• Biopirates are those who exploit genetic resources or traditional knowledge of local communities without their consent and without fair sharing of benefits. Biopiracy involves the use of plants, animals, microorganisms or knowledge about their properties for commercial purposes, often by multinational companies or research institutions, without acknowledging or compensating the communities that have preserved and used them for centuries.
  • Companies use digital genetic signatures (DSI) – sequences of genetic material of organisms in order to create new medicines, cosmetics, crops, but they do not return the profit to the communities from which they took this data.
  • This is a form of economic injustice because multinational companies make a profit, while local communities are not compensated.

How can genetic material be a political and economic issue? So it’s just molecules? As I always emphasize on Science, science and scientific research are not apolitical , they are practically always closely related to politics and financial interests. We live in a society where the commodity of zero mass, information, is the most valuable commodity. And with information about the arrangement of nucleotides in nucleic acids, you can do a lot, and even make money.

Let’s remember how the sequence for the spike protein of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes COVID-19, brought a small profit to pharmaceutical companies. Digitized data on the genome of species can bring profit and can be used for many good purposes – discovering drugs, causes of diseases, in biology, pharmaceuticals, medicine and environmental protection, for the study of evolution, in agriculture for the development of more resistant crops and in the food and cosmetic industry… Now – the fact is that the funds for this kind of research are mainly in the hands of the rich highly developed countries of the global North, while the resources, you guessed it, are located pretty much in the global South. African areas, Amazonia, Southeast Asia and Oceania, especially areas inhabited by native, autochthonous peoples. In essence, these are cybercolonial practices.

Even human DNA is a very important resource, especially that of homogeneous, isolated populations. To use this data for free for profit is not fair. And yet it is done.

DSI stands for this resource – Digital Sequence Information, digital data on genetic sequences, i.e. digital genetic information or digital genetic signatures , which are derived from the genomes of organisms, including DNA, RNA and proteins. This information can be from animals, humans, plants, lichens, corals and coral reefs, fungi, bacteria, viruses, from forests, savannas and tundra… DSI can also be obtained from environmental DNA/RNA, the genetic material that organisms leave in their environment, such as DNA fragments in water, soil, air or sediment.

For DSI, genetic material is isolated, sequenced and then digitized using appropriate methods. Here digitization means that the obtained sequences are converted into a digital format (a series of letters representing nucleotides, A-adenine, T-thymine, G-guanine, C-cytosine, and in the case of RNA, there is U for uracil) and stored in databases, usually publicly available to everyone. And also to companies. This use of the wealth of genetic data for profit (even for good purposes, for medicines) without returning part of the profit to local communities is called biopiracy .

There is the Nagoya Protocol, part of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), which gives countries the right to regulate access to their genetic resources and share benefits through Access and Benefit Sharing Agreements. That is, the Nagoya Protocol should be a protection against biopiracy. However, researchers often share DSI freely in accordance with the principles of open science, which can create a conflict with benefit-sharing obligations, as users can access this data without formal contracts. At COP15 (Conference of the Parties – COP of the Convention on Biological Diversity) it was agreed to establish a Multilateral Mechanism for the sharing of benefits from the use of DSI, the details of which were worked out at COP16 in 2024. It is DSI and their use were the central theme of COP16 in Cali. The Conference of the Parties is a body that brings together member countries to discuss and decide on measures for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity at the global level. The climate Conferences of the Parties – COPs – and the COPs on biodiversity should not be confused.

There, at COP16 in 2024, a historic agreement was reached on the sharing of benefits from the use of genetic data from nature. The agreement, which many consider a turning point in global biodiversity conservation, establishes a mechanism by which companies using DSI must contribute financially to nature conservation.

Companies from the pharmaceutical, agricultural and other sectors that use genetic data are now obliged to contribute to the so-called “Cali Fund”, which will be managed by the United Nations. The funds from this fund will be directed to the preservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. Under the agreement, companies will contribute 1% of their profits or 0.1% of their revenue , which could bring in tens of billions of dollars a year.

This agreement comes after COP15 adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Framework for Biodiversity , which aims to halt and reverse the loss of nature. That agreement aims to protect at least 30% of land and sea areas globally by 2030 (known as the “30×30” goal). Currently, about 17% of land and 8% of marine areas are protected. The Cali Fund is now considered a key instrument for achieving these goals and represents a balance between open data access and benefit sharing. In fact, the essence of this agreement is the distribution, hopefully fairer, of the profits generated by the use of genetic codes from nature

However, the Cali fund was only established in November 2024. It remains to be seen whether it will be applied, or whether the companies will respect this obligation.