<P>ausnahmsweise ein englischer Text
<P>From: "Martin Sundermann" <MARTIN.SUNDERMANN@RUHR-UNI-BOCHUM.DE><BR>To: <INFO-MAIL@LISTI.JPBERLIN.DE><BR>Subject: Fw: BRIDGES Trade BioRes, Vol. 2 No. 14<BR>Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 21:22:10 +0200<BR><BR><BR>-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----<BR>Von: BRIDGES Trade BioRes <BIORES@ICTSD.CH><BR>An: Martin.Sundermann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de<BR><MARTIN.SUNDERMANN@RUHR-UNI-BOCHUM.DE><BR>Datum: Freitag, 27. September 2002 12:51<BR>Betreff: BRIDGES Trade BioRes, Vol. 2 No. 14<BR><BR><BR>>-----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>BRIDGES Trade BioRes, Vol. 2 No. 14 26 September, 2002<BR>>------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>><BR>><BR>> Table of Contents<BR>><BR>><BR>> I. INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY<BR>> - Summit Outcomes Cited As Impetus For Progress In TRIPs<BR>>Discussions<BR>> - UK Commission Cautions Developing Countries Against Strong IPR<BR>>Regimes<BR>><BR>> II. AGRICULTURE<BR>> - WTO Members Split On Future Of 'Green Box'<BR>><BR>> III. IN BRIEF<BR>> - Southern African Countries to Set Up GMO Advisory Panel<BR>> - Australia Questions Validity Of CBD Decision On Alien Species<BR>> - Researchers Joining Forces With Mexican Communities In<BR>>Bioprospecting<BR>> - European Parliament Accepts Commission Proposal On Cartagena<BR>>Protocol<BR>> - Rice-Producing Countries Call For Greater Cooperation To Combat<BR>>Rural<BR>> Poverty<BR>><BR>> V. EVENTS & RESOURCES<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>Intellectual Property<BR>>------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>><BR>>SUMMIT OUTCOMES CITED AS IMPETUS FOR PROGRESS IN TRIPS DISCUSSIONS<BR>><BR>>The WTO Council for Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights<BR>>(TRIPs) at its 17-19 September meeting continued discussions on issues<BR>>related to TRIPs Article 27.3(b) (patentability of life forms), the<BR>>relationship between the TRIPs Agreement and the Convention on Biological<BR>>Diversity (CBD), and traditional knowledge. Several Members cited the<BR>>outcomes of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) as a<BR>>confirmation of the high priority that should be given to these issues by<BR>>the Council.<BR>><BR>>The relevance of the WSSD for the work of the TRIPs Council, in particular<BR>>the decision to negotiate an international regime on benefit-sharing (see<BR>>BRIDGES Trade BioRes Special WSSD Update No.5) was raised, inter alia, by<BR>>Brazil and Colombia on behalf of the Andean countries. While not<BR>necessarily<BR>>calling for a benefit-sharing regime to be established under the TRIPs<BR>>Agreement, Brazil pointed out that the decision highlighted the need for<BR>>including elements of disclosure of origin, prior informed consent and<BR>>benefit-sharing in the Agreement to ensure that the CBD was not jeopardised<BR>>by the absence of measures in the TRIPs Agreement to combat biopiracy.<BR>><BR>>WTO Members furthermore addressed various points raised in a "concept<BR>paper"<BR>>submitted by the EC. In the paper, the EC signalled its willingness to<BR>>discuss the inclusion of disclosure requirements in patent applications, as<BR>>repeatedly called for by a number of developing countries (see BRIDGES<BR>Trade<BR>>BioRes, 11 July 2002). To this end, the EC proposed the establishment of a<BR>>"self-standing" requirement to include information on the geographic origin<BR>>of the genetic resources and traditional knowledge. Such a requirement,<BR>>however, should not constitute an additional formal or substantial<BR>>patentability criterion. Thus, failure to disclose should lie outside the<BR>>patent law, but should, for instance, be regulated by civil or<BR>>administrative law.<BR>><BR>>While welcoming the EC proposal as a good step forward, Brazil expressed<BR>>disappointment that the submission only addressed one leg of the tripod<BR>>(disclosure), but had failed to deal with the other two (benefit-sharing<BR>and<BR>>prior informed consent). The three elements, however, needed to be looked<BR>at<BR>>together in order to ensure mutual supportiveness of the CBD and the TRIPs<BR>>Agreement, and the prevention of biopiracy, Brazil added.<BR>><BR>>In addition to the developments in the TRIPs Council, the need for<BR>equitable<BR>>access and benefit-sharing (ABS) measures in general and for disclosure<BR>>requirements in particular appears to be attracting increasing attention<BR>and<BR>>support in various fora. These include the CBD -- in particular the Bonn<BR>>Guidelines on ABS which include disclosure requirements as a possible<BR>>compliance measure (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 18 April 2002) --, the WIPO<BR>>[World Intellectual Property Organization] Intergovernmental Committee on<BR>>Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and<BR>>Folklore (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 27 June 2002), the WSSD decision, which<BR>>calls for the negotiations of a benefit-sharing regime to be 'bear in mind'<BR>>the Bonn Guidelines, and most recently the report of the UK Commission on<BR>>Intellectual Property Rights (see related story, this issue). As one source<BR>>noted, the TRIPs Council needed to respond to this growing momentum so as<BR>>not to prejudice the outcomes of these discussions. Some WTO Members,<BR>>however, have in the past been reluctant to address these issues in the<BR>>TRIPs Council while discussions were still going on in related fora.<BR>><BR>>The next regular session of the TRIPs Council will be held on 25-27<BR>>November. In addition, an informal meeting has been scheduled for 10<BR>>November to discuss the possible extension of a higher level of protection<BR>>for geographical indications to products other than wines and spirits.<BR>><BR>>Additional Resources<BR>><BR>>The EC paper is available at<BR>>http://trade-info.cec.eu.int/europa/2001newround/comnr_trips.pdf.<BR>><BR>>Past issues of BRIDGES Trade BioRes can be found at<BR>>http://www.ictsd.org/biores<BR>><BR>>ICTSD reporting.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>UK COMMISSION CAUTIONS DEVELOPING COUNTRIES AGAINST STRONG IPR REGIMES<BR>><BR>>The UK Commission on Intellectual Property Rights (CIPR) -- an independent<BR>>body set up in May 2001 by the British government -- released its final<BR>>report on 12 September, setting out a number of recommendations aimed at<BR>>aligning intellectual property rights (IPR) protection with efforts to<BR>>reduce poverty in developing countries. The doubts and concerns raised in<BR>>the report are not necessarily new, but what is significant is their<BR>source,<BR>>i.e. a high-level Commission established and appointed by a developed<BR>>country government. Many civil society groups welcomed the report as a<BR>>reflection of widespread concerns regarding the IPR regime.<BR>><BR>>Overall, the Commission concludes that the IPR system is not as beneficial<BR>>for developing countries as for industrialised countries, as it increases<BR>>the cost of accessing many products and technologies of interest to poorer<BR>>regions. The report furthermore points out that stronger IPR protection is<BR>>not necessarily better for developing countries. "Developing countries<BR>>should not be coerced into adopting stronger IP rights without regard to<BR>the<BR>>impact this has on their development and poor people," said John Barton,<BR>>Chair of the Commission. Instead, the IP systems should be tailored to the<BR>>country's state of development and its particular circumstances, the<BR>>Commission concludes.<BR>><BR>>With respect to patents on life forms -- as allowed under Article 27.3(b)<BR>of<BR>>the WTO Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights<BR>>(TRIPs) -- the report discourages developing countries from providing<BR>patent<BR>>protection for plants and animals because of the restrictions such patents<BR>>may place on the use of seeds by farmers and researchers. Also, the report<BR>>recommends that IPR applicants should be required to disclose the<BR>geographic<BR>>source of the genetic resources and provide proof that they were acquired<BR>>with the prior informed consent of the country from which they were taken.<BR>>Developing countries, including India and Brazil, have long been calling<BR>for<BR>>such requirements to be implemented both at the TRIPs Council and at the<BR>>Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (see<BR>>BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 11 July 2002,<BR>>http://www.ictsd.org/biores/02-07-11/story1.htm). The EC, changing its<BR>>position on this issue, signalled its willingness to discuss the<BR>>establishment of disclosure requirements at the last meeting of the TRIPs<BR>>Council on 17-19 September (see related story, this issue).<BR>><BR>>Oxfam welcomed the report as "powerful evidence- based critique of the<BR>>health and development problems caused by the one-size-fits-all approach of<BR>>WTO patent rules". In particular, the report's findings reflect many of the<BR>>concerns put forward by developing countries, academics, NGOs and others<BR>>regarding IPRs and medicines, Oxfam pointed out. The report's failure to<BR>>call for the reform of the TRIPs Agreement, Oxfam added, reflected "the<BR>>authors' pessimism about current power imbalances at the WTO". Similarly,<BR>>ActionAid saw the report as a "big step in acknowledging that intellectual<BR>>property rights legislation has a detrimental effect on poor countries".<BR>The<BR>>group also noted, however, that whether the Commission's recommendations<BR>are<BR>>actually put into action would now depend upon the political will of<BR>>governments.<BR>><BR>>The full CIPR report and an executive summary are available at:<BR>>http://www.iprcommission.org/<BR>><BR>>"Independent Commission finds intellectual property rights impose costs on<BR>>most developing countries and do not help to reduce property," CIPR, 12<BR>>September; "Oxfam's initial response to the report of the UK CIPR," OXFAM,<BR>>12 September; "Government Commissioned report throws TRIPs agreement into<BR>>question," ACTIONAID, 12 September.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>Agriculture<BR>>------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>><BR>>WTO MEMBERS SPLIT ON FUTURE OF 'GREEN BOX'<BR>><BR>>At the 23-25 September informal negotiating session of the WTO Committee on<BR>>Agriculture (CoA) on domestic support, no progress was made on the most<BR>>contentious farm subsidy issues. These include the question of whether the<BR>>so-called 'Green Box' should be made more flexible or be tightened. In his<BR>>conclusion, CoA special session Chair Stuart Harbinson reportedly called on<BR>>Members to "switch their mindsets from portrayal of maximising national<BR>>positions" to an "effort to compromise and bridging gaps."<BR>><BR>>Following on from discussions held at the 4-5 September intersessional<BR>>consultation on domestic support (see BRIDGES Weekly, 13 September 2002,<BR>>http://www.ictsd.org/weekly/02-09-13/story1.htm), WTO Members continued<BR>>talks on the future of the international agricultural subsidy regime,<BR>>largely categorised in the so-called Amber Box (clearly trade distortive<BR>>subsidies), Green Box (non, or at most minimally, trade-distorting support)<BR>>and Blue Box (direct payments under production-limiting programmes). Public<BR>>spending targeting non-trade issues such as food security, structural<BR>>adjustment or environmental conservation generally fall under the Green<BR>Box.<BR>><BR>>"Deadlock" between Cairns and 'Multifunctionality' Group?<BR>><BR>>At the Fourth WTO Ministerial Conference in Doha last year, Members<BR>>committed themselves to "significantly reduce" trade-distorting support as<BR>>these are seen as means of market support which harm other Members' trade<BR>>opportunities. 'Ambitious' liberalisers, such as those from the Cairns<BR>Group<BR>>of agriculture exporters (including Australia, Canada, Argentina, Brazil,<BR>>Thailand, Indonesia and others), want to go even further, calling for the<BR>>Blue Box, which they also consider trade distorting, to be scrapped.<BR>>Additionally, they proposed to restrict the use of income support schemes<BR>>under the Green Box, arguing that those payments distort trade through<BR>>cutting farmers' costs, reducing risks for those that would otherwise go<BR>out<BR>>of business and sustaining supply.<BR>><BR>>More 'cautious' Members, like those from the 'Friends of<BR>Multifunctionality'<BR>>group including the EC, Japan and Switzerland, however, made it clear that<BR>>they would only negotiate additional reductions in trade-distortive support<BR>>if the Blue Box was maintained and more flexibility was given on the<BR>>application of the Green Box. The EC et al. also declared that they were<BR>not<BR>>prepared to submit specific proposals on domestic support unless Members<BR>>agreed to negotiate additional rules on non-trade concerns related to<BR>>agriculture and other issues, such as labelling, the precautionary<BR>principle<BR>>and geographical indications.<BR>><BR>>Members such as the EC and Japan take the view that agriculture fulfils a<BR>>'multifunctional' role since in addition to producing food and fibres, it<BR>>also has a number of other functions related to public goods such as the<BR>>protection of the environment, rural development and food security. Others,<BR>>however, are concerned that the inclusion of non-trade concerns might lead<BR>>to trade distortions. "If they want to address non-trade concerns like the<BR>>need to maintain rural populations, that's fine, just put it in the green<BR>>box in a way that doesn't distort trade, " said David Hegwood, special<BR>trade<BR>>advisor to the US Secretary of Agriculture on the side-lines of the CoA<BR>>meeting. "Just don't make other countries pay for your beautiful<BR>>countryside," he added.<BR>><BR>>Green Box support<BR>><BR>>In terms of detail, Switzerland proposed to allow for "payments<BR>compensating<BR>>extra costs accruing from higher production standards" under programmes<BR>>addressing "non-producer concerns", such as animal welfare imposed by<BR>>consumers and voters. Furthermore, a number of developing countries asked<BR>>for more flexibility for their developmental concerns including food<BR>>security and rural development.<BR>><BR>>The Cairns Group and some others, however, expressed concern that many of<BR>>the proposals advocating greater leeway would add new trade-distorting<BR>>subsidies to the Green Box. Instead, the Group and some developing<BR>countries<BR>>such as India demanded overall caps on Green Box spending (e.g. 5 percent<BR>of<BR>>annual agricultural production), limits on specific types of programmes, or<BR>>removing some income support programmes from the Box. Cairns Group member<BR>>Canada furthermore suggested to tighten the applicability of the Green Box,<BR>>for instance by requiring the amount of compensatory payments under<BR>>environmental programmes to be "less than the extra costs involved in<BR>>complying with the government programme" and that it should "not be related<BR>>to or based on the volume of production."<BR>><BR>>The Agriculture Committee is holding a regular session on 26 September,<BR>>followed by a formal special session on 27 September where the Chair will<BR>>present a summary report of the 23-25 September informal special session.<BR>><BR>>ICTSD reporting; "Swiss See Deadlock Looming In Farm Reform Talks,"<BR>REUTERS,<BR>>23 September 2002; " Swiss Negotiator Warns Of Deadlock In WTO Agriculture<BR>>Liberalisation Talks," WTO REPORTER, 24 September 2002; "Japanese Official<BR>>Sets Out Position In Farm Talks, Criticises US, Cairns Group," WTO<BR>REPORTER,<BR>>25 September 2002; "US says green boy rules adequate to address non-trade<BR>>farm talk worries," WTO REPORTER, 26 September 2002.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>In Brief<BR>>------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>><BR>><BR>>SOUTHERN AFRICAN COUNTRIES TO SET UP GMO ADVISORY PANEL<BR>><BR>>Agriculture ministers from Southern Africa are planning to set up an<BR>>advisory panel to assess the potential impacts of genetically modified (GM)<BR>>foods on the population. The decision comes at a time of growing concerns<BR>>among some African countries, including Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi and<BR>>Mozambique, over the presence of GM organisms in food aid. "The absence of<BR>a<BR>>harmonised regional policy on genetically modified organisms is creating<BR>>problems with regard to the movement of food items," said Prega Ramsamy,<BR>>Executive Secretary of the Southern African Development Community (SADC).<BR>>These and other concerns related to GM food will be discussed at the<BR>>upcoming SADC summit on 2-3 October in Luanda, Angola, where agriculture<BR>>ministers are expected to recommend that each of the 14 SADC member states<BR>>take a position to accept or reject GM grain as food aid.<BR>><BR>>"Southern African nations seek GMO advisory body," REUTERS, 20 September<BR>>2002.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>AUSTRALIA QUESTIONS VALIDITY OF CBD DECISION ON ALIEN SPECIES<BR>><BR>>At the recent Bureau meeting of the Convention on Biological Diversity<BR>>(CBD), Australia --supported by the US, New Zealand and Canada -- again<BR>>raised concerns regarding the Guiding Principles on Alien Species, with<BR>>Australia going as far as declaring the decision to adopt the Principles as<BR>>illegitimate. The Principles were adopted by the Working Group at the Sixth<BR>>Conference of the Parties to the CBD in April 2002, but when put to the<BR>>final plenary, Australia rejected them due to concerns that the ambiguous<BR>>language on the precautionary approach and references to socio-economic and<BR>>cultural considerations in the context of risk management might result in<BR>>conflicts with obligations under trade agreements (see BRIDGES Trade<BR>BioRes,<BR>>2 May 2002, http://www.ictsd.org/biores/02-05-02/story1.htm). Australia,<BR>>supported by the same countries, had also noted these reservations at the<BR>>WTO's information session with multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs)<BR>>in June 2002. The President of the Bureau has been authorised to conduct<BR>>informal discussion on both of Australia's substantive concerns.<BR>><BR>>ICTSD Reporting.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>RESEARCHERS JOINING FORCES WITH MEXICAN COMMUNITIES IN BIOPROSPECTING<BR>><BR>>In an effort to implement the Convention on Biological Diversity, in<BR>>particular its objective of conserving biodiversity and equitable benefit<BR>>sharing, a group of scientists are testing the abundant flora of San Luis<BR>>Potosě in Mexico in the search of new drugs or natural herbicides in<BR>>cooperation with local communities. The researchers and the local<BR>>communities signed a legal contract which guarantees that the communities<BR>>would receive fifty percent of the profits should any plant prove to yield<BR>a<BR>>commercial product. Besides bioprospecting, the scientists will also<BR>>reintroduce some of the plant species that have disappeared from the region<BR>>due to over-harvesting and habitat damage, as well as support communities<BR>in<BR>>improving propagation and processing of medicinal plants they commonly<BR>>collect and sell. The San Luis Potosě project is part of a larger<BR>initiative<BR>>called the Bioactive Agents of Arid Zone Plants of Latin America, which<BR>also<BR>>operates in Argentina and Chile.<BR>><BR>>"Mexico's Dry Forests May Yield New Medicines," ENS, 25 September 2002.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ACCEPTS COMMISSION PROPOSAL ON CARTAGENA PROTOCOL<BR>><BR>>The European Parliament at the first reading on 24 September adopted the<BR>>European Commission's proposed legislation to bring the EU in line with the<BR>>Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, which regulates the transboundary movement<BR>>of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The legislation was adopted with<BR>a<BR>>number of amendments, addressing the following issues: prior informed<BR>>consent from the importer should be required in order for a cross-border<BR>>movement to take place; GMOs cannot be exported if they are not approved in<BR>>the EU; and transparency should be reinforced through strengthening<BR>>traceability rules.<BR>><BR>>"Cross-border movement of GMOs," EUROPARL, 24 September 2002.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>RICE-PRODUCING COUNTRIES CALL FOR GREATER COOPERATION TO COMBAT RURAL<BR>>POVERTY<BR>><BR>>During the International Rice Congress in Beijing, government officials and<BR>>rice experts called for greater cooperation among Asian rice-producing<BR>>countries in their efforts to lift farmers out of poverty. In particular,<BR>>governments discussed how states could ensure that poor farmers benefit<BR>from<BR>>agricultural research and technological innovation. The Chinese President<BR>>gave an example of this by announcing that China would share sequencing<BR>>information on thousands of rice genes thereby supporting its neighbours in<BR>>taking advantage of existing research and technologies. "The sequencing of<BR>>the rice genome will be the first sequencing project to yield tangible<BR>>results for humankind from the standpoints of food security and combating<BR>>malnutrition" said Ronald Cantrell the Director General of the<BR>International<BR>>Rice Research Institute. For information on the International Rice<BR>>Congress 2002 see: http://www.irri.org/irc2002<BR>><BR>>"Rice Experts Target Fairer Deal For Poor Asian Farmers," Deutsche Presse<BR>>Agentur, 18 September 2002; "China to Freely Share Research on Rice<BR>Genome,"<BR>>ABC, 20 September 2002.<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>Events & Resources<BR>>------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>><BR>>EVENTS<BR>><BR>>For a more comprehensive list of events in trade and sustainable<BR>>development, please refer to ICTSD's web calendar<BR>http://www.ictsd.org/cal/.<BR>>Please bear in mind that dates and times of WTO meetings are often changed,<BR>>and that the WTO does not always announce the important informal meetings<BR>of<BR>>the different bodies.<BR>><BR>>23 September - 1 October, Geneva, Switzerland: ASSEMBLIES OF THE MEMBER<BR>>STATES OF WIPO (37th series of meetings). For further information contact:<BR>>WIPO; tel: (41 22) 338 9111; fax: 733 54 28; email: WIPO.mail@wipo.int;<BR>>Internet:<BR>>http://www.wipo.inthttp://www.wipo.org/news/en/index.html?wipo_content_fram<BR>e<BR>>=/news/en/conferences.html<BR>><BR>>26-29 September, Cairo, Egypt: AGRO-ENVIRON 2002 - 3RD INTERNATIONAL<BR>>SYMPOSIUM ON SUSTAINABLE AGRO-ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS. The Symposium covers a<BR>>wide range of topics addressing key environmental and agricultural issues<BR>>through applying new technologies that aim at sustaining agricultural<BR>>systems, monitoring environment and conserving natural resources. Some of<BR>>the topics include; agricultural waste management, biotechnology,<BR>>desertification and land degradation, and environmental biodiversity. For<BR>>further information, see: http://www.agro.narss.org/.<BR>><BR>>29 September - 3 October, Leipzig-Halle, Germany: BIOLOGICAL INVASIONS IN<BR>>TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS: AN EVOLUTIONARY PERSPECTIVE. Organised by the<BR>Centre<BR>>for Environmental Research. The workshop will focus on evolutionary<BR>>processes in biological invasions of plants and animals and their<BR>>implications for ecosystem properties and processes. For further<BR>>information contact: Stefan Klotz, Centre for Environmental Research; tel:<BR>>(49 345) 558 5302; fax: 558 5329; email: klotz@halle.ufz.de; Internet:<BR>>http://www.hdg.ufz.de/index.php?en=1026<BR>><BR>>30 September - 4 October, Bonn, Germany: PIC INC-9. The ninth session of<BR>>the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for an International Legally<BR>>Binding Instrument for the Application of the Prior Informed Consent<BR>>Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International<BR>>Trade. For further information contact: Niek van der Graaff, FAO; tel:<BR>>(39-6) 5705-3441; fax: 5705-6347; email: Niek.VanderGraaff@fao.org; or Jim<BR>>Willis, UNEP Chemicals; tel: (41-22) 917-8111; email: chemicals@unep.ch;<BR>>Internet: http://www.pic.int/<BR>><BR>>30 September - 4 October, E-Conference: SCIENCE COMMUNICATION NEEDS FOR<BR>>DEVELOPING COUNTRIES. The forum aims to encourages discussion about the<BR>>needs in developing countries for science communication, highlighting how<BR>>science communication can benefit a country in terms of increasing<BR>awareness<BR>>of problems and advances, applying pressures to national politicians and<BR>>informing international donors of national activities. To participate you<BR>>can register by sending an email to<BR>>sciencecomms4development-subscribe@yahoogroups.com. For further<BR>information,<BR>>see http://www.swfaus.org/Econf.htm.<BR>><BR>>1 - 4 October, Habana, Cuba: II INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON JURIDICAL<BR>>PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT. Organised by the Instituto de Desarrollo e<BR>>Investigaciones del Derecho. For further information contact: Mr. Miguel<BR>>Angel García Alzugaray, Coordinator Organising Committee; tel: (537)<BR>670795;<BR>>Fax: (537) 670795; email: drelaciones@fgr.get.tur.cu /idid@fgr.get.tur.cu<BR>><BR>>7-10 October, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: CONFERENCE ON BRINGING BACK THE<BR>>FORESTS - POLICIES AND PRACTICES FOR DEGRADED LANDS AND FORESTS. The<BR>>international conference will address solutions to rehabilitation<BR>challenges<BR>>in the forests and grasslands of Asia and the Pacific. For further<BR>>information contact: Alias Abdul Jalil, Malaysia Forest Research Institute;<BR>>tel: (60-3) 6272-2516; fax: 6277-3249; email: foreconf@apafri.upm.edu.my;<BR>>Internet: http://apafri.upm.edu.my/reconf/index.html<BR>><BR>>8 - 9 October: WTO COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT. For further<BR>>information, contact the WTO Information and Media Relations Division, tel:<BR>>(41-22) 739 5007; fax: 739 5458; email: enquiries@wto.org.<BR>><BR>>9 - 11 October, Rome, Italy: FIRST MEETING OF THE CGRFA ACTING AS INTERIM<BR>>COMMITTEE FOR THE INTERNATIONAL TREATY ON PLANT GENETIC RESOURCES FOR FOOD<BR>>AND AGRICULTURE. For further information contact: Paloma Seńor, CGRFA,<BR>Tel:<BR>>(0039) 06 570 52199, fax: 57056347, email: Paloma.Senor@fao.org, Internet:<BR>>http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/cgrfa/docsic1.htm<BR>><BR>><BR>>Other forthcoming events<BR>><BR>>21-23 October, Aalborg, Denmark: EURO ENVIRONMENT 2002. The conference will<BR>>explore how business can seek solutions and be the engine of change towards<BR>>a sustainable society. The theme this year is 'Can business be a driving<BR>>agent of global governance and hold the keys to the goals of global<BR>>sustainability'?. For further information visit:<BR>>http://www.akkc.dk/index.asp?arrangement=327&kategori=kongresser&sprog=eng.<BR>><BR>>23 October - 1 November, New Delhi, India: COP-8 AND SESSIONS OF THE<BR>>SUBSIDIARY BODIES (SBI AND SBSTA) UN FRAMEWORK CONVENTION ON CLIMATE<BR>CHANGE.<BR>>For further information contact: Ms. Isabelle Colineau, UNFCCC; tel:<BR>>(49-228) 815 1425; fax: 815 1999; email: icolineau@unfccc.de; Internet:<BR>>http://unfccc.int/cop8/index.html<BR>><BR>>15 - 17 November, Valencia, Spain: 17TH SESSION OF THE GLOBAL BIODIVERSITY<BR>>FORUM. The GBF17 will be convened immediately prior to the eighth meeting<BR>of<BR>>the Conference of the Parties to the Ramsar Convention. GBF17 will address<BR>>the following five key issues: WSSD: the future for the Ramsar Convention;<BR>>agriculture, wetlands and water resources; wetlands, people and climate:<BR>>Preparing for change; the list of Ramsar Wetlands: Enhancing the framework<BR>>and national Implementation; and Wetlands Restoration and Mitigation. For<BR>>further information contact: Caroline Martinet, IUCN; tel: (41 22)<BR>999-0216;<BR>>fax: 999-0025; email: caroline.martinet@iucn.org; Internet:<BR>>http://www.gbf.ch/present_session.asp?no=27&lg=EN<BR>><BR>>17 - 20 November, Orlando, United States: SYMPOSIUM ON CHALLENGES FACING<BR>>SMALL FARMERS: Organised by the International Farming Systems Association.<BR>>The meeting will focus on small farms in an ever-changing world: meeting<BR>the<BR>>challenges of sustainable livelihoods and food security in diverse rural<BR>>communities. For further information contact: Peter Hildebrand, University<BR>>of Florida; tel: (1 352) 392-1965; fax: 392-7127 ; email: peh@ufl.edu ;<BR>>Internet: http://conference.ifas.ufl.edu/ifsa<BR>><BR>>18 - 26 November, Valencia, Spain: THE 8TH CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES TO<BR>THE<BR>>RAMSAR CONVENTION ON WETLANDS (COP-8). During this event Ramsar country<BR>>members will meet to assess the progress of the Ramsar Convention and<BR>>wetland conservation to date, share knowledge and experience on technical<BR>>issues, and plan their own and the Bureau's work for the next triennium.<BR>>For further information contact: Mr. Dwight Peck, Ramsar Convention on<BR>>Wetlands; Fax: (41 22) 999 0169; email: peck@ramsar.org; Internet:<BR>>http://www.ramsar.org<BR>><BR>>18- 22 November, Geneva, Switzerland: WIPO STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE LAW OF<BR>>PATENTS (8TH SESSION). For further information contact: WIPO; tel: (41 22)<BR>>338 9111; fax: 733 5428; email: WIPO.mail@wipo.int; Internet:<BR>>http://www.wipo.inthttp://www.wipo.org/news/en/index.html?wipo_content_fram<BR>e<BR>>=/news/en/conferences.html<BR>><BR>>25 - 29 November, Rome, Italy: 14TH MEETING OF THE PARTIES TO THE MONTREAL<BR>>PROTOCOL (COP-14). For further information contact: Ozone Secretariat;<BR>tel:<BR>>(1 514) 954-8219; fax: 954-6077; Internet:<BR>>http://www.unep.org/ozone/meet2002.shtml<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>RESOURCES<BR>><BR>>If you have a relevant resource (books, papers, bulletins, etc.) you would<BR>>like to see announced in this section, please forward a copy or review by<BR>>the BRIDGES staff to Heike Baumüller, hbaumuller@ictsd.ch.<BR>><BR>>BIOTECHNOLOGY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: PATENTING OF HIGHER LIFE FORMS AND<BR>>RELATED ISSUES. By the Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee, June<BR>2002.<BR>>An interim Report to the Government of Canada Biotechnology Ministerial<BR>>Coordinating Committee. Available at<BR>>http://www.cbac-cccb.ca/documents/en/E980_IC_IntelProp.pdf.<BR>><BR>>CAN THE DEVELOPMENT BOX ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THE AGRICULTURAL CRISIS IN<BR>>DEVELOPING COUNTRIES? THE CASE FOR A POSITIVE LIST APPROACH. By Aileen Kwa,<BR>>Focus On The Global South, 2002. A key issue confronting governments now in<BR>>the Development Box debate is what actually goes into the Box. This paper<BR>>makes out the case for a Positive List Approach, and gives reasons why,<BR>>short of this, it may be better not to have a Development Box, but to<BR>settle<BR>>for strengthened Special and Differential Treatment. Available at:<BR>>http://www.focusweb.org/publications/2002/Development%20Box-ag%20crisis.htm<BR>><BR>>"Local food, global solution" by Colin Hines, Caroline Lucas, Vandana Shiva<BR>>in ECOLOGIST 32 (5, 2002): 38, 40. Increased international trade in food<BR>is<BR>>putting the livelihoods of small producers across the world at risk, the<BR>>authors argue. In this piece the case for a return to a more localised<BR>>agricultural model is presented.<BR>><BR>>"Reforming Global Trade In Agriculture: A Developing-Country Perspective,"<BR>>by Shishir Priyadarshi, in TRADE, ENVIRONMENT, AND DEVELOPMENT Issue 2,<BR>>2002. The author believes the new round of WTO agriculture negotiations<BR>>should produce an agreement that will give developing countries the<BR>>flexibility to adopt domestic policies geared toward enhancing domestic<BR>food<BR>>production and protecting the livelihoods of the rural poor. Available at:<BR>>http://www.ceip.org/files/pdf/TED_2.pdf<BR>><BR>>GOVERNING BIODIVERSITY. ACCESS TO GENETIC RESOURCES AND APPROACHES TO<BR>>OBTAINING BENEFITS FROM THEIR USE: THE CASE OF THE PHILIPPINES By Liebig,<BR>>Klaus et al, German Development Institute, Reports and Working Papers 5,<BR>>2002. The study introduces two concepts of Access and Benefit-Sharing<BR>>(ABS): bilateral ABS for "wild" genetic resources, governed by the<BR>>Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and multilateral ABS for food<BR>>crops, conceptualised by the recently concluded International Treaty on<BR>>Plant Genetic Resources. The study also gives a detailed account of the<BR>>Philippine experience with both concepts, offers recommendations for<BR>>improving the outcomes of the legislations and presents lessons for the<BR>>international policy-discussions. Available at:<BR>>http://www.die-gdi.de/die_homepage.nsf/FSepub?OpenFrameset<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR>>------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>>To subscribe to this list, send a blank email to subscribe_biores@ictsd.ch.<BR>>To unsubscribe, send an email to unsubscribe_biores@ictsd.ch.<BR>><BR>>BRIDGES Trade BioRes© is published by the International Centre for<BR>>Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD), http://www.ictsd.org, in<BR>>collaboration with IUCN - World Conservation Union, http://www.iucn.org,<BR>>and IUCN's Commission on Environmental, Economic and Social Policy,<BR>>CEESP, http://www.cenesta.org/ceesp/.<BR>><BR>>This edition of BRIDGES Trade BioRes was edited by Heike Baumüller,<BR>>hbaumuller@ictsd.ch. Contributors to this issue were Jordan Gold, Marianne<BR>>Jacobsen and Alex Werth. The Director is Ricardo Meléndez-Ortiz,<BR>>rmelendez@ictsd.ch. ICTSD is an independent, not-for-profit organisation<BR>>based at: 13, ch. des Anémones, 1219 Geneva, Switzerland, tel: (41-22)<BR>>917-8492; fax: 917-8093. Excerpts from BRIDGES Trade BioRes may be used in<BR>>other publications with appropriate citation. Comments and suggestions are<BR>>welcomed and should be directed to the Editor or the Director.<BR>><BR>>BRIDGES Trade BioRes is made possible in 2002 through the generous<BR>>support of the Minister of Housing, Spatial Planning, and the Environment<BR>>(Netherlands). It also benefits from ICTSD's core funders: the Governments<BR>>of Finland, Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden; Christian Aid (UK),<BR>>the Rockefeller Foundation, MISEREOR, NOVIB (NL), Oxfam (UK) and<BR>>the Swiss Coalition of Development Organisations (Switzerland).<BR>><BR>>ISSN 1682-0843<BR>>------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>><BR>><BR>><BR></P><p><br><hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
New <a href="http://rd.yahoo.com/evt=1207/*http://sbc.yahoo.com/">DSL Internet Access</a> from SBC & Yahoo!</a>