1887

Abstract

The focus of the EU regulations on the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-Sharing leaves the control of access to genetic resources up to each member state. France has chosen to control access and is going to put in place regulations for it. All the materials received should have specific documentation regarding the accession of genetic resources, where there is a National Authority to issue them. The European commission will maintain a list of biological collections with registered status proposed by each country. The member states are responsible for considering inclusion and verification of these collections. In recent years, the Collection of Institut Pasteur (CIP) staff has expressed concern over how to interact with the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol in the collection but also at the national level with the aim that the CIP will be a registered collection. The advantage of accessing resources from a registered collection is that users of genetic resources will be considered as having exercised ‘due diligence’ if they source their genetic resources from these collections. This could facilitate the process for scientists when applying for research funding. The CIP organized the accession of new deposits and the distribution of micro-organisms in connection with it.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/acmi/10.1099/acmi.0.000008
2019-04-16
2019-10-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/acmi/1/2/acmi000008.html?itemId=/content/journal/acmi/10.1099/acmi.0.000008&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. The access and Benefit-Sharing Clearing-House. https://absch.cbd.int/
  2. Best practice guidelines for biological resource centres, OECD. 2007;http://www.oecd.org/sti/biotech/38777417.pdf
  3. Stackebrandt E, Smith D, Casaregola S, Varese GC, Verkleij G et al. Deposit of microbial strains in public service collections as part of the publication process to underpin good practice in science. SpringerPlus 2014;3:208 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Smith D, Da Silva M, Jackson J, Lyal C. Explanation of the Nagoya protocol on access and benefit sharing and its implication for microbiology. Microbiology 2017;163:289–296 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. McCluskey K, Barker KB, Barton HA, Boundy-Mills K, Brown DR et al. The U.S. culture collection network responding to the requirements of the Nagoya protocol on access and benefit sharing. MBio 2017;8:e00982–17 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Overmann J. Significance and future role of microbial resource centers. Syst Appl Microbiol 2015;38:258–265 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Dedeurwaerdere T, Melindi-Ghidi P, Broggiato A. Global scientific research commons under the Nagoya protocol: towards a collaborative economy model for the sharing of basic research assets. Environ Sci Policy 2016;55:1–10 [CrossRef]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. MIRRI best practice manual on access and benefit sharing, microbial resource research infrastructure. 2016;https://www.mirri.org/fileadmin/mirri/media/Dokumente/MIRRI_ABS_Manual__web.pdf
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/acmi/10.1099/acmi.0.000008
Loading
/content/journal/acmi/10.1099/acmi.0.000008
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error