World Federation for Culture Collections

Biodiversity Committee

Members

C Babcock [CB] (CCFC, Ottowa, Canada)
babcock@em.agr.ca
P Desmeth [PD] (BCCM/MUCL, Belgium)*
desmeth@mbla.ucl.ac.be

J Hunter-Cevera [JH] (Univ. California, USA)*
jchunter-cevera@lbl.gov

B Kirsop [BK] (Bioline Publications, UK)(Chair)*
barbara@biostrat.demon.co.uk

J L Staphorst [JS] (ARC/LNR, South Africa)*
nipbjls@plant1.agric.za

Da-Kang Song (Institute of Microbiology, China)
(songdk@sun.im.ac.cn)

M Watanabe (National Institute for Environmental Studies)
(mmw@nies.go.jp)

Contact names in other organisations:

FIM - L Anker (lia@novo.dk)
ICOME - I Dundas (i.dundas@im.uib.no)
IUBS - D Hawksworth (Myconova@btinternet.com)
IUMS - R Colwell (colwell@umbi.umd.edu)
Animal/Plant Cells - G Stacey (gstacey@nibsc.ac.uk)
Member at Large - V Canhos [VC] (vcanhos@bdt.org.br)*

Last modified: September 6, 2000
Goals

The aims of the committee are to follow closely the developments of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) as it affects ex-situ microbial resources and to keep the WFCC Membership fully informed. WFCC BC will be proactive in working towards a greater general understanding of the role of microbial diversity in the biosphere and the implementation of the CBD at the microbial level.

The Committee believes that the CBD offers opportunities for research into microbial ecology and taxonomic studies and that the WFCC Members have a significant part to play in the management of ex-situ microbial resources within the framework of the Convention.

The Committee also believes that a number of uncertainties exist in the implementation of the CBD and that the WFCC BC, working with the WFCC EB and other organisations, is well placed to develop procedures that will ensure continued unimpeded access to essential microbial resources and working codes of practice for operational management.
Work Plan
Many of the activities of the Committee will be carried out regionally by members best able to do so. Liaison with the Committee members will be carried out electronically, where possible. Members are encouraged to use e-mail for communication and the biodiv-l and WFCC Bulletin Board for wider communication. Meetings between individual members may take place throughout the period and every opportunity will be taken to further the work of the WFCC BC at these times.
[1] September 1996 - Post Workshop activities
The Committee will build upon the work of the last 4 years by finalising the InfoDoc following the Access Workshop (August 30/31 1996), and carrying out its wide distribution.
The revised InfoDoc, will be posted on the WFCC HomePage for all WFCC members to read and download for local distribution. The URL of the WFCC Web site will be disseminated widely as opportunities arise (http://www.wdcm.riken.go.jp/wfcc/ wfcc.html).[NOTE: new URL is http://wdcm.nig.ac.jp/wfcc/wfcc.html]
It will also be printed by BDT and sent to the CBD Secretariat for release at COPIII. The precise mechanism for this remains to be determined.
[2] October/November 1996 - Completion of Phase 1
The Committee will work with VC to decide the best plan of action for raising awareness of the InfoDoc and the WFCC activities at COPIII, November 1996, Argentina, and future SBSTTA meetings.
Individual Committee members will make contact with their national delegates to COPIII, informing them of the WFCC initiative, the InfoDoc and future plans (see below).
Committee members will take every opportunity to disseminate the revised InfoDoc, communicate with their regional microbiology societies, write reports in appropriate newsletters and other outlets; additionally, they will use the biodiversity lists on the Internet and the WFCC Home Page and Discussion List as electronic communication systems.
Committee members will liaise with the IUMS, IUBS, ICOME, FIM and other appropriate organisations through the contact names provided. The Committee will copy appropriate information to the Chair of the Education and Capacity Building Committee (Nina Gunde-Cimerman).
WFCC BC will liaise with VC on the development of a leaflet about the WFCC for distribution at COPIII.
[3] 1997 - Start of Phase 2
It is anticipated that during this period there will be follow-up activities of the InfoDoc Recommendations. In particular, ways to implement the CBD will be further discussed with regard to the following possible developments (see InfoDoc Recommendations 6 - 8):
The WFCC BC will take a lead in initiating this process, collaborating with other groups, as appropriate. Close communication with the Plant Genetic Resources developments will be established so that parallel interests may be coordinated. Communications with the CBD Secretariat will be maintained, building on the workshop contacts with ten Kate, Mackenzie and Glowka; the proximity of CB to the Secretariat may be valuable in this respect.
The WFCC BC will work with the WFCC EB in the possible development of a WFCC Clearing House Mechanism proposal.
[4] 1998 - 2000
Future activities will greatly depend on the effect of the InfoDoc and Phase 2 developments. The Work Programme for this period will be developed later. Awareness activties will proceed throughout.
BUDGET NEEDS
1996 - Funds for possible attendance at COPIII
1997 - Funds for a 2nd workshop to start the development of codes of conduct and/or other management mechanisms proposed in the InfoDoc Recommendations. [A tentative proposal for such a meeting at INBio, Costa Rica, has been made by Dr Rodrigo Gamez and this opportunity will be followed up after COPIII and after first reactions to the InfoDoc have been received].
Throughout, funds for travel to allow members to meet should be considered, although such meetings will generally take place through regional opportunities.
Although support from WFCC may be requested for the 2nd Workshop, funds will also be sought from other funding bodies such as UNEP, IUMS, companies, and regional agencies (such as Pan-American Organisations, if the Costa Rica option is thought appropriate). Joint proposals with other WFCC Committees may be appropriate as the work programmes are developed.
Estimated Budget needs for 1996/97 (to be requested from WFCC, UNEP and other agencies)
```
Workshop in 1997            $35,000
Travel 1996/7               $10,000
Publicity/Promotion/Printing $5,000
```
Activities
- Workshop on Economic Value of Microbial Genetic Resources
  
  ISME, Halifax, Canada, August 1998
  The World Federation for Culture Collections (WFCC) is actively working with international organisations to resolve some of the uncertainties and develop procedures for the distribution of ex-situ microbial genetic resources (MGRs) within the framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CD). Following an international workshop, supported by DGXII, an Information Document on access to MGRs was prepared by the WFCC, summarised by the CBD Secretariat (UNEP/CBD/COP/3/Inf.19) and widely distributed to governments and others.
  In discussions on the implementation of the CBD at the microbial level, the question frequently arises as to the ECONOMIC VALUE OF MGRs, both in-situ and ex-situ. It is not difficult to draw attention to the clear value of microorganisms producing antibiotics, fine chemicals and other biotechnological products. Similarly, the general value of microorganisms in essential degradation, in the food chain and also in food production (bread, fermented beverages) is abundantly clear. However, the economic value has not yet been estimated in monetary terms. As a result, it is difficult to assess the priorities that should be afforded to microorganisms in the development of conservation policies and the value that should be attached to potential industrial strains for royalty and licensing purposes. This is an important gap in current knowledge that should be resolved.
  To work towards a solution, the WFCC plans to organise a workshop during ISME to which environmental economists, environmental microbiologists, culture collection experts and policy makers can meet to consider the problem. The workshop could consider ways in which figures can be attached to current generic statements, and realistic estimates be made for the benefit of the different sectors working with MGRs.
  The outcome of the workshop would be the preparation of a document assessing the issue, giving guidance and making recommendations. This would be published conventionally and also distributed widely on the Internet. It could be anticipated that the workshop would recommend a full economic study, to be carried out by a group with the professional experience demanded.
  The WFCC is seeking sponsors for this initiative to enable experts to be brought to the workshop, together with appropriate people from developing countries who need to be aware of these issues.
- Compilation of Access Agreements/Notifications
  The WFCC Biodiversity Committee thinks it would be useful to compile examples of access agreements/notifications that are currently being used by ex-situ culture collections to conform to the requirements of the Conevntion on Biological Diversity. A number of culture collections are unsure of their obligations and are looking to the WFCC to keep them informed.
  If you are able to mail any forms used by your collection for deposit and distribution that include mention of the obligations of the Convention on Biological Diversity, the committee will compile them into an information pack which curators may be used as advisory material by collections drawing up their own access arrangements.
  It would also be useful if you could inform the committee of any meetings/discussions or even agreements at the national level concerning access to ex-situ microorganisms.
  Please mail material to Barbara Kirsop, WFCC Biodiversity Committee, Bioline Publications, Stainfield House, Stainfield, Bourne, Lincs PE10 0RS, UK or fax to +44 1778 570175 or e-mail to bio@biostrat.demon.co.uk
- Towards Best Practice for Access to Genetic Resources
  WORKSHOP organised by DGXI and the German Federal Ministry of the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety
  Cordoba, Spain, January 15, 16 1998
  Attended on behalf of the WFCC by Barbara Kirsop, Chair WFCC Biodiversity Committee, with sponsorship by the Workshop Organisers
  A background document had been prepared by 3 authors at Bonn, Germany, and this was generally accepted by the participants, with some minor changes. A draft Summary and Recommendations document was also distributed, but this was considerably revised following discussions by participants. On the second day of the workshop the group divided into 'users' and 'providers' and considered the uncertainties of each with regard to access and benefit sharing (ABS) and recommendations to COP4 regarding resolving the uncertainties.
  The Workshop output will be provided to COP4 for its consideration (Bratislava, 1998).
  BK will find out when the documents can be made publically available and will ensure that they are transmitted to WFCC as soon as possible. This may not be until after the Parties to the Convention have received them.
  The WFCC InfoDoc was distributed to all participants and other WFCC material also.
  -------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENTS
  The Workshop participants were from botanical gardens, universities and industry. The emphasis was on commercial use because this is where 'access and benefit sharing (ABS)' issues are most relevant (but see below).
  - Microorganisms seemed to be high on the agenda once more. There was discussion about natural products v combinatorial chemistry and people generally felt that the natural products were always likely to be required for industry and certainly, of course, for other uses (research, education).
  - There was some discussion about the ubiquity of microorganisms, and some misunderstanding. BK was able to point out the uncertainties of reisolation, the importance of the strain, the rapid generation times, the loss of some strains that only occurred in habitats now lost etc etc. Much of this as written in the WFCC InfoDoc.
  - Although much of the workshop emphasis was on the industrial use of microorganisms, since this is where monetary benefit sharing is most likely to occur, BK and others emphasised that there were other 'users' with other 'benefits' to be shared and the free exchange of research/educational material was vital to preserve and mechanisms have to be introduced to make this happen.
  This is generally accepted, and one of the Recommendations put forward was that the different kinds of users be recognised by PArties to the CBD and their different needs addressed, ie users are not only commercial, benefits are not only monetary. It is good that this is being dsicussed.
  - Although mostly at such meetings there is discussion about botanical gardens and not CCs, the term 'ex-situ providers' was introduced as one that would include microbial resource centres. Maybe WFCC can begin to use this term in CBD meetings etc.
  - The need to track movement of microbial resources that pass through the 'intermediaries' (ie ex-situ providers) was raised by BK as, without this, there is no record of the country of origin, the collection number, the recipient(s) etc, and therefore CCs could not comply with the CBD when cultures are supplied. This mechanism has to be very simple, not an administrative burden (as we have discussed in WFCC circles). BK explained how various groups were beginning to consider how this can best be done (WFCC, MOSAICC, UK CCs etc).
  The concept of tracking was strongly opposed by industry. In the case where a company has an agreement with a single provider Institute, all parties know exactly where/what was being transferred and a tracking mechanism is indeed not required. This is a specific situation. However, industry seems not to understand that there are also many other categories of providers/users where movement of resources is not so defined. For example, the world's CCs are distributing hundreds of resources daily and this is a quite different situation and we need to devise mechanisms that suit the needs and capabilities of the ex-situ providers.
  There was concern by industry that Universities may be 'passing on' strains to 3rd parties inadvertantly (or deliberately). BK felt that a simple tracking mechanism (for eg a Form that followed the transfer of any resource) could help this situation also since a resource could not finally be developed unless the associated Transfer Document was also available to prove its origins. This clearly needs thinking through among WFCC and other groups. The CITES system already uses such a tracking mechanism and it seems that it works well.
  - BK had a good discussion with Professor Zakri, Malaysia, now Chair SBSTTA. He was interested in the case of microorganisms and wonders whether he should suggest to SBSTTA the formation of a Focus Group for microorganisms. BK suggested that this could be very helpful in resolving the current uncertainties, finding solutions, developing mechanisms etc.
  - There was discussion about the present IPR system, and the need to develop alternative lower cost systems for DCs. On the whole it was felt that this complex issue was not appropriate for discussion by the workshop.
  The final Recommendations include a list of uncertainties felt by users and providers and that need to be addressed by COP4. Some of these are listed below, in no order of importance:
  Users uncertainties included:
  need for clear contact points and competant authorities in countries;
  clarity of legal rights over resources;
  need for corporate ABS policies;
  lack of legal and negotiating experience in provider countries.
  .......
  Provider uncertainties included:
  need to establish a mechanism to provide evidence of prior informed consent;
  value of resources;
  lack of control once resources outside area of providers' jurisdiction (hence need for tracking system);
  need to clarify position regarding non-commercial use;
  lack of confidence, especially re IPRs;
  lack of negotiating experience and knowledge of market structure for genetic resources.
  Recommendations to COP will ask that some of these uncertainties are addressed.
  SUMMARY
  It is good that the situation regarding microorganisms is better understood now; also the needs of the different user communities is being recognised (ie research/teaching). It could be useful if some Parties (Countries) are encouraged to ask COP that these uncertainties be resolved and maybe WFCC members can put this forward to their national delegates for COP4. (It seems that the Philippines well recognises research needs and the legal departments are using scientists in an advisory capacity to ensure these needs are not impaired).
  The commercial ABS issues seem to be more in perspective now and expectations not so high. Companies are developing access policies and trying to find the best regions to collaborate with (ie those with well defined procedures that are flexible).
  This workshop was encouraging for WFCC in that participants seem increasingly attuned to microbiological issues; no measures were discussed that adversely affect our activities and aims. We need to continue to ensure that the message is spread to our governments and others at all opportunities.
- The provisional progamme for the Halifax Workshop on the ECONOMIC VALUE OF MICROBIAL GENETIC RESOURCES.
Reports
- PRE-CBD DEPOSITS HELD BY Ex-SITU MICROBIAL GENETIC RESOURCE CENTRES (June 1999)
- WFCC BIODIVERSITY COMMITTEE REPORT (June 1998)
- October, 1996 - Participation at the 3rd Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity
  
  WFCC BIODIVERSITY COMMITTEE REPORT
  on
  PARTICIPATION AT THE 3rd CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES
  of the CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
  The WFCC has observer status at the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) meetings as a non-governmental organisation. As such, the WFCC attended the Conference of the Parties 3rd meeting (COP3) in Buenos Aires, Argentina, at the beginning of November, 1996, with the purpose of further raising awareness of the importance of microbial diversity and the role of culture collections in implementation of the CBD. In this role, the WFCC was supported by the International Union of Microbiological Societies (IUMS) and the International Union of Biological Sciences.
  Previous to COP3, the WFCC had been working on the preparation of a background document on 'Access to ex-situ microbial genetic resources within the framework of the CBD' in order to draw attention to the uncertainties and opportunities for culture collections in the implementation of the CBD. This document had been drawn up by a number of people and organisations and was finalised at a workshop held in association with the WFCC's International Conference on Culture Collections (ICCC8), Veldhoven, Netherlands, August 1996. The finalised Document was printed by the Fundacao Tropical de Pesquisas e Tecnologia, Brazil, and < 300 copies were made available at COP3.
  Additionally, this Document was well summarised by the Secretariat of the CBD and the summary was made available to all government Parties to the Convention at COP3 as an official Information Document, UNEP/CBD/COP/3/Inf.19.
  COP3 was attended by Dr Vanderlei Canhos (President WFCC) and Barbara Kirsop (Chair, WFCC Biodiversity Committee) who were able to talk to many government representatives about culture collections and the WFCC's activities and role. These discussions were very productive, and the impression was gained that microbial diversity is now recognised as a fundamental element of the biosphere that requires additional attention by Governments. The WFCC is increasingly recognised as an active and strong organisation with an essential role to play in advising governments on such issues as access, distribution and conservation of microbial genetic resources.
  The WFCC was successful in securing a room for an evening workshop to introduce the document to governments and discuss any issues that were of interest to Parties. Some 40 governments and NGOs attended (November 5th, 6-8pm), which was very encouraging in view of the alternative activities at this time and the workload to be undertaken by all participants. At the workshop, the background to the WFCC was introduced and the major elements of the Information Document were discussed. A number of questions were asked subsequently. The WFCC representatives were joined for this event by Professor David Hawksworth, President of IUBS, who was able to contribute authoritatively to the discussions.
  During the course of the COP3 debates, a number of countries included the importance of microorganisms in their interventions. Countries who mentioned microorganisms (mostly in the context of the need to give priority to agricultural biodiversity), or endorsed the proposals from other countries, included: Brazil, Argentina, Morocco, Japan, New Zealand, Sweden, India, Netherlands, Tunisia. The USA (which is not yet a party to the Convention) also supported the need for emphasis on microbial diversity. Other countries, such as the EU, felt there was a need for a gap analysis study. There was some divergence between countries that recognised an urgent need and did not accept any delaying tactics, and others that wanted more information before proceeding. (See final outcome, above).
  In comparison with other COP meetings, at which microorganisms have been near-invisible, this COP represented a marked change in awareness and interest in microorganisms. It remains to be seen how this becomes translated into projects. The time should be right for projects to be submitted relating to microbial taxonomy, environmental studies, conservation and the legal and administrative management of microbial genetic resources.
  NEXT STEPS
  As a result of this initiative of the WFCC, and to take advantage of the current raised awareness, it is important that culture collections consider approaching their government departments as soon as possible to ensure recognition of the existence of the microbial resource centres in their country, and to begin discussions on the implementation of the CBD particularly with regard to access.
  The WFCC will be considering the possibility of obtaining financial support for carrying forward some of the Recommendations, particularly the development of an internationally acceptable code of conduct for the WFCC registered collections. Regional activities, such as that proposed to the EU by the Belgian culture collections, may form a basis for this. The WFCC Biodiversity Committee (BC) asks that WFCC members keep the committee informed of any developments in their countries that may be of importance and interest to other Federation members. Further developments by the BC will be made available through the WFCC Newsletter and the WFCC WWW site.
  The WFCC is also actively considering ways in which capacity building for microbial genetic resource centress through training, partnerships and research programmes can be coordinated and developed through the WFCC Education Committee.
  Copies of the publication, 'Access to ex-situ microbial genetic resources within the framework of the CBD' may be obtained from http://www.wdcm.riken.go.jp/wfcc/wfcc.html by WWW Internet users, or from any officers of the WFCC or the Biodiversity Committee Chair (email: bio@biostrat.demon.co.uk or fax +44 1778 570175). The UNEP Inf.19 document should now be available through the CBD WWW site.

Biodiversity Committee

Members

Goals

Work Plan

Activities

Reports

WFCC BIODIVERSITY COMMITTEE REPORT on PARTICIPATION AT THE 3rd CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES of the CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY

WFCC BIODIVERSITY COMMITTEE REPORT
on
PARTICIPATION AT THE 3rd CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES
of the CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY