Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32581783›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2020

Access and Benefit Sharing Under the Nagoya Protocol-

Michael Heinrich, Francesca Scotti, Adolfo Andrade-Cetto, Monica Berger-Gonzalez, Javier Echeverría, Fabio Friso, Felipe Garcia-Cardona, Alan Hesketh, Martin Hitziger, Caroline Maake and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Balancing openness with Indigenous data sovereignty: An opportunity to leave no one behind in the journey to sequence all of life.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Michael HeinrichResearch Group 'Pharmacognosy and Phytotherapy', UCL School of Pharmacy, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Francesca ScottiResearch Group 'Pharmacognosy and Phytotherapy', UCL School of Pharmacy, University of London, London, United Kingdom.
Adolfo Andrade-CettoLaboratorio de Etnofarmacología, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City, Mexico.
Monica Berger-GonzalezCentro de Estudios en Salud, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Guatemala City, Guatemala.
Javier EcheverríaDepartamento de Ciencias del Ambiente, Facultad de Química y Biología, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Fabio FrisoDepartmento de Investigación, Centro de Rehabilitación de Toxicómanos y de Investigación de Medicinas Tradicionales-Takiwasi, Tarapoto, Peru.
Felipe Garcia-CardonaInstituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos, Alexander von Humboldt, Sede Venado del Oro, Bogotá, Colombia.
Alan HeskethIndigena Biodiversity Limited, Gerrards Cross, United Kingdom.
Martin HitzigerSection of Epidemiology, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Caroline MaakeInstitute of Anatomy, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Matteo PolitiDepartmento de Investigación, Centro de Rehabilitación de Toxicómanos y de Investigación de Medicinas Tradicionales-Takiwasi, Tarapoto, Peru.
Carmenza SpadaforaCentro de Biología Celular y Molecular de Enfermedades (CBCMe), Instituto de Investigaciones Científicas y Servicios de Alta Tecnología (INDICASAT AIP), Panama City, Panamá.
Rita SpadaforaAsociación Nacional de Conservación de la Naturaleza (National Association for the Conservation of Nature), Cd. de Panama City, Panamá.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGlobal challenges related to access and benefit sharing (ABS) of biological resources have become a key concern in the area of research on herbal medicines, ethnopharmacology, drug discovery, and the development of other high value products for which Intellectual Property protection can be secured. While the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD, Rio 1992) has been recognized as a huge step forward, the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol (NP) and of new forms of collaboration often remain unresolved, especially in the context of "the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources" (Convention on Biological Diversity, 2011). The vision and the specific implementation of this international treaty vary from country to country, which poses additional challenges.

aimsUsing a case study approach, in this analysis we aim at understanding the specific opportunities and challenges for implementing international collaborations regarding ABS in six Latin American countries-Chile, Colombia, Guatemala, México, Panama, and Peru. Based on that analysis, we provide recommendations for the path ahead regarding international collaborations under ABS agreements in ethnopharmacological research. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS: The implementation of the NP varies in the six countries; and while they are all rich in biodiversity, access and benefit sharing mechanisms differ considerably. There is a need to engage in a consultation process with stakeholders, but this has often come to a halt. Institutional infrastructures to implement national policies are weak, and the level of knowledge about the NP and the CBD within countries remains limited.

conclusionsDifferent policies in the six countries result in very diverse strategies and opportunities relating to the equitable use of biodiversity. A long-term strategy is required to facilitate a better understanding of the treaties and the resulting opportunities for a fairer development and implementation of transparent national polices, which currently differ in the six countries. So far, the benefits envisioned by the CBD and the NP remain unfulfilled for all stakeholders involved including local communities.

Indexed as

Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS)benefit sharingbiological resourcesNagoya Protocolnatural productstraditional medicine

Identifiers

PMID32581783
PMCPMC7294742

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.