Pre-assigned groups Chair & Rapporteurs Workshop goals AHTEGs: they have to pre-decide if non commercial research “is different” and/or needs a different approach… in that case, why & how?

QUESTIONS 1.- What are the defining characteristics of the non-commercial biodiversity research sector? [is there a common thread?] [is “basic research” still useful?] [is it public vs private outputs or benefits ? but there can be cases although results are IPRd, data are “publicized” and released for farther use: no licensing zb metagenomics or FAO Plant Treaty 13.2.d) ii ] [ it that line clear? is the legal nature of the entity (non profit vs corporate) of essence? ] [Economic benefits: building of general knowledge or of intellectual infrastructure… ]

2.-What are the different ways that the non-commercial research sector and its subsectors understand and treat biological resources, genetic resources, derivatives, and products? PLEASE:NO DEFINITION [manner of utilization: capitalization on the functional units of heredity?] [commodities …] [Brazil Resolution 2006?]

3.-What are various forms of utilization of genetic resources in the sub-sectors within the non-commercial biodiversity research sector? [are they “subsectors” or “practice communities” … or only “projects”?] [ products delivered to the public domain: do they have a common manifestation? ]

4.- Should there be different approaches to access and benefit sharing for communities with and without commercial intent? [ Economic benefits: building of intellectual infrastructure… - leading to specific regime? Zb institutional vs personal? specific trade-offs art 15.6 –capacity building, infrastructure building… does compliance & enforcement distrust and efficiency in control (which runs against western classic law on biotech and jurisdiction) block everything? invention of less value-charged concepts (zb bioprospecting)? Is there a structural problem: is the way in which the economies that stem from the sectors are organized (biodiv productive science) in a way distrust is unavoidable? why do researchers behave “irresponsibly” by not caring of the potential future value of their research (zb why not copies of published work?); is it a structural defect of western science (intellectual paradigm), research vs organized research?... ]

NOT GET INTO TOMORROW´s DEBATES Session 12: The following questions reflect issues that the CBD has raised for consideration by the ABS Working Group. Discussion groups are asked to address the following from the perspective of the non-commercial biodiversity research sector. Identify and describe the characteristics of access and benefit-sharing arrangements for non-commercial research. What kind of voluntary measures are available to enhance compliance of users of foreign genetic resources? Non-commercial biodiversity research produces information resources (e.g., publications and databases) and infrastructure (e.g., museum collections and cell lines), that can then be used for subsequent non-commercial and commercial research. With this in mind, what particular compliance measures are needed for research with non-commercial intent? How could these measures address challenges arising from: (1) changes in intent and/or users, and (2) non-compliance with relevant access and benefit-sharing legislation and/or mutually agreed terms?

Relation to the report (sign-up sheet outside): 1.- Is non-commercial research a distinct sector? How can it be defined? (sessions 3-4, 6) N.Davies 2.- What are the communities of practice (subsectors) within non-commercial research sector? (sessions 3-4, 6) D. Schindel 3.- What are the possible benefits of non-commercial research and the possible costs of restricted access? (sessions 3-4, 6) S. Martinez 4.- What different approaches to ABS agreements should be considered for non-commercial research? (6, 8, 9, 11 and 12) C. Häuser 5.- What are the risks and possible costs for provider countries associated with non-commercial research? (session 5 and 6) M. Ribadeneira Sarmiento