Genetic wealth: a millionaire business that does not return to the countries of origin

Yerevan, ArmeniaDigitalization shook the music industry at the end of the nineties: the internet and MP3s allowed songs to circulate around the world without physical media, and this forced an adaptation of copyrights and royalties. Now biodiversity faces a similar challenge: with the arrival of digital sequence information (DSI), DNA and RNA sequences of plants, animals, and microorganisms can be consulted in open-access databases, without the need to physically travel to the place of origin. This is the case of the Madagascar periwinkle, a plant from which vincristine and vinblastine are derived, two anti-cancer drugs with which one can now innovate without having to obtain new samples of the plant, which makes scientific research cheaper and easier.

But the lands richest in biodiversity, mostly concentrated in developing countries and the Global South, have suffered the consequences. The Nagoya Protocol, adopted in 2010, establishes a system for the benefits derived from the use of genetic resources to be shared fairly with provider countries, but it only regulates access to physical material. Unlike music, there is no equivalent international system that distributes the commercial benefits derived from digitized genetic information. Now the Cali Fund, promoted by the United Nations within the framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity, seeks to have companies that use this information contribute to conserving the biodiversity on which they depend.

Created at COP16 in Cali, Colombia, and launched in February 2025, the fund is ambitious: it aims to raise 1 billion dollars annually from large companies that use genetic information. "At least 50% will go to indigenous peoples and local communities that coexist with these species," explains Amber Scholz, the fund's head of scientific policy, to ARA. The rest will be invested in biodiversity conservation programs in developing countries, which usually have fewer resources to preserve it.

“It is a mechanism that ensures that the benefits are distributed fairly,” explains Scholz. “This global library has more than 300 million genetic sequences available that are key for innovation within these industries,” he assures. The fund will become the gear so that scientific advances benefit both the companies that use this data and the communities that safeguard biodiversity.

It is the first global proposal to regulate digital genetic information: until now, some countries have established their own compensation mechanisms, and everything is regulated through bilateral agreements.

A billion target and only 7,085 dollars raised

But a year and a half after its launch, the fund has received 7,085 dollars, with a total of 10,656 committed. The contrast between the aspirations and the results has made it one of the hottest topics at the negotiation tables of COP17, which is being held this week in Yerevan, Armenia. Negotiations remain open on three fundamental issues that generate uncertainty for companies in the sector: the contribution percentages and thresholds, the criteria for distributing resources between governments and indigenous communities, and the fund's oversight system.

The current proposal recommends that companies that exceed at least two of the three established economic thresholds –20 million dollars in assets, 50 million in turnover, or 5 million in profits– contribute 0.1% of their annual revenue or 1% of their profits. In fact, according to data from Zero Carbon Analytics, the fifteen largest pharmaceutical companies in the world could have contributed 756 million dollars based on their 2025 results under the fund's guidelines, and they would cover more than three-quarters of the annual target.

But large pharmaceutical companies, key to the success of the mechanism, have not yet made any contribution. The only companies that have contributed are Prozomix and TierraViva AI, two British companies linked to biotechnology and artificial intelligence, and E-Biom, specialized in biotechnology and environmental consulting. All three are SMEs, precisely those that the mechanism intends to exclude from economic obligations.

Anticipating future restrictions

The Cali Fund goes beyond environmental justice. “We depend on genetic biodiversity,” asserts Simon Charnock, executive director of Prozomix. For his company, which works exclusively with DSI, the fund is also an opportunity to prevent countries from imposing restrictions on the access and use of this data. In fact, it is already a reality: Brazil already legally requires benefit-sharing for certain commercial uses of its digital genetic information. “South Africa is also starting to restrict access to certain sequences from across the African continent,” explains Charnock.

On the other hand, investing in indigenous communities is a way to preserve the biodiversity that companies need to develop their products. “These peoples are the guardians of genetic wealth,” asserts a WWF representative at the negotiations.

Despite being the potential solution to an imminent problem, COP17 will continue to define the rules of the Cali Fund to bring it closer to its objectives. Digitization has allowed genetic information to circulate freely around the world. Now it is necessary to ensure that the benefits it generates also do so.