INTRODUCTION
The United Nations had set a target to end global hunger and malnutrition by 2030, but the COVID-19 pandemic has made it challenging to achieve this goal. As the pandemic subsides, we are now focused on various projects and programs aimed at alleviating poverty and ensuring food security in the Global South. FAO has reported that the number of undernourished people has risen since 2020 which is a major setback to global hunger eradication efforts. As the pandemic has subsided, we are back on track with multifarious projects and programmes to alleviate poverty and ensure food security in the Global South.[1]
The world’s food systems have been drastically affected by increased social conflicts, climate change and recent economic distress. Multiple pathways could propel us towards food security, including promoting sustainable food habits and climate-resilient farming techniques, tackling poverty and structural inequalities, and fostering positive social conflict resolution tactics and peace-building initiatives.[2] With impetus to intellectual property rights received from WTO and TRIPS, the food justice lens has come up with an innovative strategy for ensuring food security through IPR initiatives.
In developing countries, the use of modern biotechnology in the agrarian sector to meet the food requirements of the people remains an open question to all. To bolster food productivity and efficiency, genetically modified seeds and plants have been developed. The new varieties lead to high yields and are resistant to pests and climate adversities. Protecting the rights of the researchers and plant breeders through IPR tactics is essential to provide them with the necessary impetus to invest their time, money and effort in developing novel crops and plant varieties. It can be done by reserving certain economic rights of researchers and plant breeders in their inventions like the right to manufacture, sell and distribute their products in the market. A level of monopoly is necessary to ensure innovation in the food sector.
INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK TO MEET FOOD SECURITY THROUGH IPRS
Food security is a grave concern for all. Meeting the dietary requirements of the global population is a crucial step towards inclusivity and sustainable development. Access to safe and nutritious food in adequate quantities is key to a healthy and productive lifestyle that leads our nation to prosperity and wealth. Many international organisations and conventions have brought the issue of the role of IPR in agro-industry to the forefront. It specifically includes recognising the rights of plant breeders over new crop varieties and seedlings to provide them with the incentive to carry on further research and development that leads to higher-yielding varieties of seeds and improved biosafety and management.
The role of IPR in securing food for all was first envisaged in the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property. Article 3(1) of the Convention held that the industrial property included not only products of manufacturing and commerce but also agriculture and extractive industries. However, the technology at that time was underdeveloped and hence the application of technology in agriculture was dismal. This means that the situation of IPRs in agriculture was quite bleak. Thus, the inclusion of agricultural items in the list of industrial property probably relates to the use of trademarks and GIs for farm products.[3]
TRIPS or Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights is an important agreement for all WTO members ensuring minimum protection for various IPRs like patents, trademarks, copyrights and geographical indications. TRIPS lays significant emphasis on technology transfer for capacity building in developing nations. It provides for enforcement strategies and a robust dispute resolution mechanism. Amongst various IPRs, patents have a crucial role to play in agricultural developments. TRIPS has a provision that allows member-states to exclude from patentability criteria various plants and animals (except microorganisms), and other inventions that can potentially harm human health and the environment. Article 27.3 (b) of TRIPS is a unique provision that provides flexibility to member states to provide for patents or a suis generis system for the protection of plant varieties.[4]
The International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants was established by the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) as an international organization in 1961 by a group of developed countries that were not ready for patents in crops and seedlings but desired a system of IPR protection in agriculture. It provided for plant breeders’ rights that are significantly different from patent rights. Breeding new varieties of crops and plants requires substantial investment and hence protecting new varieties of crops that have distinctiveness, uniformity and stability is essential for fostering an IPR system for benefit of the humankind. Article 14 of UPOV provides that authorization is necessary from breeders for acts like production, sale, marketing, importing or exporting of new crop and plant varieties that are important for commercial exploitation.[5]
The Convention on Biological Diversity (1992) is an interesting achievement of humankind in establishing an international framework for the sustainable use and conservation of biological resources along with a fair access and benefit-sharing mechanism that profits exporting and importing countries equitably. Nagoya Protocol and Bonn Guidelines are the sure forerunners of the biodiversity management projects. Cartagena Protocol regulates biosafety mechanisms for the safe handling and transboundary movement of LMOs. It aims to negate the ill effects of modern biodiversity on human health and the environment including biodiversity. The Convention explicitly discussed the question of traditional knowledge management and protection including the recognition of the rights and interests of tribals and indigenous communities over their resources. This in many direct and indirect ways impacts agriculture and food security programmes at the international level.[6]
FAO as the central institution for securing food for all convened the International Treaty for Plant Genetic Resources (ITPGRFA) in Rome, in 2001 to ensure fair and steady access to seeds for farmers for agriculture all around the globe. It equips them to deal with contingencies like droughts, storms, floods, cyclones and other climate exigencies in a better manner. It combats global crop diversity loss and acts as a harbinger of food security for all by nurturing seeds that are on the verge of extinction through botanical gardens, seed banks and gene banks. It also promotes the utilization of traditional knowledge and practices for developing sustainable agriculture and farm management techniques.[7]
INDIAN EXPERIENCE: AN OVERVIEW OF PLANT VARIETIES PROTECTION AND FARMERS’ RIGHTS ACT, 2001
In India, through the exclusion made in Section 3(j) of the Patents Act, 1970, the plant and animal material (barring microorganisms) along with essential biological resources went outside the patentability criteria.[8] The introduction of TRIPS imposed numerous restrictions on India as a WTO member including an obligation on India to provide for a plant variety protection programme to foster scientific innovation and technology in the domain of agriculture. India adopted a sui generis system in the form of the Protection of Plant Varieties’ and Farmers’ Rights Act, of 2001 for the recognition of the rights of plant breeders, researchers and farmers for the promotion of agriculture and food security.[9]
PPVFR contains many provisions that directly took inspiration from UPOV including the minimum criteria of distinctiveness, uniformity and stability for the grant of registration of new crop varieties. The registration confers an exclusive right to the plant breeders and their successors to produce, develop, sell or commercialise in any form a crop variety for a set period (usually 15 to 18 years). Nothing contained in this Act affects the rights of researchers to carry on experiments and scientific studies on registered crop varieties to develop new crop varieties. However, breeders’ authorization is required when such registered crop variety is repeatedly used for developing new varieties of crops for commercialization. Moreover, farmers, just like breeders, are given the exclusive right to use, manufacture, sell or license the new crops they bred on their farmland.[10]
Interestingly, the Authority under the Act has been given the power to grant compulsory licences under certain circumstances as given under Chapter VII. Any person after the expiry of three years from the grant of certificate of registration can make an application to the Authority for the grant of compulsory to undertake production, distribution and marketing of new crops on the ground that the reasonable requirements of the public are not being met and the seeds or propagating material of such a registered variety is not available to the public at affordable rates. The Authority has the sole power to determine the duration, terms and conditions, modification and revocation of such a compulsory license. The Authority has to make fair-minded provisions to provide compensation to the breeders of registered crop varieties for their investment of labour, time and money in developing new crop varieties.[11]
CONCLUSION
The introduction of modern technology and IPR has raised numerous concerns. Multiple stakeholders have utilized the prowess of biotechnology and IPR to develop genetically modified plants and microorganisms to improve food security and reduce global hunger. At the same time, it has led to global biodiversity loss and concerns about biosafety which heightened with the Cartagena protocol that forms an essential part and parcel of the Convention on Biological Diversity. It is quintessential to ensure that the IPR regime to ensure food security in the Global South is tailored to meet the specific requirements and conditions of the individual countries.[12]
The present-day IPR initiatives while protecting the rights of researchers and plant breeders should also focus on safeguarding the interests of the farmers and encouraging the conservation and sustainable use of biological resources by adopting adequate benefit-sharing mechanisms and protecting the traditional resources of tribals and indigenous communities to curb the menace of biopiracy. It should take under its umbrella all the potential risks of modern biotechnology on global biodiversity loss and adverse effects on human health. The suis generis system developed by India for protecting the rights of plant breeders and farmers is an exemplary example of how multiple interests in the agro sector can be balanced through the advent of IPR in food empowerment.
Author(s) Name: Paridhi Sehgal (Amity University, Noida)
Reference(s):
[1] WHO, ‘The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2021. Transforming food systems for food security, improved nutrition and affordable healthy diets for all’ ( WHO, 2021) < https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/the-state-of-food-security-and-nutrition-in-the-world-2021> accessed 8 July 2024
[2] Ibid
[3] Queen Mary Intellectual Property Research Institute, ‘The Relationship between Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and Food Security’ (June 2004) < https://www.iatp.org/sites/default/files/451_2_60385.pdf> accessed 8 July 2024
[4] TRIPS 1994, Article 27
[5] WIPO, ‘Introduction to Plant Variety Protection under UPOV Convention’ < https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/sme/en/wipo_ip_bis_ge_03/wipo_ip_bis_ge_03_11-main1.pdf> accessed 9 May 2024
[6] Convention on Biological Diversity < https://www.cbd.int> accessed on 9 May 2024
[7] FAO, ‘ International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture < https://www.fao.org/plant-treaty/en/> accessed 9 May 2024
[8] The Patents Act 1970, S 3(j)
[9] The Protection of Plant Varieties Act and Farmers Rights Act 2001, Aims and Objectives
[10] The Protection of Plant Varieties Act and Farmers Rights Act 2001, S. 14, 15, 24, 28, 30, 39
[11] The Protection of Plant Varieties Act and Farmers Rights Act 2001, S. 47 to 53
[12] Dr Phillipe Cullet, “Food Security and Intellectual Property Rights in Developing Countries”(2003) IELRC Working Paper < https://www.ielrc.org/content/w0303.pdf> accessed 7 May 2024
