In October 2014, the Nagoya Protocol entered into force. It created a new international regulatory system affecting all life science companies that conduct R&D on biological material such as animals, seeds, flowers, viruses, fragrances, flavonoids, essential oils, enzymes, yeasts, and so on. So far, compliance by companies is progressing slowly due to unawareness of the regime and uncertainty over its requirements.

By January 2017, this new international agreement will be in force in 89 countries, including China, India, Mexico, Switzerland, South Africa, and the entire EU. Between December 4 and 17, 2016, the second “COP-MOP” takes place. At that meeting, the parties to the Nagoya Protocol are working to accelerate substantive implementation and enforcement of the rules.

How the Nagoya Protocol Works

The full title of the Nagoya Protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity reads “…on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from Their Utilization.” Under the Protocol, the Parties may adopt (i) provider-country measures on “access and benefit sharing” (ABS), but must adopt (ii) user-country rules to enforce compliance with provider-country measures.

(i) Provider-country rules are most relevant for countries rich in biodiversity such as India, Denmark (Greenland), France (mainly through the overseas territories), Brazil, and South Africa. First, as “providers” of genetic resources, countries may require a public permit to obtain them from their territory. Such a permit commonly describes what genetic resource may be acquired, and whether the results of R&D may be commercialised. Second, countries may require the negotiation of a contract with public or private entities on how benefits from R&D on the genetic resources will be shared. Monetary benefit-sharing can include payments into a public fund or making the resulting product available at a preferential price. Non-monetary benefit-sharing can include providing access to scientific results of the R&D.

(ii) User-country rules are most relevant for countries with advanced technological capabilities, where public and private entities conduct R&D to develop commercial products from genetic resources. Under the Nagoya Protocol, all parties must adopt enforcement measures to ensure that genetic resources used in their jurisdiction have been acquired in compliance with rules of the country that provided them.

The Nagoya Protocol covers “genetic resources” and “associated traditional knowledge.” Both are legal terms subject to controversy. Nevertheless, the following examples likely fall within the scope.

  • Black cumin seeds and the derived compound thymoquinoe with properties that reduce food allergies;
  • pineapple stem and the derivative bromelain, a proteolytic enzyme used as the active ingredient in an EU-approved medicinal product to treat burn wounds, and;
  • flower buds of the Japanese Pagoda Tree and the derived flavonoid rutin with properties useful in hair and skin cosmetics. In Asian traditional medicine the Pagoda Tree is mentioned for its hemostatic effects, possibly qualifying as “associated traditional knowledge” under the Nagoya Protocol.

In the span of two years, the Nagoya Protocol has created a complex web of public rules and private contracts spanning almost one-hundred provider and user countries.

Challenge for Industry

Upon reviewing their R&D pipelines, many companies are likely to find that the vast majority of their activities do not trigger provider country obligations. However, user countries’ rules require that companies have in place processes to check whether access and benefit-sharing obligations apply. This necessarily implies reviewing all R&D activities. If the company then finds that Nagoya obligations are triggered, they must request public permits and negotiate benefit-sharing as required in the provider country.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Bart Van Vooren Bart Van Vooren

Bart Van Vooren, partner leads a dynamic practice at the intersection of EU regulatory law, global health, and biodiversity law. In these fields, he advises innovative pharmaceutical, food, cosmetic and technology companies on complex EU and global regulatory, compliance and policy assignments.

Bart…

Bart Van Vooren, partner leads a dynamic practice at the intersection of EU regulatory law, global health, and biodiversity law. In these fields, he advises innovative pharmaceutical, food, cosmetic and technology companies on complex EU and global regulatory, compliance and policy assignments.

Bart holds a Ph.D. in EU and International Law and was a professor of EU law until 2013. During that time, he wrote the first-ever handbook with Cambridge University Press on “EU External Relations Law” (2014). He then transitioned to private practice, and frequently acted for the Belgian government before the EU Court of Justice (e.g. C-16/16P Belgium vs Commission). Bart joined Covington in 2016, leading some of our most consequential EU litigation proceedings (e.g. C-311/18 “Schrems II”) over the years.  Having handled nearly 50 cases before the EU Court, he’s uniquely qualified to support our corporate clients in our most high-stakes disputes. Recent examples include T-189/21 Aloe Vera of Europe v Commission (which we won, so the Commission decided to appeal); as well as T-201/21 Covington & Burling and Van Vooren v Commission (which we also won, and hence is also on appeal).

As a pioneer in biodiversity law, over the past 15 years Bart has built a unique, global practice on Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) laws under the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Nagoya Protocol, the Plant Treaty, the High Seas Treaty and the WHO Pandemic Agreement. ABS compliance is critical when sourcing biological materials for life sciences R&D and I work with many of the world’s innovative life sciences companies on the whole range of e.g. transactional, contractual, compliance, IP, (EU) regulatory and litigation work relating to ABS. As biodiversity has increasingly become identified as a major commercial and financial risk to companies, so has the practice expanded to e.g. biodiversity credit markets, biodiversity insurance, biodiversity claims and advertising, and so on. Since April 2025, Bart has been appointed as the industry representative to the Steering Committee of the UN Biodiversity Fund that seeks funding from the private sector for biodiversity conservation and restoration.

Bart also pioneered our global health practice. He has advised pharmaceutical clients on seasonal and pandemic influenza since 2016. Since then, this practice area expanded to cover all matters relating to infectious diseases, and as of 2020, emergency preparedness and response (eg. WHO prequalification, International Coordination Group negotiations, Emergency Use Listing, International Health Regulations Rev 2024). He has been the pharmaceutical industry’s lead lawyer advising on the WHO Pandemic Treaty negotiations, adopted on 14 May 2025. Currently, he continues to advise on the work of the Intergovernmental Working Group (“IGWG”) teasing out the technical details of the “Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing System” intended to create legally binding obligations on companies to commit vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics in case of a new global health emergency.

In Chambers rankings, clients have kindly described Bart as “very knowledgeable, action-focused and service-focused lawyer”, adding that he “really tries to find a way of working through challenges”, am “customer-oriented” and provide “sound advice and reasonable options for our business with pros and cons.”

Finally, Bart has an active pro bono practice assisting NGOs defending the human rights of persons with a disability through strategic litigation before the EU Court.

Photo of Peter Bogaert Peter Bogaert

Peter Bogaert has a broad European life sciences practice. He has detailed regulatory expertise under EU and national laws, handles legislative and other policy assignments and provides strategic advice. He also represents life sciences companies before the EU Courts in Luxembourg and in…

Peter Bogaert has a broad European life sciences practice. He has detailed regulatory expertise under EU and national laws, handles legislative and other policy assignments and provides strategic advice. He also represents life sciences companies before the EU Courts in Luxembourg and in local litigation in Belgium. Peter’s practice covers pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, medical devices, special foods and feed, cosmetics and other consumer products and he represents numerous innovative life sciences companies, including start-ups, as well as several industry associations.

Chambers Global notes that a client said: “He is an extremely experienced professional with broad expertise and provides sensible and well-balanced solutions.” He is consistently ranked by PLC as one of the leading life sciences lawyers globally and Legal 500 EMEA and Chambers Europe note Peter’s prominent regulatory pharmaceutical and environmental practice. Legal 500 EME noted that he is “a superb lawyer who is very pleasant to work with.” Peter regularly writes and speaks on life sciences issues. He is a founding member of the Brussels Pharma Law Group and also served for fifteen years as Managing Partner of the firm’s Brussels office.