In spite of the heated debate on the use of and access to genetic resources, only few scholarly publications and in-depth discussions have directly addressed policy issues regarding access to ‘marine’ genetic resources. This dissertation explores the emerging policy problems raised by a lack of policy framework governing access to marine genetic resources, examines alternative policy options in the context of two international conventions: the Law of the Sea Convention and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and selects the most appropriate and feasible policy framework for granting access to marine organisms for biotechnological uses. This research was based on literature reviews, interviews, participation in marine biotechnology related workshops, and on the survey conducted by the Center for Study of Marine Policy of the University of Delaware, USA.; To illustrate examples of contractual arrangements for access to genetic resources under national jurisdiction, a few land-based bioprospecting contracts were presented. The contracts were between the user and the provider of genetic materials, for example, material transfer agreements (MTA) and the Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) signed in 1997 between the Yellowstone National Park and Diversa, Co. Ltd. Although such land-based contractual arrangements could potentially serve as a model for accessing marine genetic resources, an enactment of a U.S. national marine bioprospecting legislation is still necessary to provide a comprehensive framework governing the sustainable use, management, and conservation of marine genetic resources.; To fill the vacuum created by the lack of policy framework governing access to marine genetic resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction, seven alternative policy options were presented. After an examination of each option on the basis of Oran Young's criteria for assessment of regime performance, one policy framework, “Bringing marine genetic resources under the CBD umbrella in a joint agreement with the International Seabed Authority (ISA),” was chosen as the most desirable option. The selected option would extend the CBD's authority to marine areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, as well as extending ISA's jurisdiction to encompass genetic resources of the seafloor (the “Area”). This option was also examined in the context of theoretical approaches to international regime formation and the role of institutional bargaining in the emerging CBD/ISA joint access regime.
展开▼
