The Multilateral System (MLS) of the Plant Treaty must deliver the fair and predictable monetary benefits it promised. If, that is, we want crop diversity to continue to be available with minimal friction to all who want to use it to help ensure the world’s food security.
That at least has been the premise of the past two years of negotiations by the Plant Treaty’s Ad Hoc Open-ended Working Group to Enhance the Functioning of the Multilateral System. With the 11th Session of the Governing Body coming up in November in Lima, Peru, the report of the Working Group is now up on the Plant Treaty’s website. 1
What does it say? Are we there yet?
Well, it’s not easy reading, but let me give you what I see as the key points. Summarizing such a dense and technical document in a few sentences is tricky, so I hope I don’t misrepresent anything. Please let me know if I have, and I will make any corrections needed.
Countries agree that a subscription model would generate more, and more predictable, user contributions than the current pay-per-use approach. There also seems to be a shared view that more crops should be brought under the MLS (beyond the ones currently listed in Annex 1), to reflect importance and interdependence. But also that countries should be allowed to carve out exemptions. And finally, there is general agreement that benefits derived from the use of Digital Sequence Information (DSI) must be addressed in the MLS framework. Somehow.
Still unclear, however, are the level, timing, and conditions of payments under the subscription model. And indeed debate continues over whether pay-per-use should remain available as an option, and under what terms. There are also different views on how DSI contributions could be embedded in the subscription system; and around how to amend Annex 1, whether to include all PGRFA or adopt a phased approach. The view of the seed sector was recently well summarized in Seed World. A predictably somewhat different view comes from Third World Network.
So, though there’s definitely been a lot of progress, without bold decisions and compromises in Lima (and thereafter), the reform package could still fall short of the needs of farmers and future generations. Fingers crossed.
