The Function of IPR In Biodiversity Preservation

Rajat Rastogi , who is presently the manager of the IP department, wrote this article. All of the requirements are covered in this article, along with the rationale for why the nation needs such legislation.

INTRODUCTION

IPR refers to a type of legal protection for data against new inventions. These rights enable the owner to prohibit imitators from commercializing the innovations or processes for the defined amount of time in exchange for being compelled to disclose the formula or strategy behind the procedure. The range of living organisms that originate from all types of source materials and the ecological components to which they are related is referred to as "biodiversity."

Ecosystem diversity, inter-species diversity, and intraspecies diversity are also included. Biodiversity enriches human lives and provides a practical means of accomplishing developmental goals. Both of these ideas are quite interrelated since inventions and products are produced from the resources present in biodiversity.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW AND BIODIVERSITY

IPR protects products made with specific raw materials found in the biodiversity system, like the pricey furniture made with Kashmiri wood from a particular species of teak tree found in the Kashmir region, as well as products that are directly derived from conventional wisdom, like the use of Malabar Pepper as medicine. IPR serves these two purposes in relation to biodiversity. The geographical indicators system established by intellectual property law protects the latter.

The growing demand for herbal and organic products in urban communities across the world today demonstrates the significance of goods generated directly or indirectly from biodiversity outside of rural, tribal, and indigenous sectors. The use of its derivatives in improving soil fertility, reducing crop failures, balancing the nutritional value of products, and guaranteeing food security has had the most influence on biodiversity in the agricultural sector. The growth of increased output through commercial agriculture research and development has led to the creation and utilization of new plant types.

Commercial agriculture and genetic degradation can be stopped by intellectual property rules, and it is now necessary to conserve these innovative plant species. As evidenced by the dynamic history of mankind, innovation is motivated by motivations other than financial gain, such as social recognition, reform, goodwill, and the necessity to simply exist.

Asian farmers created hundreds of thousands of rice varieties from a single species to meet varied ecological and socioeconomic demands. Traditional healers, farmers, and others are motivated to innovate to address society needs by the spirit of social welfare. It is simpler to identify these innovators who are operating inside the biodiversity system because of the protection provided by intellectual property regulations, which also serve as a strong incentive for innovation.

CHALLENGES TO BIODIVERSITY

Local communities may have new chances as a result of the exponential increase in demand for goods created from biodiversity resources, such as organic fertilizers and herbal medicines, since the financial benefit from sharing resources and knowledge may assist their economic growth. As local people have depended on biodiversity resources for centuries, they act as stewards of these resources, and any improvements will undoubtedly have an impact on biodiversity.

Local communities have seldom profited from the commercial application of their knowledge and skills since the majority of prophets have gone to businesses that employ them. There are two aspects to the issue with the present international protections for biodiversity resources. Secondly, states must ensure that enterprises that exploit traditional knowledge, natural resources, and other products of biodiversity do so in a way that equitably distributes the benefits to the community, in accordance with the Nagoya Protocol (2010) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (1992).

These accords, however, do not deal with resources or collections of traditional knowledge that were already in the public domain; rather, they only apply to materials obtained after the CBD and Nagoya Protocol entered into force.

Second, depending on multinational businesses for possible "advantage" is more labor- and time-intensive than selling biocultural goods independently and pursuing a comprehensive "benefit capture" plan for local populations. The main premise is that development and profit-sharing will benefit local people and optimize the conservation of biodiversity resources.

UTILIZATION OF THE CURRENT SYSTEM TO SAFEGUARD BIODIVERSITY RESOURCES

The "Biological Diversity Act of 2002" was passed to safeguard biological diversity, promote sustainable use of goods generated from biological resources, and guarantee a fair and equal distribution of the advantages of resource utilization and long-standing customs. The Biodiversity Act makes provisions for the retention of traditional knowledge and has a progressive outlook. 

If its provisions are put into action, local communities and those who possess traditional knowledge may see substantial changes. The present implementation method for this law, which is much in need of reform, has been limited to recording information used to create the PBR.

The PPVFR Act of 2001, which acknowledges farmers as breeders who have successfully created a number of varieties as well as cultivators and guardians of the agricultural gene pool, has the ability to protect biodiversity in the agricultural industry. The farmer, a farmer's organization, or any other person allowed by the farmer to submit such an application (Section 16E, PPVFR Act 2001) shall register such a farmer's variety in accordance with Section 14(c) of the Act. This rule recognized long-standing traditions, such as planting, harvesting, and sharing farm produce—habits that are still essential to cutting-edge concepts like organic farming and resource-rich plantations.

CONCLUSION

A sustainable society where people may use natural resources without disproportionately hurting them requires biodiversity protection. IPR has a significant negative influence on local communities and traditional residents, who are the genuine guardians of the knowledge and resources generated from biodiversity. 

An IPR policy that is sympathetic to native peoples will successfully protect them from being exploited and the use of their biological resources for commercial gain. It will also encourage the growth of human knowledge and creativity.