Abstract
... Over the past two decades or so, the legal landscape of IP for plants has changed dramatically in Asia. The overarching trend has been the increasing harmonization of domestic laws across the region with the 1991 Act of the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (‘UPOV 1991’) and its system of ‘plant breeders’ rights’. Supporters of the UPOV framework have long extolled its benefits, relying on the implicit assumption that the particular agroeconomic model that the Convention advances will provide universal benefits, irrespective of the diversity of farming and other plant cultivation systems that exist across different world regions.1 This article challenges this assumption and argues that the logic—understood here as a set of conventions that characterize a given area of law—underpinning the UPOV framework constrains how people think about the role of legal systems in governing human uses of plants, especially in agriculture and food production.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
