[CODATA-international] Digital Feudalism

Kevin McCluskey mccluskeyk at ksu.edu
Mon Oct 14 11:08:32 EDT 2019

Meanwhile, conversations about making digital sequence information databases into a pay-as-you-go resource continue vis a vis the Nagoya Protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity.

While this may be a simplification, there is significant push back from "provider" parties who suggest that access to genetic data is not enough of a shared benefit and that some monetary benefit sharing should be established.  This is a significant impediment to open data sharing and creates pressure for private rather than public data resources.

The CBD held a fact finding study, and subsequently hosted an ad hoc technical expert group to discuss digital sequence information. https://www.cbd.int/abs/dsi-gr/2017-2018/default.shtml

The output of this first "ahteg" was a weak, non conclusive document that spawned a repeat meeting which will be held next winter https://www.cbd.int/abs/dsi-gr/2019-2020/default.shtml   Indeed, they could not even agree on what digital sequence information was with obstructive participants insisting that meta data was equivalent to sequence data.

Moreover, the first "ahteg" included participants who were not technical experts. One (representing Namibia and the African bloc) suggested that genome sequence databases were "like kiddie porn" and this was only challenged by a representative of a ngo- neither the CBD secretariat or the facilitator saw that this comment was neither technical or expert.  Another (representing the "third world network") exhorted the technical experts to "just be honest" which was again only challenged by the ngo representative. Other "technical experts" to the first ahteg included representatives of the international chamber of commerce, the WHO, and something called the ABS Capacity Development Initiative

Questions, such as how much data is generated from materials sourced in developing nations, who accesses these data sets, and whether the data is used for scientific publication (including co-authorship by scientists in developing nations), or in commercial products remain un-answered.   Maybe codata has experts who can look at these types of questions. Certainly genbank, entrez, gold, ddbj, riken, and the myriad of organism specific genome databases would be impacted by any pay-as-you-go or subscription model for access to genetic databases.

In this instance, open access to data is threatened by a desire to monitor utilization and tie it to benefit sharing. It has been my contention (not shared by everyone) that the solution to the digital sequence information problem lies in the data itself. If a party can show that a genetic trait is unique to their sovereign territory, then they should have unique exclusive rights to the utilization of that information. If, however, that specific genetic sequence is present in organisms from many parties (countries), then one party should not have exclusive rights to the utilization of that information. The key here is that the data on geographic distribution of the specific genetic sequence (or variant thereof) is the answer to the question of who has the right to control utilization of that information.

best regards,

Kevin McCluskey

Research Professor, Ret
Department of Plant Pathology
Kansas State University

From: CODATA-international <codata-international-bounces at lists.codata.org> on behalf of Mwitondi, Kassim <K.Mwitondi at shu.ac.uk>
Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2019 2:14 PM
To: Falk Huettmann <fhuettmann at alaska.edu>; BOULTON Geoffrey <Geoff.Boulton at ed.ac.uk>
Cc: CODATA International <codata-international at lists.codata.org>
Subject: Re: [CODATA-international] Digital Feudalism

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.codata.org/pipermail/codata-international_lists.codata.org/attachments/20191014/61c785e7/attachment.html>

More information about the CODATA-international mailing list