q@hi

Consultative

Group on International

Agricultural

Research

- CGIAR

Mid-Term Meeting 1996 May 20 -24,1996 Jakarta, Indonesia

The CGIAR Reseurch Agenda: Facing the Poverty Chdllenge

Report of the Private Sector Committee

Attached is the report of the second meeting of the Private Sector Committee. The report is issued as background documentation to agenda item 2(iii), Linkages with the Private Sector.

CGIAR Secretariat l Mailing Address: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20433, U.S.A. l Office Location: 701 18th Swt, N.W. Tel: (I-202) 473-8951 l Cable Address: INTBAFRAD l Fax: (I-202) 473-8110 l E-mail: CGIAR@cgnet.com or CGIAR@wmtidbank.org

Report of the Second Meeting of the CGIAR Private Sector Committee
April 29-30, 1996, The Hague, Netherlands

The CGlAR Private Sector Committee (PSC) held its second meeting at ISNAR on April 29-30, 1996. Eighf of the fen members attended. Messrs. Mohamad Hasan (Indonesia) and John Preston (USA) sent their regrets. The meeting was chaired by Andreas Biichting (Germany). Frauke Spanakakis (Germany) and C/audio Barriga (Chile) attended in their capacity as internal coordinators on PSC matters on behalf of the two Co-chairs Biichfing and Alejandro Rodriguez (Mexico). Joel Cohen (ISNAR) attended as resource on biofechnology and Geoff Hawtin (IPGRI) on genetic resource matters. Selguk ozgediz attended on behalf of fhe CGlAR Secretariat and served as secretary. The Committee also interacted with Christian Bonte-Friedheim (ISNAR), David Seckler (IIMI) and Bernd Dreesmann (NGO Committee). The agenda consisted of fhe following items: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 1. lnfroduction Role of PSC in fhe CGIAR Developments in the CGIAR Biotechnology (PSC Working Group 1) Intellectual Property Rights, Genetic Resources, and Biodiversity Working Group 2) Dialogue wifh the centers Reports from chairs of PSC Working Groups 3 and 4 Completion of PSC membership Future meetings

Policy (PSC

Introduction

Andreas Btichting expressed the PSC’s appreciation to ISNAR for hosting the meeting. He noted that the main substantive items for discussion are exploration of PSC actions in the areas of biotechnology and IPR/genetic resources, which the PSC Working Groups 1 and 2 have been addressing. Bijchting invited members to report on their PSC activities since the December meeting in Washington. P.K. Agrawal and Biichting reported on their visit to ICRISAT, Carol Amaratunga on her visit to IIMI, and Barriga on his participation in the Regional Forum in Bogota, Colombia. 2. Role of PSC in the CGIAR

Some members questioned why the PSC was listed as a “partnership” committee and not as an “advisory” committee (in the Secretariat paper on CGIAR Committees and Units). Ozgediz explained the rationale for the starting terms of reference for the PSC and the NGO Committees as new bodies advising the CGIAR on ways of broadening its

2 partnerships with major actors in the global agricultural research community and noted that the CGIAR would welcome the Committee’s own suggestions about their future role. The PSC agreed to prepare a mission statement for the Committee for discussion at the next meeting. This would include clarification of what is meant by the term ‘private sector’. 3. Developments in the CGIAR

Ozgediz briefed the PSC on recent developments in the CGIAR. He covered the completion of the Renewal Program, the increase in the number of members of the CGIAR from the South, the funding outlook for 1996 and 1997, the developments in broadening partnerships--in particular the regional fora, changes in CGIAR governance, the upcoming Mid-Term Meeting of the CGIAR, and the planned 25th Anniversary and the Global Forum in October 1996. 4. Biotechnology (PSC Working Group 1)

Sam Dryden chaired the session. Joel Cohen briefed the Committee on the agricultural biotechnology initiatives of the centers, IARC-NARS collaboration, ISNAR’s Intermediate Biotechnology Service (IBS), and relative strengths of IARCs and the private sector. Cohen noted that the IARCs are toolmakers in biotechnology, developing these tools both for their own research and research by their NARS partners. As use of biotechnology by the centers increases, complexities of safe practice emerge, including formation of biosafety committees, containment facilities, use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and dialogue with host country regulators. Cohen noted that, according to a recent IBS survey, the main objectives of international biotechnology research programs are: virus resistance, insect resistance, quality enhancement, disease resistance, and micropropagation. He highlighted cases of strong NARS-Private Sector collaboration, without IARC involvement, and noted that in some cases the centers are not able to work with the commercial sector as well as the NARS. The PSC discussed the international public goods nature of the centers’ technology outputs, as contrasted with the private good nature of the Private Sectors. It was concluded that partnerships between the IARCs and the Private Sector would need to recognize these differences in perspective and to find ways to make them complementary. It will be crucial to identify incentives needed by the private sector in order to increase collaboration and technology transfer. The PSC identified the following issues for further analysis and follow-up:
l

0
l l l

0

conflicts/complementarities between PS and IARCs/NARS (through examples) identification of needs / kind of technology / crops (including incentives for interaction) bio-safety (protocols/regulation) field evaluation (protocols/regulation) intellectual property rights (confidentiality) advantages and commercial acceptance of genetically modified products

3 orphan crops (how to improve CGIAR-PS interactions training on them)

l

0

The PSC will prepare an action plan for discussion with the CGIAR.

5.

Intellectual Biodiversity

Property Policy

Rights, Genetic Resources, (PSC Working Group 2)

and

Geoffrey Hawtin briefed the PSC on the issues, their origins and the CGIAR’s stand on them. He noted that a paradigm shift has been taking place in how genetic resource issues are viewed globally. 1O-l 5 years ago genetic resources were viewed as a “common heritage” (with emphasis on ex-situ conservation and open access). Global changes - the appearance of new biotechnologies, increased importance of IPR, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) - lead to a new paradigm based on the concept of “national sovereignty” and viewing genetic resources as a common concern of humankind (with emphasis on in-situ conservation and regulated access.) Hawtin reviewed the history of the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources and its revision to bring it in line with the Convention on Biodiversity. He noted the importance of agreeing on a Global Plan of Action at the upcoming International Technical Conference on Genetic Resources (June 1996 in Leipzig) as the technical underpinning of international cooperation in genetic resources, paralleling the International Hawtin Undertaking, which constitutes the policy underpinning of cooperation. summarized the IPGRI study on Multilateral Systems for the Exchange of Germplasm (MUSE) which will be discussed at the CGIAR Mid Term Meeting in Jakarta. He also briefly introduced to the PSC the discussion on genetic resources issues in the frame of the CBD process. On IPR, Hawtin reviewed the draft guiding principles of the CGIAR and invited the PSC to comment on them. The PSC agreed to have informal comments sent by members before the MTM and have the revised draft discussed at the next meeting of the Committee. With regard to IPR it was discussed that no patent protection should be granted to true plant varieties in order to preserve the breeders’ exemption, which is of high importance to plant breeding. Broad access to the improved materials from modern plant breeding could be facilitated by including samples of released and protected varieties into genebanks. The PSC identified the following issues for further analysis and follow-up:
l l

l

Implementation of Farmers’ Rights PS access to genetic materials (What is the industry interest in access to CG materials? What are acceptable limitations?); sharing of benefits and responsibilities (access to PGR vs. contributions from industry);

4

l

l

germplasm conservation (role of private genebanks; role of PSC in promoting CGIAR’s involvement with long-term conservation); and, pre-breeding (for complex gene combinations; need for better global structure). Dialogue with the Centers

6.

The PSC agreed to conduct a questionnaire survey of Centers to generate baseline data on Center-PS collaboration so that progress can be measured over time. A draft prepared by Ozgediz was discussed and will be revised based on the comments made at the meeting. The PSC would like to have analysis of the survey completed before its next meeting in August. The PSC divided responsibility as follows: for interaction with the Centers among its members

CIAT: Cl FOR: CIMMYT: CIP: ICARDA: ICLARM: ICRAF: ICRISAT:

Rodriguez/Barriga Hasan Rodriguez Ghandour Alaoui Amaratunga Hasan Agrawal

IFPRI: IIMI: IITA: ILRI: IPGRI: IRRI: ISNAR: WARDA:

Rodriguez/Barriga Amaratunga Agrawal Preston Buchting Dryden Alaoui Auxenfans

Members are expected to serve as point persons for contact with the Centers and will follow up issues that may emerge from the survey. 7. Reports from Chairs of PSC Working Groups 3 and 4

Assia Alaoui reported on her contacts in Morocco and Tunisia on research partnerships between centers, NARS and the private sector. P.K. Agrawal reported on his contacts with the center directors on center and private sector practices in research, including representation of private sector perspectives on center boards. The PSC agreed to devote a major portion of the August meeting to the question of research partnerships.
8.

Completion

of PSC Membership

PSC agreed to identify two candidates for the vacant membership positions, one from the South and one from the North, and forward these nominations to the CGIAR Chair. It agreed to give priority to women candidates, those from Africa and from Japan. 9. Interaction with other CGIAR Committees

The PSC expressed its interest to interact with the CGIAR NGO Committee. The CoChairmen will contact their respective counterparts to elaborate appropriate procedures.

5 10. Future Meetings and Representation at CGIAR Meetings

Messrs. Rodriguez and Dryden will attend the CGIAR Mid-Term Meeting in Jakarta, where Mr. Rodriguez will present a report to the CGIAR on behalf of the PSC. In addition, Mr. Dryden will attend the Stakeholder Consultation organized by the Cosponsors, and Messrs. Dryden and Barriga will attend the Preparatory Meeting for the Global Forum. The PSC agreed to accept the invitation from CIMMYT to host its 3rd meeting on August 19-20 in Mexico. Alejandro Rodriguez invited the PSC to visit PULSAR’s facilities at Chiapas on August 17-18. Transportation to Chiapas within Mexico will be arranged by Rodriguez. The 4th meeting will be held in Washington PSC representation at the Global Forum 27. determined at the August meeting. on October 26 (evening) and October and at the CGIAR meeting will be