals and animal reproductive material (semen, embryos or eggs, for example) are considered to be genetic resources, as they contain functional units of heredity. More information can be found in the articles ‘EU ABS Regulation: in or out of scope?’ and ‘When am I a user under the EU ABS Regulation?’ Utilisation of genetic resources in breeding In the sense of the EU ABS Regulation, utilisation of genetic resources in animal breeding means research and development on the genetic and/or biochemical composition of the parent breeding animals and/or their progeny. Below, various examples are given of activities which are considered to be utilisation and activities which are not. The texts between brackets at the end of the examples refer to the relevant sections of the revised EU Guidance document. Examples of activities considered to be utilisation
Examples of activities not considered to be utilisation
EU-recognised breeding books As a breeder, it may be beneficial to take part in a breeding programme led by an officially recognised EU breeding society or operation. The products (offspring) of animal breeding may fall outside the scope of the EU ABS Regulation. After a product has been registered in a breeding book of an officially EU recognised breeding organisation as a new line or breed (according to Regulation (EU) 2016/1012), it is considered to be a new genetic resource and its further use in breeding is out of scope of the EU ABS Regulation. However, the breeding of these products may be in scope of the EU ABS Regulation (Annex II section 8.6). Due diligence To demonstrate that you have fulfilled your due diligence obligations as a user of a genetic resource that is in scope of the EU ABS Regulation, you may have to submit a due diligence declaration. A due diligence declaration should be submitted prior to placing a newly developed product (offspring) on the market or registering the product in an EU-recognised breeding book. For more information on due diligence declarations, read: ‘To DECLARE or not to DECLARE: when to submit a due diligence declaration’. For more information on animal breeding and the EU ABS Regulation, see chapter 8 of Annex II and the previously indicated sections of the revised EU Guidance document. |
|
Digital Sequence Information (DSI) negotiations again delayedSince our last update in September, few international developments have taken place in the field of Digital Sequence Information (DSI) on genetic resources. Negotiations on DSI were planned to take place during the resumed, physical session of the OEWG-3 in January 2022. However, due to the development of the COVID-19 pandemic, this meeting had to be postponed, possibly to March 2022. As previously explained, an international discussion is currently taking place on whether the utilisation of DSI on genetic resources should be subject to Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) obligations, and various policy options on possible ways to deal with access to and benefit-sharing from the utilisation of DSI have been developed. During the Third Meeting of the Open-ended Working Group on the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (OEWG-3), held online from 23 August to 3, September 2021, widely diverging views were expressed on access to and benefit-sharing from the utilisation of DSI, ranging from applying the same ABS rules to DSI as to genetic resources, to no monetary benefit-sharing arising from the utilisation of DSI. The EU and its Member States are of the opinion that the principle of "open access" to DSI in the public domain must be preserved, and that any possible future solution for DSI should not lead to hindering this open access nor negatively affect the open science model.
Negotiations in 2022 In the meantime, the Dutch ABS Competent National Authority (Ms Kim van Seeters; k.vanseeters@minlnv.nl) remains interested in hearing the experiences of Dutch stakeholders with DSI and their opinions on the DSI policy options described in previous articles (Policy options for Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) and Digital Sequence Information and Progress on Digital Sequence Information (DSI)). |
|
Nagoya Bites podcast on the EU ABS RegulationA new episode of the podcast ‘Nagoya Bites’, hosted by the German Nagoya Protocol HuB, discusses the EU ABS Regulation with Martin Brink of the Dutch ABS Focal Point as a special guest. In addition to the tools and resources on their very informative website, the German Nagoya Protocol HuB (GNP HuB) also hosts ‘Nagoya Bites’, a podcast for users of genetic resources with bite-sized pieces of information about the Nagoya Protocol and access and benefit-sharing (ABS). Although mainly aimed at researchers in the German academic sector, the podcast could be useful for anyone else involved in research and development on genetic resources. The podcast’s host, Elizabeth Karger from the GNP HuB and the Leibniz Institute DSMZ, interviews a variety of people involved in ABS, ranging from competent authorities and national focal points to users of genetic resources. In the third episode, Martin Brink of the Dutch ABS Focal Point and Elizabeth Karger discuss the scope of the EU ABS Regulation (EU Regulation 511/2014) and how users can comply with their due diligence obligations. In previous episodes, user checks for ABS compliance in Germany and the development of an institutional compliance strategy at Kiel University were discussed. Find the third podcast episode and the previous ones on the page ‘Podcasts’ of the GNP HuB website. |
|
FAO survey on ABS country measuresThe FAO has published a paper that explores the way that countries take into account the specific features of genetic resources for food and agriculture (GRFA) and traditional knowledge associated with GRFA (TKGRFA) in their ABS measures. During the adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1992, it was accepted that genetic resources for food and agriculture (GRFA) were different from other genetic resources and needed special treatment. The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has now published a background paper that explores the way that countries take into account the specific features of genetic resources for food and agriculture (GRFA) and traditional knowledge associated with GRFA (TKGRFA) in their ABS measures. The survey aimed to identify approaches and lessons learned from their implementation, as well as challenges and possible solutions. The main conclusion is that, although countries have a range of options to take into account the specific features of GRFA and TKGRFA in their ABS measures, most measures do not seem to address GRFA in a different way than other genetic resources. Exceptions are plant genetic resources for food and agriculture, which are often treated under the approach of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA). It is also concluded that different approaches exist to take into account the special characteristics of GRFA/TKGRFA in ABS measures, and that there is not a one-size fits all model. A third conclusion is that there is a lack of evidence about the positive or negative effects of these different approaches on users of GRFA, the conservation and sustainable use of GRFA, the sharing of benefits, and food security, while there is also a lack of evidence about how measures have been implemented in practice. Find the paper titled ‘Survey of access and benefit-sharing country measures accommodating the distinctive features of genetic resources for food and agriculture and associated traditional knowledge’ on the ABS Focal Point page ‘Downloads and links’ or through the direct link (PDF). |