Who owns biogenetic resources and which governance models are, or should be, applied to regulate such resources?
Francioni’s first question is answered through a modelling of three possible governance models of biotechnology: the “modern permanent sovereign regime”, the “common heritage regime” and the “common concern” concept. Francioni, judging from the internal chapter organisation and by his use of the term “concept” rather than “regime”, seems to consider “common concern” a subset of the “common heritage regime”, although it presents sufficient differences from the latter to stand on its own. More specifically, in the “common concern” concept “resources of the world […] are not ‘owned’ by the international community on the basis of an indivisible title, as is the case of the common heritage; on the contrary, they remain subject to the traditional regime of sovereignty or freedom, but their management requires a holistic approach that takes into account the general interest of humanity in their conservation. In this sense […] the common concern serves as a legal basis for legitimising for
Related Questions
- Can Corporate Governance Variables Enhance the Prediction Power of Accounting-Based Financial Distress Prediction Models?
- What are the best online resources for research about buying a car, specifically comparisons between models and pricing?
- What other resources do nations use to regulate politics besides oil?
