Do new Access and Benefit Sharing procedures under the Convention on Biological Diversity threaten the future of biological control?

By M. Cock, J. C. Lenteren, J. Brodeur, B. Barratt, Franz Bigler, K. Bolckmans, F. L. Cônsoli, F. Haas, P. Mason, J. Parra. BioControl (Dordrecht), 2010

274 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Biological Control in Brazil: an overview (2014, background): “Recent international discussions on "Access and Benefit Sharing" must be taken into consideration (Cock et al., 2010; Lenteren et al., 2011; Coutinot et al., 2013);”
It is time to bridge the gap between exploring and exploiting: prospects for utilizing intraspecific genetic variation to optimize arthropods for augmentative pest control – a review (2017, background): “…Nagoya protocol for Access and Benefit Sharing (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, 2011), limits the export of natural enemies for biological control from many countries that have been a rich source of natural enemies in the past (Cock et al., 2010; van Lenteren et al., 2011).”
Applying molecular-based approaches to classical biological control of weeds (2011, background): “quired, based on prior informed consent, mutually agreed terms of use, and potentially some form of benefit sharing (Cock et al., 2010).”
Exotic biological control agents: A solution or contribution to arthropod invasions? (2016, background): “Analysis of the of the use of arthropod biological control agents in the database compiled for Cock et al. (2010) shows that biological control targets of these introductions have been primarily insect pests (79.9”