Hostname: page-component-7d8f8d645b-r82c8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-05-27T11:30:09.674Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false
  • English

The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2004

Kal Raustiala  and
David G. Victor
Kal Raustiala
Affiliation:
Kal Raustiala is Acting Professor of Law at UCLA Law School, Los Angeles. He can be reached at raustiala@law.ucla.edu.
David G. Victor
Affiliation:
David G. Victor is Director of the Program on Energy and Sustainable Development at Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. He can be reached at dgvictor@stanford.edu.
Get access

Abstract

This article examines the implications of the rising density of international institutions. Despite the rapid proliferation of institutions, scholars continue to embrace the assumption that individual regimes are decomposable from others. We contend that an increasingly common phenomenon is the “regime complex:” a collective of partially overlapping and nonhierarchical regimes. The evolution of regime complexes reflects the influence of legalization on world politics. Regime complexes are laden with legal inconsistencies because the rules in one regime are rarely coordinated closely with overlapping rules in related regimes. Negotiators often attempt to avoid glaring inconsistencies by adopting broad rules that allow for multiple interpretations. In turn, solutions refined through implementation of these rules focus later rounds of negotiation and legalization. We explore these processes using the issue of plant genetic resources (PGR). Over the last century, states have created property rights in these resources in a Demsetzian process: as new technologies and ideas have made PGR far more valuable, actors have mobilized and clashed over the creation of property rights that allow the appropriation of that value.We are grateful for comments on early drafts presented at Stanford Law School, New York University Law School, Duke Law School, Harvard Law School, and the American Society for International Law. Thanks especially to Larry Helfer, Tom Heller, Robert Keohane, Benedict Kingsbury, Peter Lallas, Lisa Martin, Ron Mitchell, Sabrina Safrin, Gene Skolnikoff, Richard Stewart, Chris Stone, Buzz Thompson, Jonathan Wiener, Katrina Wyman, Oran Young, and two anonymous reviewers for their feedback. Kal Raustiala thanks the Program on Law and Public Affairs at Princeton for support. We also thank our research assistants, Lindsay Carlson, Lesley Coben and Joshua House.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Organization , Volume 58 , Issue 2 , April 2004 , pp. 277 - 309
Copyright
© 2004 The IO Foundation and Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aggarwal, Vinod K. 1985. Liberal Protectionism: The International Politics of Organized Textile Trade. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Bardach, Eugene, and Robert Kagan. 1982. Going by the Book: The Problem of Regulatory Unreasonableness. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Barton, John H. 1982. The International Breeder's Rights System and Crop Plant Innovation. Science 216 (4550):1071–75.Google Scholar
Benedick, Richard E. 1991. Ozone Diplomacy: New Directions in Safeguarding the Planet. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Benkler, Yochai. 2002. Coase's Penguin, or Linux and the Nature of the Firm. Yale Law Journal 112:369–446.Google Scholar
Blum, E. 1993. Making Biodiversity Conservation Profitable: A Case Study of the Merck/INBio Agreement. Environment 35 (4):16–20, 38–45.Google Scholar
Boyle, James. 1996. Shamans, Software and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information Society. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Brenton, Tony. 1994. The Greening of Machiavelli: The Greening of International Environmental Politics. London: Earthscan and the Royal Institute of International Affairs.
Chayes, Abram, and Antonia Chayes. 1995. The New Sovereignty: Compliance with International Regulatory Agreements. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Demsetz, Harold. 1967. Toward a Theory of Property Rights. American Economic Review 57 (2):347–59.Google Scholar
DeSombre, Elizabeth R., and Joanne Kaufman. 1996. The Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund: Partial Success Story. In Institutions for Environmental Aid: Pitfalls and Promise, edited by Robert O. Keohane and Marc A. Levy, 89–126. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 (1980).
Evans, Peter, Harold Jacobson, and Robert Putnam, eds. 1993. Double-Edged Diplomacy: International Bargaining and Domestic Politics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Evenson, Robert E. 2002. Agricultural Biotechnology. In Technological Innovation and Economic Performance, edited by Benn Steil, David G. Victor, and Richard R. Nelson, 367–84. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Ex Parte Hibberd, 227 U.S.P.Q. 443 (1985).
FAO. 1989. Resolution 4/89: Annex 1: Agreed Interpretation of the International Undertaking. Rome: Extract of the Twenty-Fifth Session of the FAO Conference, 11–29 November. Available at 〈ftp://ext-ftp.fao.org/ag/cgrfa/Res/C4-89E.pdf〉. Accessed on 31 December 2003.
FAO. 1995. CPGR 6/95/8: Revision of the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources. Issues for Consideration in Stage II: Access to Plant Genetic Resources and Farmers' Rights. Rome: First Extraordinary Session of the Commission on Plant Genetic Resources, 7–11 November 1994. Available at 〈ftp://ext-ftp.fao.org/ag/cgrfa/cgrfa6/R6W8E.pdf〉. Accessed on 31 December 2003.
Gilpin, Robert. 1987. The Political Economy of International Relations. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Godoy, Ricardo, R. Lubrowski, and Anil Markandya. 1993. A Method for Economic Valuation of Non-Timber Tropical Forest Products. Economic Botany 47 (3):220–33.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Judith, et al. 2001. Legalization and World Politics. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Golley, Frank. 1993. A History of the Ecosystem Concept in Ecology: More than the Sum of the Parts. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
Griliches, Zvi. 1957. Hybrid Corn: An Exploration in the Economics of Technological Change. Econometrica 25 (4):501–22.Google Scholar
Haas, Peter M., ed. 1992. Knowledge, Power, and International Policy Coordination, special issue of International Organization 46 (1).Google Scholar
Hasenclever, Andreas, Peter Mayer, and Volker Rittberger, eds. 1997. Theories of International Regimes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Helfer, Laurence. 2002. Intellectual Property Rights in Plant Varieties. FAO Legal Papers Online 31. Available at 〈http://www.fao.org/Legal/prs-ol/paper-e.htm〉. Accessed on 31 December 2003.
Helfer, Laurence. Forthcoming. Regime Shifting: The TRIPs Agreement and New Dynamics of International Intellectual Property Lawmaking, Yale International Law Journal 29.
Howse, Robert. 2002. From Politics to Technocracy—And Back Again: The Fate of the Multilateral Trading Regime. American Journal of International Law 96 (1):94–117.Google Scholar
Ingram, Helen. 1977. Policy Implementation Through Bargaining: The Case of Federal Grants-in-Aid. Public Policy 25 (4):499–526.Google Scholar
JEM Ag. Supply v. Pioneer Hi-Bred, 534 U.S. 124 (2001).
Keck, Margaret, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. Activists Beyond Borders: Advocacy Networks in International Politics. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Keohane, Robert O. 1983. The Demand for International Regimes. In International Regimes, edited by Stephan D. Krasner, 141–72. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Keohane, Robert O., and Joseph S. Nye, Jr. 2001. The Club Model of Multilateral Cooperation and Problems of Democratic Legitimacy. In Efficiency, Equity and Legitimacy: the Multilateral Trading System at the Millennium, edited by Roger B. Porter et al., 264–94. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Kiple, Kenneth F., and Kriemhild Conee Ornelas, eds. 2000. The Cambridge World History of Food. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kloppenburg, Jack R., ed. 1988. Seeds and Sovereignty: The Use and Control of Plant Genetic Resources. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.
Krasner, Stephen D., ed. 1983. International Regimes. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Lawrence, Robert, Albert Bressand, and Takatoshi Ito. 1996. A Vision for the World Economy: Openness, Diversity and Cohesion. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.
Leebron, David W. 2002. Linkages. American Journal of International Law 96 (1):5–27.Google Scholar
Levmore, Saul. 2002. Two Stories About the Evolution of Property Rights. Journal of Legal Studies 31 (2):5421–51.Google Scholar
Libecap, Gary D. 1989. Contracting for Property Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Libecap, Gary D. 2003. Contracting for Property Rights. In Property Rights: Cooperation, Conflict, and Law, edited by Terry L. Anderson and Fred S. McChesney. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Litfin, Karen. 1994. Ozone Discourses: Science and Politics in Global Environmental Cooperation. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lurquin, Paul F. 2001. The Green Phoenix: A History of Genetically Modified Plants. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lyster, Simon. 1985. International Wildlife Law: An Analysis of International Treaties Concerned with the Conservation of Wildlife. Cambridge: Grotius Publishers.
Marin, Patricia Cantuária. 2002. Providing Protection for Plant Genetic Resources: Patents, Sui Generis Systems and Biopartnerships. New York: Kluwer Law International.
Maskus, Keith. 2000. Intellectual Property Rights in the Global Economy. Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economics.
Merrill, Thomas. 2002. The Demsetz Thesis and the Evolution of Property Rights. Journal of Legal Studies 31 (2):331–38.Google Scholar
Mowery, David C., et al. 2001. The Growth of Patenting and Licensing by U.S. Universities: An Assessment of the Effects of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. Research Policy 30 (1):99–119.Google Scholar
Paarlberg, Robert L. 2001. The Politics of Precaution: Genetically Modified Crops in Developing Countries. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Pardey, Philip G., ed. 2001. The Future of Food: Biotechnology Markets and Policies in an International Setting. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute.
Parson, Edward. 2003. Protecting the Ozone Layer: Science and Strategy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Peters, Charles, Alwyn Gentry, and Robert Mendelsohn. 1989. Valuation of an Amazonian Rain Forest. Nature 339 (6227):655–56.Google Scholar
Pisano, Gary P. 2002. Pharmaceutical Biotechnology. In Technological Innovation and Economic Performance, edited by Benn Steil, David G. Victor, and Richard R. Nelson, 347–66. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Raustiala, Kal. 1997. Domestic Institutions and International Regulatory Cooperation: Comparative Responses to the Convention on Biological Diversity. World Politics 49 (4):482–509.Google Scholar
Raustiala, Kal, and David G. Victor. 1996. Biodiversity Since Rio: The Future of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Environment 38 (4):16–29.Google Scholar
Reid, Walter, ed. 1993. Biodiversity Prospecting: Using Genetic Resources for Sustainable Development. Washington, D.C.: World Resources Institute.
Rories, Charles. 2001. Does the U.S. PTO Have Authority to Grant Patents for Novel Varieties of Sexually Reproducing Plants? Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society 83:737–58.Google Scholar
Ryan, Michael. 1998. Knowledge Diplomacy: Global Competition and the Politics of Intellectual Property. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Safrin, Sabrina. 2002. Treaties in Collision?: The Biosafety Protocol and the World Trade Organization Agreements. American Journal of International Law 96 (3):606–28.Google Scholar
Sebenius, James K. 1983. Negotiation Arithmetic: Adding and Subtracting Issues and Parties. International Organization 37 (2):281–316.Google Scholar
Sell, Susan K. 1995. Intellectual Property Protection and Antitrust in the Developing World: Crisis, Coercion, and Choice. International Organization 49 (2):315–49.Google Scholar
Shanks, Cheryl, Harold K. Jacobson, and Jeffrey H. Kaplan. 1996. Inertia and Change in the Constellation of International Governmental Organizations, 1981–1992. International Organization 50 (4):593–627.Google Scholar
Skolnikoff, Eugene. 1993. The Elusive Transformation: Science, Technology, and the Evolution of International Politics. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
Slaughter, Anne-Marie. 1997. The Real New World Order, Foreign Affairs 76 (5):183–97.Google Scholar
Steinberg, Richard H. 2001. In the Shadow of Law or Power? Consensus-Based Bargaining and Outcomes in the GATT/WTO. International Organization 56 (2):339–74.Google Scholar
Stewart, Richard B. 1975. The Reformation of American Administrative Law. Harvard Law Review 88 (8):1667–1813.Google Scholar
Stokke, Olav Schram, ed. 2001. Governing High Seas Fisheries: The Interplay of Global and Regional Regimes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stone, Christopher D. 1994. What to Do About Biodiversity: Property Rights, Public Goods, and the Earth's Biological Riches. Southern California Law Review 68 (3):577–620.Google Scholar
Tilford, David S. 1998. Saving the Blueprints: The International Legal Regime for Plant Resources. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 30 (2/3):373–446.Google Scholar
Tollison, Robert, and Thomas Willett. 1979. An Economic Theory of Mutually Advantageous Issue Linkages in International Negotiations. International Organization 33 (4):425–49.Google Scholar
United Nations. 1997. Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Available at 〈http://www.unfccc.int〉. Accessed on 31 December 2003.
Victor, David G., Kal Raustiala, and Eugene B. Skolnikoff, eds. 1998. The Implementation and Effectiveness of International Environmental Commitments: Theory and Practice. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Weiss, Edith Brown. 1993. International Environmental Law: Contemporary Issues and the Emergence of a New World Order. Georgetown Law Journal 81 (3):675–710.Google Scholar
Weiss, Edith Brown, and Harold K. Jacobson, eds. 1998. Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliance with International Accords. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Young, Oran R. 2002. The Institutional Dimensions of Environmental Change: Fit, Interplay, and Scale. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.