The Application of Intellectual Property Rights to Biodiversity Resources: A Technique for the South Countries to Maintain Control over the Biodiversity Resources in Their Territories?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the increased industrial application of biological resources, there has been a steep rise in the economic and commercial utility of such resources. This has resulted in the emergence of a new era of discovery and patent filings by individuals and corporeal organs, in the form of biological processes and plant varieties. On the other hand, biodiversity rich countries of the south have started to assert their sovereignty over the resources in their territories by claiming rights of ownership of the resources. Due to the huge financial benefits that modification and commercialisation of biological resources can confer, biodiversity has now become a subject of intense arguments and trade negotiations.The article begins with a brief discussion of the rules regulating rights over biodiversity resources under the World Trade Organization's Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights and the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. Part III examines the background and context of controversies over the emerging practices of registering Intellectual Property Rights over biodiversity resources by different countries, while the next part assesses the merits of Geographical Indications and Trademarks as instruments of control of biodiversity resources. Then follows a discussion on the utility of Intellectual Property Rights to the developing countries in maintaining control over the biodiversity resources in their territories. Part VI concludes the paper with several suggestions, and raises the challenging impediments to the subject.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".