International organizations

Can biological diversity escape any risk of biopiracy when part of it is digitised in computers? The answer depends on ongoing negotiations within international bodies. In the meantime, an international project to sequence the genome of all known eukaryotic species is making progress. Financed indirectly by players in the IT and artificial intelligence fields, this project even hopes to be able to bypass certain rules thanks to more powerful working tools.

The Svalbard Global Seed Vault (Svalbard, Norway), often nicknamed the “seed vault”, plays a special role in preserving genetic biodiversity. Its main mission, focused on the long-term conservation of seed samples, is officially to preserve the diversity of plant genetic resources and ensure their accessibility in the event of disasters. However, a closer look at how it works reveals the considerable influence and interests of pro-GMO players in its governance. Who will really benefit from Svalbard, the multinationals or the farmers?

In less than a year and a half, from May 3, 2022 to October 12, 2023, the previous European Commission has launched a number of legislative initiatives concerning the Living. The deregulation of GMOs, the digitization of living organisms and even patents are just some of the issues on the table of member states and the European Parliament. If adopted, these projects will make it easier for companies with substantial financial, human and technical resources to take ownership of the Living. These initiatives do echo current international negotiations.

What are the links between new techniques of genetic modification, digitization of genetic sequences information and patents? Inf’OGM publishes here an analysis presented in June 2024 at a regional workshop organized by the African Center for Biodiversity, in Durban (South Africa). It was written by Guy Kastler, representative of the international farmers’ organization La Via Campesina at various ITPGRFA and CBD meetings. 

For the past fifteen years, governments have been discussing “synthetic biology” on an international level. If to date, an “operational” definition exists, the outlines of this field remain hard to draw. Are talks of “synthetic biology” simply a change of semantics, or a genuinely new frontier of the biotechnology field? For the moment, examples of organisms or molecules obtained by synthetic biology are accumulating: unnatural proteins, GMO plants, GMO bacteria, recreated viruses, modification of living organisms directly in the environment, GMO insects, xenobacteria…