Find literature: Global level and conceptual work
Here, you will find a list of relevant peer-reviewed articles and books, as well as central reports on Farmers' Rights that apply a global focus or conceptual perspective. The resources are organized chronologically, the newest addition first.
Please contact us here if you have information about high-quality literature which you deem relevant for this overview.
Andersen, R. (2023). Synthesis Note for the Global Symposium on Farmers’ Rights, New Delhi
Download the pdf here (PDF, 256KB)
This paper was commissioned by the Secretariat of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (Plant Treaty) as a background document for the Global Symposium on Farmers’ Rights in New Delhi, September 2023. It provides a synthesis of the research on farmer-managed seed systems, community seed banks and Farmers’ Rights.
Farmer-managed seed systems are essential for present and future food security, especially given the implications of climate change for agriculture, as small-scale farmers in many countries of the Global South rely on them for their seed and propagating material and thus for their seed and food security. Nevertheless, farmer-managed seed systems are largely neglected in policies and legislation, and thus their potential contributions to food and nutrition security and management of crop genetic diversity are under-developed. Community seed banks, when well-managed, represent platforms for the development of farmer-managed seed systems and are important contributions to food security. However, policies and legislation are often not supportive of community seed banks, making it difficult for them to reach out, become financially sustainable and to scale up. Supporting farmer-managed seed systems and community seed banks through policies, laws, effective implementation and adequate financial and technical support are ways to unfold the potentials of these systems and initiatives and implement Article 9 of the Plant Treaty on Farmers’ Rights. The paper ends by proposing and agenda for future work.
Kenner, D., and Segal, R. (2023). Sowing the seeds of poverty. How the World Bank harms poor farmers.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 3MB).
This CAFOD report shows how the World Bank is promoting regulations and laws that support the expansion of commercial markets for hybrid seeds and chemical inputs like fertilisers and pesticides in Africa. Our research shows how this approach does not support poor smallholder farmers’ diverse needs and is not effective in reducing poverty or increasing food security. We outline alternative models, based on agroecological principles, that are more appropriate for supporting farmers to build resilient livelihoods. We are calling on the World Bank to stop promoting a narrow ‘one size fits all’ model and to start supporting a range of approaches that are vital for tackling poverty and building sustainable food systems.
Golay, C., Peschard, K., De Schutter, O., Elver, H., Esquinas, J., & Fakhri, M. (2022). Implementing the International Treaty (ITPGRFA) in light of the UNDROP
Download the pdf here (PDF, 331KB).
This Briefing Paper explains how the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas (UNDROP) complements the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA), in particular its Article 9 on Farmers’ Rights, and how their joint implementation is essential for the realization of farmers’ and peasants’ rights.
It is demonstrated that UNDROP: 1) reaffirms as well as further elaborates on the scope of peasants’ right to seeds and related State obligations; 2) firmly positions peasants’ rights, including their right to seeds, as human rights that take precedence over other legal norms; 3) brings to bear accountability mechanisms linked with defining peasants’ rights as human rights guarantees; and 4) clearly defines the role and obligations of UN agencies.
Wynberg, R., Andersen, R., Laird, S., Kusena, K., Prip, C., & Westengen, O. T. (2021). Farmers' Rights and Digital Sequence Information: Crisis or Opportunity to Reclaim Stewardship Over Agrobiodiversity?
Wynberg, R., Andersen, R., Laird, S., Kusena, K., Prip, C., & Westengen, O. T. (2021). Farmers' Rights and Digital Sequence Information: Crisis or Opportunity to Reclaim Stewardship Over Agrobiodiversity? Frontiers in Plant Science, 12, 686728–686728.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 1MB).
This paper explores the relationship between farmers' rights, as recognized in the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, and the dematerialization of genetic resources. The concepts of "stewardship" and "ownership" are used to emphasize the need to move away from viewing agrobiodiversity as a commodity that can be owned, toward a strengthened, proactive and expansive stewardship approach that recognizes plant genetic resources for food and agriculture as a public good which should be governed as such. The relationship between digital sequence information and different elements of farmers' rights are analyzed to compare implications for the governance of digital sequence information. Two possible parallel pathways are presented, the first envisaging an enhanced multilateral system that includes digital sequence information and which promotes and enhances the realization of farmers' rights; and the second a more radical approach that folds together concepts of stewardship, farmers' rights, and open source science. The authors suggest that farmers' rights may well be the linchpin for finding fair and equitable solutions for digital sequence information beyond the bilateral and transactional approach that has come to characterize access and benefit sharing under the Convention on Biological Diversity. Existing policy uncertainties could be seized as an unexpected but serendipitous opportunity to chart an alternative and visionary pathway for the rights of farmers and other custodians of plant genetic resources.
Adhikari, K., Bikundo, E., Chacko, X., Chapman, S., Humphries, F., Johnson, H., Keast, E., Lawson, C., Malbon, J., Robinson, D., Rourke, M., Sanderson, J., & Tranter, K. (2021). What Should Farmers' Rights Look Like? The Possible Substance of a Right
Donwload the pdf here (PDF, 880KB).
Farmers' Rights formally appeared in the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) as a means of recognising the past, present, and future contributions of farmers in conserving, improving, and making available the plant genetic materials that are important for food and agriculture. Discussions have been underway under the auspices of the ITPGRFA's Governing Body with the recent Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group on Farmers' Rights (AHTEG-FR) collecting together views, experiences, and best practices to produce an inventory and options for encouraging, guiding, and promoting the realisation of Farmers' Rights. While this is useful, this article reports on the outcomes of a workshop that applied a different methodology. Our purpose was to identify what could be and should be the substance of Farmers' Rights so that the policy substance drives the implementation rather than the AHTEG-FR's retro-fitting Farmers' Rights to existing views, best practices, and measures. The contribution of this article is to develop and set out a list of possible substantive Farmers' Rights as a contribution and foundation for further consultations and negotiations.
FAO. (2021). Farmers’ Rights – Module V
FAO. (2021). Farmers’ Rights – Module V (Second edition). Rome.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 17MB).
This is the fifth educational module in a series of training materials for the implementation of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. Lesson 1 describes the foundation of Farmers’ Rights, and the critical role played by farmers and indigenous communities in the conservation and sustainable management of PGRFA. It includes short narratives of the negotiations that led to adoption of Farmers’ Rights, as contained Article 9 of the International Treaty and how the concept has been enshrined in other international processes. Lesson 2 describes the different measures that can be undertaken to promote and protect Farmers’ Rights and its linkages with other International Treaty’s provisions on conservation and sustainable use of PGRFA. Lesson 3 describes some ideas and practical activities implemented by different stakeholders which demonstrate some of the ways in which the provisions of Farmers’ Rights can be put into practice, with varying degree of success.
Girard, F., and Frison, C. (2021). From farmers’ rights to the rights of peasants: seeds and the biocultural turn
In light of the ongoing agrobiodiversity erosion process, the article delves into the history of crop genetic resources governing instruments to show how the international agrobiodiversity regime has evolved from a limited appreciation of the contribution of farmers/peasants to a broader recognition of the critical role indigenous peoples, local communities, and farmers play in shaping and cultivating agrobiodiversity. The genesis and development of various international soft and hard law instruments that make up this international agrobiodiversity regime are explored. The article focuses on the period stretching from the 1983 Food and Agriculture Organization’s International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, to the 2018 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas. The reflexion is organised around three lines: 1. the advent of the concept of “farmers’ rights”, 2. The issue of farmers/peasants in the aftermath of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the crystallisation of debates around incentivising and driving on-farm maintenance of crop genetic resources, 3. The new framework offered by biocultural approaches to rethink peasants’ rights.
Vernooy, R., Mulesa, T. H., Gupta, A., Jony, J. A., Koffi, K. E., Mbozi, H., Singh, P. B., Shrestha, P., Tjikana, T. T., & Wakkumbure, C. L. K. (2020). The role of community seed banks in achieving farmers' rights
Download the pdf here (PDF, 1MB).
This article addresses the question of how Community Seed Banks (CSBs) contribute to the establishment of the farmers’ rights defined by the ITPGRFA. After explaining the origin, main definitions and implementation modalities of farmers’ rights, four case studies from Côte d’Ivoire, India, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh are presented. The article concludes with the statement, that CSBs can be an effective platform for realising farmers’ rights as defined by the ITPGRFA and, in some cases, in broader terms. They can be instrumental in establishing comprehensive farmers’ rights, although the degree and depth may vary according to the national context. The need for mainstreaming CSBs in national policies and learning from experiences in other countries is emphasized.
Ching, L. L. (2020). Focus on Plant Variety Protection: A compilation of Selected Literature on the Impact of the UPOV Convention, Alternative sui generis PVP Laws and the effect of Farmers’ Rigths.
Dowloand the PDF here (PDF, 988KB)
This publication compiles selected literature on the issue of plant variety protection (PVP) and especially on the relevance and impact of the 1991 Convention of the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) in the context of developing countries. The aim is to inform policymakers with robust studies and evidence, so that policy is not made in a void or absence of knowledge.
The first key aspect the compilation focuses on is the impacts of the UPOV Convention and PVP laws derived there from. Secondly, the publication highlights the effectiveness and implementation of sui generis regimes and includes some analysis of laws that are seen to be in line with UPOV 1991. Thirdly, the compilation also includes literature that examines Farmers’ Rights, particularly the right to save, use exchange and sell farm-saved seed and propagating material. The final aspect of the compilation includes literature on what a sui generis PVP regime that attempts to balance Farmers’ Rights and breeders’ rights could look like, what factors may influence policy and legal developments, and what options are available for countries given their international obligations.
Andersen, R. (2017). ‘Stewardship’ or ‘Ownership’. How to realize farmers’ rights?
Over the last ten millennia, farmers from all cultivated regions of the world have contributed to developing the enormous diversity of crop genetic diversity that is available today. The enormous diversity of food crops available today has developed through careful selection of seeds and propagating material and exchange over short and long distances, in close interaction with nature. The stewardship approach describes the idea that agro-biodiversity as a principle belongs to the common heritage of mankind and that it should be shared for the common good as part of the public domain. As such, the stewardship approach can be said to have been the dominant rationale throughout the history of agriculture until the advent of intellectual property rights. The ownership approach evolved when interests in the commercial use of genetic resources increased along with the growing economic stakes of biotechnologies in the second half of the last century, followed by demands for intellectual property rights to protect and promote inventions.
Correa, C. (2017). Implementing Farmers Rights relating to seeds
Correa, C. (2017). Implementing Farmers Rights relating to seeds. South Centre Research Paper.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 962KB).
The concept of Farmers’ Rights recognized the role of farmers as custodians of biodiversity and helped to draw attention to the need to preserve practices that are essential for a sustainable agriculture. This paper examines one particular aspect of such rights, perhaps the most controversial. It deals with the component of farmers’ rights referred to the use, exchange and sale of farm-seed seeds. Although that concept was initially introduced –in 1989– with the aim of balancing the rights of farmers as breeders and of commercial plant breeders, a specific reference to the rights relating to seeds was only introduced upon the conclusion of the ITPGRFA in 2001.
Golay, C. (2017). The right to seeds and intellectual property rights.
Golay, C. (2017). The right to seeds and intellectual property rights (PDF, 138KB)
Dowload the PDF here (PDF, 138KB)
Key messages
For over 10,000 years, peasants have freely saved, selected, exchanged and sold seeds, as well as used and reused them to produce food. Today, these customary practices remain essential to peasants’ right to food, as well as to global food security and biodiversity. But the protection of intellectual property rights over seeds at the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV), and the promotion of commercial seed systems have posed serious challenges to the protection of these customary practices, and to the maintenance of peasant seed systems and agrobiodiversity.
In the great majority of states, seed laws and regulations have been designed with the aim to further develop the agricultural industry, and peasants seed systems have been largely neglected. In Europe, for example, national seed catalogues and the European Union (EU) Common Catalogue have been designed to promote industrial seeds and agriculture standards, largely excluding peasant seeds, and in a number of countries, peasant seed selling has been outlawed. This has discouraged, and in some cases hindered the continuation of peasant agricultural activities.
To respond to these challenges, among others, the United Nations (UN) in 2018 adopted the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants and Other People Working in Rural Areas (UNDROP), in which the right to seeds is recognized. According to the UNDROP, all states shall, inter alia, ‘support peasant seed systems, and promote the use of peasant seeds and agrobiodiversity’; and ‘ensure that seed policies, plant variety protection and other intellectual property laws, certification schemes and seed marketing laws respect and take into account the rights, needs and realities of peasants’.
The implementation of the UNDROP represents a unique opportunity to rebalance the lack of support given to peasant seed systems worldwide, compared to the support given to industrial seed systems in recent decades. This is essential for the protection of the lives and livelihoods of hundreds of millions of peasants, as well as in the interest of all for the preservation of crop biodiversity.
In accordance with the priority to be given to human rights norms in international and national laws, reflected in the UNDROP, states shall ensure that their laws and policies, as well as the international agreements to which they are party, including on intellectual property, do not lead to violations, but to a better protection of peasants’ right to seeds.
Clancy, E., and Vernooy, R. (2016). Realizing farmers’ rights through community-based agricultural biodiversity management
Download the pdf here (PDF, 1MB).
This brief has been prepared by Bioversity International for delegates to the 2016 Global Consultation on Farmers’ Rights. The brief aims to raise awareness among delegates and Contracting Parties to the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) of the crucial contribution that a community-based approach to the conservation and sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity can make to realizing farmers’ rights and empowering men and women smallholder farmers. The research provides evidence that farmers’ rights can be effectively implemented through a community-based approach that is responsive to local conditions and builds on traditional knowledge and practices of farming communities.
Halewood, M. (Ed.) (2016). Farmers' Crop Varieties and Farmers' Rights: Challenges in Taxonomy and Law
Over the last 50 years there has been a growing appreciation of the important role that farmers play in the development and conservation of crop genetic diversity, and the contribution of that diversity to agro-ecosystem resilience and food security. This book examines policies that aim to increase the share of benefits that farmers receive when others use the crop varieties that they have developed and managed, i.e., ‘farmers varieties’. In so doing, the book addresses two fundamental questions. The first question is ‘how do farmer management practices – along with other factors such as environment and the breeding systems of plants – affect the evolution and maintenance of discrete farmers’ varieties?’ The second question is ‘how can policies that depend on being able to identify discrete plant varieties accommodate the agricultural realities associated with the generation, use and maintenance of farmers’ varieties?’ This focus on discreteness is topical because there are no fixed, internationally recognized taxonomic or legal definitions of farmers’ varieties. And that presents a challenge when developing policies that involve making specific, discrete farmers’ varieties the subject of legal rights or privileges.
The book includes contributions from a wide range of experts including agronomists, anthropologists, geneticists, biologists, plant breeders, lawyers, development practitioners, activists and farmers. It includes case studies from Asia, Africa, Latin America and Europe where, in response to a diversity of contributing factors, there have been efforts to develop policies that provide incentives or rewards to farmers as stewards of farmers’ varieties in ways that are sensitive to the cultural, taxonomic and legal complexities involved. The book situates these initiatives in the context of the evolving discourse and definition of ‘farmers' rights’, presenting insights for future policy initiatives.
Ling, C. Y., et al., (2016). Farmers’ Rights to Participate in Decision - making - implementing Article 9.2 (c) of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources, working paper, APBREBES.
Download the PDF here (PDF, 4MB)
The right of farmers to participate in making decisions, at the national level, on matters related to the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture (PGRFA) is recognized in Article 9.2(c) of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (the Treaty). It is a prerequisite for the full and effective implementation of Farmers’ Rights. This paper describes the provisions of the Plant Treaty in this regard, identifies challenges encountered in implementing these provisions, highlights existing norms and good practices and proposes recommendations in this regard.
Christinck, A., and Tvedt, M. (2015). The UPOV Convention, Farmers’ Rights and Human Rights. An Integrated Assessment of Potentially Conflicting Legal Frameworks
Download the pdf here (PDF, 2MB).
This study was commissioned by GIZ on behalf of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). It aimed to assess whether plant breeder’s rights (as defined by the 1991 Act of the UPOV Convention) support the progressive realization of the right to food and other human rights; whether they support the realization of Farmers’ Rights enshrined in the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA); and whether UPOV-based plant variety protection laws can be considered appropriate for the agricultural conditions of 'developing countries'.
Shashikant S., and Meienberg, F. (2015). Report. International Contradictions on Farmers’ Rights: The interrelations between the International Treaty, its Article 9 on Farmers’ Rights, and Relevant Instruments of UPOV and WIPO
Download the pdf here (PDF, 1MB).
An Analysis of How UPOV and WIPO affect farmers rights. “Farmers’ rights” is a core component of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (hereafter referred to as “the Treaty”), and as such its full implementation is a prerequisite for achieving the Treaty’s objectives. It is enshrined in the Treaty’s Article 9. However, there is much concern that the activities of UPOV and WIPO are not supportive of farmers’ rights, and even undermine those rights, thereby hindering the implementation of the Treaty’s provisions.
Haugen, H. (2014). The Right to Food, Farmers’ Rights and Intellectual Property Rights: Can Competing Law Be Reconciled?
This chapter analyzes the relationships between three fields of law: intellectual property rights, the right to food and farmers’ rights. It reviews the development of the right to food under international law, from its recognition in the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), to the more recent development of tools to advise states on how to best promote the realization of the right to food, including when states are negotiating trade and investment agreements with chapters on intellectual property protection. It then explores the emerging issue of farmers’ rights, with particular reference to the detailed requirements to realize farmers’ rights in the 2001 International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA). While acknowledging that the World Trade Organization’s 1994 Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) sets high standards of intellectual property protection, which can sometimes be in conflict with rights held under the ICESCR and ITPGRFA, the chapter nevertheless argues that there are several provisions of the TRIPS Agreement that states could make use of in order to expand their policy space, and thereby better ensure the rights of food producers. It illustrates examples of states using this policy space, such as the Indian Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act of 2001. Ultimately, this chapter argues that tensions between TRIPS, on the one hand, and the ICESCR and the ITPGRFA, on the other, can only be reduced by a more coherent implementation of the relevant treaties.
Winge, T. and Andersen, R. (Eds.) (2013). Realising farmers' rights to crop genetic resources : success stories and best practices
This book shows the necessity of realizing Farmers' Rights for poverty alleviation and food security, the practical possibilities of doing so, and the potential gains for development and society at large. It provides decision-makers and practitioners with a conceptual framework for understanding Farmers’ Rights and success stories showing how each of the elements of Farmers' Rights can be realized in practice.
The success stories have brought substantial achievements as regards one or more of the four elements of Farmers' Rights: the rights of farmers to save, use, exchange and sell farm-saved seed; the protection of traditional knowledge; benefit- sharing; and participation in decision-making.
This does not mean that these examples are perfect. Challenges encountered on the way are conveyed and offer important lessons. The stories represent different regions and localities, including Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America, as well as various categories of stakeholders and types of initiatives and policies.
Andersen, R., and Winge, T. (2012). Farmers’ Rights Project: Furthering agrobiodiversity as a means of poverty alleviation
This short article presents the Farmers' Rights Project and some of its research results, with a particular emphasis at the way agrobiodiversity can serve as a means to alleviate poverty.
Da Vià, E. (2012). Seed Diversity, Farmers’ Rights, and the Politics of Re-peasantization
Download the pdf here (PDF, 250KB).
Over the last decade, the practice of using and exchanging locally adapted seeds has become a focal site of grass-roots organizing in the rural areas of Europe, spear-headed by the mobilization of seed networks in different countries and regions. Countering the restrictive scope of existing seed regulations, these networks are composed of family farmers, collectives, farmers movements, researchers, agronomists, and non-governmental organizations that are actively engaged in the development of farmer-based seed systems as a source of both peasant autonomy and environmental sustainability. Within the context of a broader struggle to overcome the multiple crises of the agro-industrial model, the reproduction of farm-saved seeds is closely associated with the promotion of agro-ecological alternatives that enhance integration, resilience, and livelihood security. Correspondingly, the goal to diversify food and seed systems puts renewed emphasis on the role of peasant innovation and localized consumption in processes of agrarian transformation. Combining sustainable farming methods, participatory forms of knowledge and de-commodified circuits of exchange, these initiatives reassert the centrality of the social and ecological role of agriculture in Europe beyond the reductionism of market-based approaches to rural change.
Gautam, P., Singh, A.K., Srivastava, M.K., & Singh, P. (2012). Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights: A Review
Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and its application and expansion to agriculture has recently attracted global attention. Consequent upon the establishment of international agreements/institutional mechanisms such as the CBD and the WTO, and further, signing of ITPGRFA, the growing importance and the global scope of IPR in agriculture have been well realized and recognized. Most of the countries as members of World Trade Organization (WTO) are required to harmonize their related instruments with the TRIPS Agreement. It required that member countries enact/amend their domestic laws to provide for intellectual property rights (IPRs) in one form or the other in all fields of agricultural technology. Developing countries are currently attempting to fulfill the obligations of these international agreements by evolving new IPR regimes that simultaneously protect the rights of breeders and farmers. India’s PPV & FR Act is significant both in the domestic and international context. The paper highlights various conventions/treaties/agreements affecting agricultural innovation systems and legal mechanisms adopted in developed and developing countries for such innovations. It also reviews the achievements / progress made in effective implementation of various provisions of the Indian legislation.
Andersen, R., and Winge, T. (2011). The 2010 Global Consultations on Farmers' Rights: Results from an Email-based Survey
Download the pdf here (PDF, 1MB).
This report presents the results of the e-mail based survey on Farmers' Rights carried out in 2010 as part of the Global Consultations on Farmers' Rights. The consultations were organized in response to Resolution 6/2009 of the Governing Body of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, which called for regional workshops on Farmers' Rights. A total of 131 respondents from 36 countries participated. These were sorted into the groups 'farmers', 'the public sector', 'seed industry', 'NGOs' and 'others', as well as regional groups. Through the questionnaire the respondents shared their views and experiences on the realization of Farmers. Rights, including achievements, obstacles and options. The prime concern among most participants was the need for guidance, support and capacity building to develop or adjust national legislation, policies, strategies and programs for the realization of Farmers' Rights.
Andersen, R., and Winge, T, with contributions from Torheim, B. B. (2011). Global Consultations on Farmers' Rights in 2010
Download the pdf here (PDF, 1MB).
This report presents the results and proceedings of the Global Consultations on Farmers. Rights carried out in 2010. Consisting of both an e-mail based survey and an international consultation conference with regional components held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, the consultations were organized as a response to Resolution 6/2009 of the Governing Body of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, which called for regional workshops on Farmers. Rights. In the two phases of the consultations, a total of 171 experts and stakeholders from 46 countries in Africa, Asia, the Near East, Latin America and the Caribbean, North America and Europe, and from farmer organizations, government institutions, the seed industry, NGOs, IGOs, research institutions and other relevant groups participated. The participants shared their views and experiences and discussed obstacles and options to the realization of Farmers. Rights. The consultation conference resulted in recommendations from the regional groups as well as joint recommendations from the conference. The prime concern among most participants is the need for guidance, support and capacity building to develop or adjust national legislation, policies, strategies and programs for the realization of Farmers' Rights.
de la Perrière, R. A. B. and Kastler, G. (Eds.) (2011). Seeds and Farmers’ Rights: how international regulations affect farmer seeds
This dossier aims to shed some light on the questions of how international regulations affect farmer seeds, on what the threats to farmers’ rights over their seeds are and what are the foundation of food sovereignty? The analysis focuses principally on the situation in the European Union, but most of the examples used are taken from the French-speaking world, most notably French-speaking Africa. The dossier is intended as a tool and is the result of discussions within the European Farmer Seeds Network. It provides a diverse array of information and aims to help the community of participants and users of farmer seeds to understand today’s most important issues, whether they are farmers, gardeners, nursery workers, artisan seed producers, people who work with farmer varieties in their livelihoods (bakers, cooks), researchers, park employees or consumer groups. The hope of the publishers is that the dossier will clarify the matters for as many people as possible, increase participation in debates on seed regulation and help people to act with regard to the issue of user rights to seed.
Andersen, R. (2010). An issue of survival
Andersen, R. (March 24, 2010). An issue of survival. D+C, No. 03 2010, Volume 51.
This essay discusses the erosion of agricultural biodiversity. It argues that this trend is putting the ability of future generations to feed themselves at risk, and that in order to reverse the trend, new policies must be implemented worldwide. One of its main points is that this is especially important because it is the poorest farmers that are the stewards of genetic diversity.
Andersen, R. (2009). Information paper on Farmers’ Rights submitted by the Fridtjof Nansen Institute, Norway, based on the Farmers’ Rights Project
Resolution 2/2007 of the Governing Body of the International Treaty encourages Contracting Parties and relevant organizations to submit their views and experiences on the implementation of Farmers’ Rights, as set out in Article 9. In response to this, the Fridtjof Nansen Institute has prepared an information paper based on the research findings of the Farmers' Rights Project. This input paper is a contribution to the negotiations on Farmers' Rights during the Third Session of the Governing Body of the International Treaty in Tunisia. The information paper summarizes the knowledge of the project to date on views and experiences with the implementation of Farmers’ Rights globally, noting existing gaps and needs. After a brief introduction to the research and other activities of the Farmers’ Rights Project, the paper proceeds to views on the contents of Farmers’ Rights and experiences with their realization. It further outlines various avenues towards systemic implementation of Farmers’ Rights according to needs and priorities at the national level. Finally, remaining gaps and needs are identified and recommendations for the Governing Body are presented.
Kneen, B. (2009). Farmers’ rights and plant breeders’ rights
Download the pdf here (PDF, 977KB).
In this chapter from his new book, “The Tyranny of Rights”, a comprehensive critique of the concept and language of rights, Canadian author Brewster Kneen argues that while the assertion of Farmers’ Rights may be intended to create the legal space for farmers to maintain their traditional practices of selecting, saving, and replanting seeds from year to year, these traditional ‘custodial responsibilities’ were never contingent on being granted as ‘rights’ by any authority. Only very recently have states and corporations endeavoured to take control of these traditional practices and replace them with corporately owned hybrids, patented varieties and genetically engineered seeds and outlaw the traditional and essential practices of farmers. Thus Farmers’ Rights are functionally a reactive claim for an exception to the capitalist laws of private property for profit that does not contest the legitimacy of such privatizing claims.
Santilli, J. F. D. R. (2009). Agrobiodiversity and Law
This study looks at the impact of the legal system on agrobiodiversity (or agricultural biodiversity) – the diversity of agricultural species, varieties and ecosystems – and at the implementation of farmers' rights in Brazil. The first part of the study discusses the origins of agriculture and the different farming systems in the world, and the history of agriculture in Brazil, from the pre-Columbian period through modern times, highlighting the diversity of agricultural systems. Using an interdisciplinary approach, it takes up the (emerging) concept of agrobiodiversity and its interfaces with food security, nutrition, health, environmental sustainability, climate change and agro-fuels. After these initial concepts are presented, the study analyzes the impacts on agrobiodiversity of the following legal instruments: the Seeds Law, the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants, the Plant Breeders’ Rights Law, the Convention on Biological Diversity, the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture and Provisional Measure 2186-16/2001 (on access to genetic resources). It concludes with a discussion on the forms of implementation of farmers’ rights in Brazil, on the laws already adopted in other countries and regions (India, Africa, European Union, Italy and Switzerland), on the interfaces between the free software movement, the “commons” movement and seeds, as well as the legal instruments to protect cultural heritage and their application in farming systems, protected areas and geographical indications.
United Nations. (2009). The right to food. Seed policies and the right to food: enhancing agrobiodiversity and encouraging innovation
Download the pdf here (PDF, 123KB).
This report explores how States could implement seed policies that contribute to the full realization of human rights. It identifies how research and development could best serve the poorest farmers in developing countries, and how commercial seed systems could be regulated to serve the right to food and ensure the right of all to enjoy the benefits of scientific progress. Finally, it examines how farmers’ seed systems could be best supported, in order to serve the interest of all in the preservation of agrobiodiversity.
Andersen, R. (2008). Governing Agrobiodiversity: Plant Genetics and Developing Countries
The point of departure for the book is how domesticated plant varieties are disappearing at an alarming rate. This loss of biodiversity has negative consequences for food security, traditional small-scale farming, and poverty alleviation. Meanwhile, interest in the commercial use of genetic resources has increased through the development of biotechnologies, and industry is demanding intellectual property rights. This has triggered and affected the formation of various international regimes from different angles and with different objectives. The book analyses the interaction between these international agreements related to plant genetic resources in agriculture. It especially looks into how their interaction affects developing countries.
A key conclusion in the book is that the interaction between the various regimes has had largely negative effects for the management of these vital resources for food security in developing countries - despite other intentions behind the individual agreements. The result is an emerging situation where multiple actors have the possibilities to exclude each other from the use of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) that entered into force in 2004 has potentials to change this development, but its success depends on the political will of its Contracting Parties.Andersen, R., and Winge, T. (2008). The Farmers' Rights Project – Background Study 7: Success Stories from the Realization of Farmers' Rights Related to Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture
Download the report here (PDF, 3MB).
Farmers' Rights are essential for maintaining crop genetic diversity, which is the basis of all food and agricultural production in the world. The International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture recognizes Farmers' Rights and provides for relevant measures. However, implementation is slow, and in many countries there is resistance. This book shows the necessity of realizing Farmers' Rights for poverty alleviation and food security, the practical possibilities of doing so, and the potential gains for development and society at large. It provides decision-makers and practitioners with a conceptual framework for understanding Farmers’ Rights and success stories showing how each of the elements of Farmers' Rights can be realized in practice. The success stories have brought substantial achievements as regards one or more of the four elements of Farmers' Rights: the rights of farmers to save, use, exchange and sell farm-saved seed; the protection of traditional knowledge; benefit- sharing; and participation in decision-making. Challenges encountered on the way are also conveyed and offer important lessons. The stories represent different regions and localities, including Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America, as well as various categories of stakeholders and types of initiatives and policies.
Bertacchini, E. E. (2008). Coase, Pigou and the Potato: Whither Farmers' Rights?
Download the pdf here (PDF, 176KB).
This article explores the realization of farmers' rights in order to reward farming communities for their contribution in conserving and developing crop genetic resources. Current proposals to realize farmers' rights follow both Coasean and Pigouvian approaches, which try to solve the public good dilemma generated by traditional farmers in supplying agrobiodiversity. However, this article claims that both these solutions not only may be difficult to realize but also provide incomplete incentives to traditional farmers in enhancing in situ genetic diversity. In analogy with emerging open source models in the digital information economy, the author contends that traditional farming systems, with the customary practices of seed saving and exchange, must be regarded as a commons based peer organization for germplasmproduction and distribution. For this reason, new options for implementing farmers' rights should be devised in order to strengthen farmers' practices to use and exchange seeds within the traditional seed systems.
Andersen, R., and Berge, G. (2007, September 18-20). Informal International Consultation on Farmers' Rights, Lusaka, Zambia
Download the pdf here (PDF, 634KB).
The informal international consultation in Lusaka gathered 27 participants from 20 countries and most regions of the world. They all participated in their personal capacities, coming from various backgrounds, including ministries of agriculture, gene banks, research institutions, farmers' organizations and nongovernmental organizations. The consultation consisted of six sessions, each starting with brief introductions by some of the participants, with the main emphasis on the discussions. One aim of the consultation was to identify key-issues of importance for the implementation of Farmers' Rights and to facilitate a process towards the realization of Farmer' Rights by the national governments, while acknowledging Farmers' Rights as vital for food security and the future of our agricultural plant genetic heritage. On the basis of the discussions and by taking account of comments from the participants, Norway and Zambia prepared an input paper to be submitted to the Governing Body for consideration at its Second Session.
The report starts out with a summary of results from the consultation. Then it summarizes the introductions and discussions, and provides an insight into the shared understandings, experiences and ideas on how to protect and promote Farmers' Rights. The last part of the report is a collection of the papers presented at the consultation. The programme of the Lusaka Consultation and the list of participants can be found in the annex.Andersen, R. (2007). Protecting Farmers' Rights in the Global IPR Regime: Challenges and Options
Download the pdf here (PDF, 2MB).
This policy brief gives a short introduction to the concept of Farmers' Rights and its importance for agrobiodiversity, food security and poverty reduction. It then goes on to discuss the possibilities for protecting these rights under the existing global IPR regime. Central options that are discussed pertain to creating a legal space within legislative frameworks for farmers' stewardship and innovations in agriculture, and establishing funding mechanisms at the national and international levels in order to scale up activities supporting them in their vital contribution to the global genetic pool.
Salazar, R., Louwaars, N., and Visser, B. (2007). Protecting Farmers' New Varieties: New Approaches to Rights on Collective Innovations in Plant Genetic Resources
This article documents how modern varieties developed in the formal sector have gradually replaced landraces as a source of diversity for many small-scale traditional farmers. However, this development has not done away with farmer-breeding, which is vital in traditional agriculture.
This knowledge is of great importance when designing plant breeders and farmers' rights, in order to ensure food security and genetic diversity. The major challenges are to warrant the recognition of the collective innovation and breeding efforts of farmers, to allow access to relevant genetic resources, and to keep these materials freely available for use and further breeding - while at the same time ensuring effective benefit sharing, the authors conclude.Andersen, R. (2006). Realising Farmers' Rights under the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, Summary of Findings from the Farmers' Rights Project (Phase 1)
Download the pdf here (PDF, 300KB).
The summary of the findings from Phase 1 of the Farmers' Rights project is designed as a guide to delegations and stakeholders concerned with Farmers' Rights. It presents the components of the Farmers' Rights Project and identifies two approaches to the understanding of Farmers' Rights in the current debate: the ownership approach and the stewardship approach.
There is a latent conflict between these two, and the report argues that the stewardship approach must prevail if Farmers' Rights are to be realised within the framework of the ITPGRFA. A working definition is presented and reasons why these rights are so important are highlighted. Most importantly, the realisation of Farmers' Rights is a precondition for the maintenance of agrobiodiversity and a central means in the fight against poverty in the world. The report summarises the state of realisation of Farmers' Rights and shows that achievements are already being made with regard to all measures addressed in the ITPGRFA. It pinpoints the central barriers to further progress in this area and indicates what steps are required to overcome these barriers and to implement the ITPGRFA with regard to Farmers' Rights. Finally, the report recommends measures to be taken by the Governing Body of the ITPGRFA, and highlights issues of importance for further discussion.Andersen, R. (2006). Farmers' Rights and agrobiodiversity
Andersen, R. (2006). Farmers' Rights and agrobiodiversity. GTZ Issue Paper series; People, Food and Biodiversity (Eschborn: GTZ). (PDF, 209KB)
The Issue Paper deals with the concept of Farmers' Rights as they are addressed in the International Treaty.
The nature of Farmers' Rights is analysed and the key points presented. Farmers' Rights and their role in the fight against poverty are touched upon, and some important considerations for the practical implementation of these rights are outlined.Andersen, R. (2005). The History of Farmers' Rights: A Guide to Central Documents and Literature
Download the pdf here (PDF, 563KB).
The guide presents the findings of a comprehensive survey of documentation and literature on these rights. It is designed as a guide for negotiators, practitioners and researchers wishing to understand the concept and the potentials of farmers' rights.
The documents represent the fruits of long and complex negotiations, and provide an important context for the realization of farmers' rights. How to reward farmers for their past, present and future contributions to conserving, improving and making available crop genetic resources for food and agriculture has been a central topic in the negotiations. An international fund for supporting and assisting farmers in this has long been on the agenda. Discussions have also focused on how farmers' rights can balance breeders' rights, so as to ensure an equitable system that can facilitate farmers' continued access to - and free use of - crop genetic resources. The substantial and increasing body of literature on farmers' rights provides a valuable source of insights in the potentials for, and possible difficulties in, realizing farmers' rights. Although authors differ in their points of departure, emphases and perspectives, their contributions are largely compatible. The literature provides important points of departure for understanding the subject matter of farmers' rights, types of rights, rights holders, and appropriate measures for protecting and promoting these rights. It also draws lessons from initial efforts at realizing these rights, and warns against certain tendencies which might prove counterproductive.
Andersen, R. (2005). Results from an International Stakeholder Survey on Farmers' Rights
Download the pdf here (PDF, 932KB).
The background study presents the findings of an international stakeholder survey on the topic. It gathers the perceptions and opinions of various stakeholders from all parts of the world, as expressed in 60 questionnaires from 31 countries. The survey gives an overview of the state of realization of farmers' rights which shows that, despite the huge challenges ahead, efforts are already underway with regard to all issues addressed as farmers' rights in the International Treaty.
This indicates that there is already an opportunity for learning and for deriving models and success stories. The survey highlights the most important barriers to the realization of farmers' rights, as perceived by the respondents, and pinpoints at the same time options for overcoming them. One of the barriers is the diffuse understanding of the concept of farmers' rights. The survey compiles different interpretations and develops a common ground for the understanding and communication of farmers' rights. It further identifies institutions and experts working for the realization of these rights, and indicates the potentials for pooling resources towards this goal. The survey indicates a potential path for the Governing Body to promote the realization of farmers' rights while respecting the freedom of countries to choose ways and means according to their needs and priorities. This path has broad support among the respondents.Brush, S. B. (2005 A). Farmers' Rights and Protection of Traditional Agricultural Knowledge/ Brush, Stephen B. (2005 B): Protecting Traditional Agricultural Knowledge
Download the pdf here (PDF, 328KB).
Brush, Stephen B. (2005 B). Protecting Traditional Agricultural Knowledge. Washington University Journal of Law and Policy, 17, p. 59-109.Download the pdf here (PDF, 301KB).
In these two contributions, Stephen B. Brush questions the value of bioprospecting contracts that involve direct payment and royalties for the purpose of protecting traditional agricultural knowledge. He argues instead for a common pool approach to the management of crop genetic resources and as a basis for farmers' rights. Brush starts out with an analysis of the nature of the 'common heritage' regime that was a prevalent feature of the management of crop genetic resources until the adoption of the CBD. In this context he explains key characteristics of traditional agricultural knowledge and the background to the closing of the genetic commons by the upcoming intellectual property rights regimes under the World Trade Organization and by the access and benefit sharing regime under the CBD. He offers examples of domestic implementation of these regimes from Colombia, Mexico and Costa Rica, all showing the negative effects of such regimes for the management of crop genetic resources.
An important reason for these problems is that the access and benefit sharing regimes derived from the CBD failed to distinguish between wild and domesticated plant genetic resources. According to Brush, there are three important differences (pp. 21[A]/80[B]): '(1) involvement of numerous farmers and farming communities in creating and maintaining genetic resources, (2) genetic complexity of crop traits, and (3) a long history of exchange and publicly supported conservation of crop genes within and outside of their places of origin.' Crop genetic resources should be approached in a fundamentally different way, reviving the 'common heritage' approach.
On this background, Brush analyses the International Treaty. He concludes that the 'common heritage' principle has re-emerged in the Treaty, with its Multilateral System of Access and Benefit Sharing. This is the context in which the provisions of the International Treaty on farmers' rights are explored. Bioprospecting contracts between farming communities and seed companies would not only be legally difficult, but could also lead to market failure because a multitude of farmers would face an extremely limited set of potential 'buyers' of their genetic resources. For this and other reasons, alternative approaches to the realization of farmers' rights need to be found. Brush suggests four guidelines for the crafting of national policies (pp. 29[A]/93[B]): (1) the goals of farmers' rights should balance breeders' rights and encourage farmers to continue as stewards and providers of crop genetic resources; (2) farmers' rights should be viewed as collective rights rather than rights of individual farmers or communities; (3) farmers' rights should not be exclusive and are not meant to limit access to genetic resources; and (4) mechanisms are needed for sharing the benefits received by the international community from the genetic material from farmers' fields or international collections.
According to Brush, the weakness of the International Treaty is that it does not give proper emphasis to the obligations of industrial and developing countries to support the conservation of crop genetic resources. Therefore, it does not solve Hardin's classic 'tragedy of the commons' (Hardin, Garrett (1968): 'The Tragedy of the Commons', Science, 162, pp. 1243-1248) that has beset the management of crop genetic resources, allowing breeders to benefit from the access to genetic resources without bearing the costs of maintaining them. Instead, development assistance is the most likely source of funds for realizing farmers' rights under the current regime. The irony of this conclusion is that 'it reverts to tools and principles that were established before the assault on common heritage', Brush concludes (pp. 34[A]/109[B]).Bjørnstad, S. I. B. (2004). Breakthrough for 'the South'? An Analysis of the Recognition of Farmers' Rights in the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources on Food and Agriculture
Download the pdf here (PDF, 1MB).
This report analyses the influence of developing countries on the recognition of farmers' rights in the International Treaty. By comparing the developing countries' original proposals on the formulation of farmers' rights with the final text of the International Treaty, Batta Bjørnstad concludes that developing countries have had a medium breakthrough for their interests.
To explain this result, regime theories are applied, and it is found that how the negotiations were organized, as well as the entrepreneurial leadership of different actors, affected the possibilities for developing countries to get their interests attended to. At the same time, the issue-specific power of these countries was reduced, for two reasons: (1) Their control over crop genetic resources had decreased because much of the commercial interesting genetic resources had already been collected in international and private gene banks, and (2) various groups of developing countries developed differing interests and strategies. These constellations reduced their joint influence on the negotiations. On the other hand, the role of experts and NGOs as supporters of farmers' rights is found to have had an important impact on the negotiations.
Batta Bjørnstad's report represents a special contribution to the understanding of the development of farmers' rights in the 1990s and the context in which the provisions on farmers' rights of the International Treaty were negotiated. It contains a detailed analysis of the negotiation process leading to the International Treaty (pp. 49-72) as well as an overview over different positions (pp. 40-42). In explaining the negotiation result, it provides a comprehensive overview over the various actors in the negotiations and how they influenced the process (pp. 73-98). Additionally, it offers humorous and interesting anecdotes from the negotiation table.Borowiak, C. (2004). Farmers' Rights: Intellectual Property Regimes and the Struggle over Seeds
This article analyses farmers' rights as a strategy of resistance against the perceived inequities of intellectual property rights regimes for plant genetic resources.
Borowiak finds that farmers' rights are a unique form of rights that may help to transform intellectual property rights systems in ways better suited for registering and encouraging alternative forms of innovations, particularly farmers' innovations. However, thus far it has been difficult to enact farmers' rights. The author concludes that by situating farmers' rights alongside easily enacted commercial breeders' rights, the endeavour risks further legitimizing the inequities it is responding to.Brush, S. B. (2004). Rights over Genetic Resources and the Demise of the Biological Commons
Stephen B. Brush contrasts the common heritage principle with intellectual property rights over plants and shows how the genetic commons are being closed. He highlights how the emerging situation cannot be described solely as a 'tragedy of the commons' (see Brush, 2005) but also as a 'tragedy of the anti-commons', where multiple owners have the right to exclude others from utilizing scarce resources and no one gets the effective privilege of use.
According to Brush, the concept of the 'tragedy of the anti-commons' was first coined by Heller and Eisenberg (1998) referring to the situation of biomedical research (Anitha Ramanna used the concept to describe the situation of agrobiodiversity management in 2003). After discussing bioprospecting in this context, Brush addresses the prospects for realization of farmers' rights (likewise see Brush, 2005). He highlights the dangers of an access system based on market negotiations between purported 'owners' and 'users' of genetic resources, as this is likely to 'abuse the rights of people who have long been involved in the common pool of genetic resources but find themselves arbitrarily excluded in contracting' (p. 255). He concludes that farmers' rights as provided for in the International Treaty 'remains a moral but largely rhetorical recognition of the contribution of farmers to the world's stock of genetic resources, and they provide only a limited mechanism to share benefits from using crop genetic resources or to promote their conservation' (p. 255).Srinivasan, C.S. (2003). Exploring the Feasibility of Farmers' Rights
Download the pdf here (PDF, 273KB).
This article examines the feasibility of farmers' rights provisions based on intellectual property rights.
It argues that the farmers' rights legislation already adopted in some developing countries will involve enormous operational difficulties, while intellectual property rights based farmers' rights are unlikely to provide any significant economic returns to farmers or farming communities. Indeed, they may dilute the incentives for innovation provided to institutional plant breeders, the author argues, noting that this may not be a desirable outcome for developing countries. Conservation projects supported by community gene funds may be a better way to address concerns regarding the conservation of agrobiodiversity, but it would be unrealistic to expect that such funds could be financed through levies on the royalties of plant breeders, the author concludes.Correa, C. (2000). Options for the Implementation of Farmers' Rights at the National Level
Download the pdf here (PDF, 138KB).
This report is among the first to be written after the adoption of the text on farmers' rights in 1999, which was to become the final formulation of Article 9 in the International Treaty. After considering the origin of the concept of farmers' rights, and how it has been incorporated in international regimes and national regulations, Correa explores in greater detail the rationale behind the concept. On this background, the relationship between farmers' rights and intellectual property rights is explored, before various proposals for the contents and implementation of farmers' rights are discussed.
Correa concludes that farmers' rights may be seen as a 'moral recognition to farmers' past and present contributions to making agriculture sustainable', as well as 'concrete instruments to protect and promote traditional farming activities and communities' culture and lifestyles' (p. 41). The possible scope and characteristics of the suggestions provided in the International Treaty on how governments can protect and promote farmers' rights need to be further developed, in order to provide more concrete guidelines to governments on how best to comply with their responsibilities in this field, he suggests. Work on realizing farmers' rights will also require capacity building, training, transfer of technology and a fair reward for farmers' contributions, among other things. Nevertheless, 'there seem to be a gradual movement from the realm of ideas towards the design of such measures that can be realized in practice and which supports and promotes farmers' activities in the conservation and improvement of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture' (pp. 41-42).
Correa's report contains an overview over national legislation and proposed legislation from several countries, with provisions pertaining to farmers' rights. It further lists and discusses the possible content of and measures for farmers' rights, and provides a detailed account of possible measures to establish national legislation on farmers' rights according the International Treaty. It is therefore a valuable source book regarding implementation of the provisions on farmers' rights in the International Treaty.Girsberger, M. A. (1999). Biodiversity and the Concept of Farmers' Rights in International Law. Factual Background and Legal Analysis
This doctoral thesis analyses the concept of farmers' rights from a legal perspective. The first part presents an extensive description of the factual background to the topic, including agriculture, plant genetic resources for food and agriculture, indigenous knowledge and the effects of modern biotechnology. The second part examines the applicability of existing forms of intellectual property rights to traditional crop genetic resources and related know-how. Here Girsberger concludes that existing intellectual property rights are not adequate for this purpose, and that farmers' rights should rather be non-exclusive rights.
The third part contains a legal analysis of farmers' rights as a concept and of the prospects for their realization. The author suggests that farmers' rights should have three complementary and closely related purposes: (1) compensation for the use of traditional plant genetic resources for food and agriculture and related traditional knowledge; (2) incentives for the conservation and sustainable use of crop genetic resources; and (3) balancing inadequacies and deficiencies of existing forms of intellectual property rights with regard to these resources (p. 205). Farmers' rights should, however, not compete with - or replace - existing intellectual property rights, he argues.
On this basis, the subject matter of farmers' rights would be (1) traditional crop varieties and their wild and weedy relatives, and (2) the related knowledge of informal plant breeders (p. 213). Girsberger further concludes that individual farmers or farming communities cannot be considered rights holders, since the determination of such rights holders would be very complicated, if not impossible, and would consume substantial financial, technical, and legal resources (p. 228). Instead, he proposes that all entities involved in the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture be defined as rights holders, and that the international community should act as steward for the holders of farmers' rights (ibid.).
A central question is what the rights and obligations should be. On the basis of the foregoing analysis, Girsberger proposes that the fundamental right is compensation, and the fundamental obligation is the conservation of crop genetic diversity. For this purpose an international fund should be established to distribute compensation among the holders of farmers' rights, i.e. entities involved in the conservation and sustainable use of traditional crop genetic diversity (pp. 259-261). Due to the nature of the utilization of crop genetic resources, the financial capabilities of countries in the South, and the development of intellectual property rights to genetic resources from the global genetic pool, compensation would basically have to be an international task (p. 282). Therefore, realization of farmers' rights would have to take place at the international level and be enforced by states (p. 296). The international fund should distribute financial resources according to proposals submitted by rights holders, to be approved by a committee of internationally acclaimed experts (p. 308). The book concludes with a proposed agenda for farmers' rights.Esquinas-Alcázar, J. (1998). Farmers' Rights
Esquinas-Alcázar, J. (1998). Farmers' Rights. In R. Evenson, D. Gollin & V. Santaniello (Eds.). Agricultural Values of Plant Genetic Resources (p. 207-217). Wallingford: FAO/CEIS/CABI Publishing.
Esquinas-Alcázar provides an overview over the FAO negotiations on farmers' rights, with references to the CBD and the WTO Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.
He maintains that implementation of farmers' rights at the international level is vital to global equity and to halting genetic erosion in agriculture. Implementation should ensure that farmers, farming communities and their countries receive a just share of the benefits derived from the use of crop genetic resources, and provide incentives and means for the conservation and further development of these resources.Gollin, D. (1998). Valuing Farmers' Rights
Gollin, D. (1998). Valuing Farmers' Rights. In R. Evenson, D. Gollin & V. Santaniello (Eds.), Agricultural Values of Plant Genetic Resources (p. 233-245). Wallingford: FAO/CEIS/CABI Publishing.
This book chapter argues that there are significant potential hazards to the South in seeking to establish a system of farmers' rights based on intellectual property rights or other forms of property rights.
The point of departure for the analysis is the international flows of genetic resources, which have been multi-directional between the South and the North, the South and the South, and the North and the North. Gollin proceeds to a detailed analysis of the international flows of genetic resources in rice and its implications for the question of compensation. The great majority of the rice varieties covered by the study (1709 varieties) were developed using breeding lines from outside the country of release. Most countries in the study were found to be net borrowers of landraces. Large importers of germplasm with regard to the varieties dealt with here are Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal, Nigeria and Vietnam. Under a compensation system, they would be the losers, whereas for example the United States would be a winner, since it is a large exporter of rice germplasm. However, the author warns against drawing general conclusions on the basis of the data, due to some methodological problems. Rather, the results should be seen as illustrating some important empirical questions relating to gainers and losers under farmers' rights - if these are understood as property rights. The basic conclusion is that there is no guarantee that the South would gain from such a system.Swaminathan, M. S. (1998). Farmers' Rights and Plant Genetic Resources
Swaminathan, M. S. . (1998). Farmers' Rights and Plant Genetic Resources. Biotechnology and Development Monitor, 36, pp. 6-9.
The point of departure for this article is the fact that tribal and rural families conserve genetic diversity for the public good at their own personal cost. It is this 'inequity inherent in the current recognition and reward systems that the concept of farmers' rights seeks to end', M. S. Swaminathan states, before proceeding to discuss the practical implications.
He compares relevant provisions from the International Undertaking, the CBD and the WTO Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and draws the attention the need for states to reconcile their obligations to these different agreements in terms of equity and ethics in intellectual property rights claims. He also highlights effects of new technological inventions, like the so-called 'terminator technology' which enables seed companies to produce seeds which cannot be used for a second generation of crops. Such a technology would further reduce farmers' rights. The author suggests that legislation which addresses breeders' and farmers' rights simultaneously should be introduced in all countries, ensuring plant-back rights for farmers. Such legislation should provide for a community gene fund, which would draw its resources from a one percent levy on the sales of agricultural commodities. Plant breeders should have to disclose the sources of origin of their breeding material; and, on this basis, funds could be channelled back to these communities. A similar approach should be sought for the distribution of benefits between and among countries, based on a bilateral approach where applicable, and a multilateral approach when more than one country is the source of origin. A multilateral system should be established under FAO. Finally, Swaminathan draws the attention to the many revisions of the UPOV Act since 1961, and states that we should have the will to wait and learn also with regard to farmers' rights.Wright, B. D. (1998). Intellectual and Farmers' Rights
Wright, B. D. (1998). Intellectual and Farmers' Rights. In R. Evenson, D. Gollin & V. Santaniello (Eds.), Agricultural Values of Plant Genetic Resources (p. 219-232). Wallingford: FAO/CEIS/CABI Publishing.
In this book chapter, B. D. Wright highlights the paradox of the high total value of agricultural germplasm and the current low demand of plant breeders for such material due to their own well-stocked gene banks and the narrow genetic bases of their crop varieties.
Therefore any attempt to seek to earn rents on access to germplasm seems likely to fail. Against this backdrop, the author concludes that care must be taken that the exchange of seeds is not too severely hampered by taxes, fees or individualized prior approval requirements.Cleveland, D. A., and Murray, S.C. (1997). The World's Crop Genetic Resources and the Rights of Indigenous Farmers
Download the pdf here (PDF, 301KB).
This article explores some theoretical and empirical aspects of the debate on intellectual property rights for traditional farmers. The authors conclude that traditional farmers have their own concepts of intellectual property rights in folk varieties of plants, and that these differ considerably from the intellectual property rights applied in commercial agriculture.
They moot the possibility of taking advantage of the discourse on human rights and indigenous peoples' rights in discussing solutions to the question of intellectual property rights for traditional farmers to folk varieties. Finally, the authors argue that the conflict between industrial agriculture and indigenous farmers over rights to crop genetic resources may be easier to resolve if placed in the context of a common goal of sustainable agriculture. The article is commented by various experts - Janis B. Alcorn, Stephen B. Brush, Michael R. Dove, David R. Downes, Donald N. Duvik, Cary Fowler, Anil K. Gupta, Ashish Kothari and Paul Richard - to which the authors reply, and conclude the discussion.Pistorius, R. J., and Butler, B. (1996). How Farmers' Rights Can Be Used to Adapt Plant Breeders' Rights
Pistorius, R. J., and Butler, B. (1996). How Farmers' Rights Can Be Used to Adapt Plant Breeders' Rights. Biotechnology and Development Monitor, 28, September 1996, pp. 7-11.
In this article, the question of farmers' rights is discussed in light of the lack of political will in developed countries to generate additional funds to support the role of farmers in maintaining agrobiodiversity.
The authors suggest using farmers' rights to curb the negative effects of the 1991 Act of the Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV). A remuneration system could be established to compensate breeders without recognizing property rights, i.e. a system with contracts between breeders and the society. Such a system would be closer to the original idea behind the plant breeders' rights system, Butler and Pistorius maintain. The main benefit of the system would be that farmers would have the right to freely use the seed they buy.Swaminathan, M. S. (Ed.) (1996). Agrobiodiversity and Farmers' Rights
The technical consultation on which this book is based addressed the issue of how the equity provisions of the CBD and the concept of farmers' rights could be developed in FAO. Facts and viewpoints were contributed by experts and stakeholders from many countries, involving representatives from the plant breeding industry, public sector breeding institutions, farmers, various international organizations (e.g. FAO, WTO and UPOV), research institutions and NGOs.
The book starts out with a comprehensive background paper prepared by José Esquinas-Alcázar titled 'The Realization of Farmers' Rights', outlining the rationale for farmers' rights, a list of suggested components and the state of negotiations. One of the conclusions is that present inequities will increase and current forces driving genetic erosion most likely be magnified if farmers' rights are not implemented at the international level (p.15).
The volume proceeds with a section on the national and international context of farmers' rights as seen from highly different perspectives, before it focuses on the relationship between plant variety protection and the CBD. In the latter context the current status of plant variety protection in several countries in the South and the North is highlighted. On this basis, viewpoints from private and public plant breeding institutions are presented, and then the views of tribal and rural farmer-conservers are highlighted. A need for resource centres on farmers' rights is identified.
In conclusion, detailed recommendations are presented. It is recommended that farmers' rights should involve the free choice of, and access to, germplasm; the freedom to sell harvested produce and to improve cultivars; the ability to influence future breeding efforts; access to technologies and training; the ability of farming communities to control access to agrobiodiversity under their custodianship; economic incentives to continue to conserve agrobiodiversity; and recognition of past and present achievements (pp. 193-195). Concrete steps are suggested, inter alia in terms of the development of national legislation and with regard to negotiations at the international level.Brush, S. (1992). Farmers' Rights and Genetic Conservation in Traditional Farming Systems
This article argues that intellectual property rights such as plant breeders' rights or patents should not be used to protect crop genetic resources. Rather, farmers' rights should be used as an alternate form of intellectual property rights, to compensate farmers indirectly by supporting genetic conservation. These conclusions are based on an analysis of the role of genetic resources in traditional farming, intellectual property rights over plant varieties and potentials of the concept of farmers' rights.
Brush highlights four reasons why intellectual property protection is not adaptable to the situation of traditional farming and crop varieties (p. 1628): (a) the usual criteria for recognizing plant breeders' rights (novelty, distinctness, uniformity and stability) do not apply to traditional knowledge systems as they are normally part of public knowledge, (b) severe accounting problems would accrue, since crop improvement is based on numerous genetic sources, and it would be unreasonable to assign proportional values to the resources from each relevant country, (c) the primary beneficiary would most likely be the nation state rather than farmer conservers, and (d) the focus on equity and compensation does not explicitly address the pressing problem of improving crop genetic conservation. Therefore, concludes Brush, farmers' rights should be embraced without the cumbersome baggage of intellectual property rights'. He warns, however, that extending farmers' rights is not without pitfalls. One of these pitfalls would be that farmers could be bypassed by the elite in their countries when compensation is to be organized. Another would be that the transaction costs would be too high and that the systems would prove inefficient.Mooney, P. R. (1983). The Law of the Seed – Another Development and Plant Genetic Resources.
In the 1975 Dag Hammarskjold Report, What Now: Another Development, it was emphasized that an alternative conceptual framework was needed for the future development of the world and that Another Development should be need-oriented, endogenous, self-reliant, ecologically sound and based on structural transformations.
In pointing up the need for strengthening the Third World’s capacity for self-reliant development, it was, furthermore, stressed that this entailed ‘Exercising the right of national economic sovereignty over resources and production, ending the drain of resources from the Third World to the industrialized countries’ by, inter alia, reviewing ‘contracts, leases and concessions entered into with transnational corporations under conditions of inequality’ and ‘regulations of conditions governing trade in technology including the revision of the present patent system’. In order to achieve these objectives, citizens must exercise their ‘right to inform and be informed about the facts of development, its inherent conflicts and the changes it will bring about, locally and internationally’, thereby promoting a process of ‘conscientization’ and ensuring full participation in the decision- making process.