Summary report, 24–29 November 2025

Bringing together policy-makers, farmers, and plant breeders, the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA or Treaty) aims to conserve crop diversity and share its benefits for human and planetary well-being. Its adoption back in 2001 was a milestone for the agricultural research sector and the biodiversity community alike. The Treaty’s Multilateral System (MLS) of access and benefit-sharing (ABS) aimed to ensure the flow of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture (PGRFA) needed for the development of new crop varieties for global food security. It also aimed to enhance fairness and equity in agricultural development by institutionalizing monetary and non-monetary benefit-sharing and combating biopiracy¾the unauthorized use and misappropriation of genetic resources and traditional knowledge. The Treaty’s recognition of farmers’ rights aimed to ensure the reward and continuation of farmers’ practices that have provided the basis for agricultural biodiversity and production.

Some 25 years later, the Treaty needs to adapt to the changing policy and agricultural research landscape. Initiated in 2013, the process to enhance the functioning of the MLS aimed to adjust to the new realities and increase user-based payments and contributions to the Benefit-sharing Fund (BSF), as a priority. The benefit-sharing component of the system was not living up to expectations.

Following 12 years of negotiations, 14 meetings of the Working Group to enhance the functioning of the MLS, hundreds of pages of legal and technical documents and studies, and intense negotiations during the week, mostly behind closed doors, the 11th meeting of the Governing Body (GB 11) was unable to reach consensus on a package of measures on the MLS enhancement. As the process came to a halt, some expressed their deep disappointment, while others stressed that the amendment, as proposed, would rather create problems than offer solutions. Work on improved implementation of the MLS as currently stands continues, while decisions on farmers’ rights and PGRFA conservation and sustainable use set the path for intersessional work toward GB 12. A series of decisions on cooperation with other international organizations and processes will further the objectives of the Treaty while ensuring mutual supportiveness and synergetic implementation at the national level.

GB 11 was held from 24–29 November 2025 in Lima, Peru, preceded by regional and interregional consultations on 22–23 November. Approximately 700 participants attended the session, representing governments, intergovernmental organizations, international agricultural research centers, Indigenous, farmer, and peasant organizations, civil society, academia, and the private sector.

A Brief History of the Treaty

Concluded under the auspices of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO), the Treaty is a legally-binding instrument that targets the conservation and sustainable use of PGRFA, and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of their use, in harmony with the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), for sustainable agriculture and food security. It establishes an MLS for facilitated access to a specified list of PGRFA including 35 crop genera and 29 forage species (Annex I), and institutionalizes monetary and non-monetary benefit-sharing from the utilization of these resources in the areas of commercialization, information exchange, technology transfer, and capacity-building.

The Treaty was adopted on 3 November 2001 by the FAO Conference, following seven years of negotiations. It entered into force on 29 June 2004, and currently has 155 parties.

Key Turning Points

GB 1: The first session of the Treaty’s GB (June 2006, Madrid, Spain) adopted the Standard Material Transfer Agreement (SMTA) and the Funding Strategy. The SMTA includes provisions on a benefit-sharing scheme, providing two options. First, the recipient can choose to pay 0.77% of gross sales from commercialization of new products incorporating material accessed from the MLS, if its availability to others for further research and breeding is restricted. Alternatively, the recipient can choose to pay 0.5% of gross sales on all PGRFA products of the species they accessed from the MLS, regardless of whether the products incorporate the material accessed and regardless of whether the new products are available without restriction. The GB further adopted:

• its rules of procedure, including decision making by consensus;
• financial rules with bracketed options on an indicative scale of voluntary contributions or voluntary contributions in general;
• a resolution establishing a Compliance Committee;
• the relationship agreement with the Global Crop Diversity Trust (Crop Trust); and
• a model agreement with CGIAR and other international institutions.

GB 2: The second session of the GB (October-November 2007, Rome, Italy) addressed the implementation of the Funding Strategy, the material transfer agreement for non-Annex I crops, and sustainable use of PGRFA. The meeting also adopted a resolution on farmers’ rights, as well as a joint statement of intent for cooperation with the FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (CGRFA).

GB 5: The fifth session of the GB (September 2013, Muscat, Oman) established the Ad Hoc Open-ended Working Group to Enhance the Functioning of the MLS, with the mandate to develop measures to increase user-based payments and contributions to the BSF, as a priority, as well as additional measures to enhance the functioning of the MLS.

The Working Group met four times during the intersessional period (May 2014, December 2014, June 2015, and October 2015).

GB 6: The sixth session of the GB (October 2015, Rome, Italy) extended the mandate of the Working Group on the MLS, and requested that it, among other issues:

• elaborate a full draft revised SMTA;
• elaborate options for adapting coverage of the MLS, based on different scenarios and income projections; and
• consider issues regarding genetic information associated with material accessed from the MLS.

The Working Group met three times during the intersessional period (July 2016, March 2017, and September 2017).

GB 7: The seventh session of the GB (October-November 2017, Kigali, Rwanda) extended the mandate of the Working Group on the MLS; established an Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group on Farmers’ Rights; and decided to put digital sequence information/genetic sequence data (DSI/GSD) on the GB 8 agenda.

The Working Group on the MLS met three times during the intersessional period (October 2018, June 2019, and October 2019). It reached a tentative compromise to amend Annex I of the Treaty (list of crops in the MLS), to include all PGRFA under the management and control of Parties and in the public domain, in ex situ conditions, while allowing for reasoned national exemptions regarding a limited number of native species. Negotiations continued on the draft revised SMTA, but no consensus was reached on benefit-sharing payments and benefit-sharing from DSI/GSD.

GB 8: At its eighth session (November 2019, Rome, Italy), the GB did not reach agreement on the package of measures to enhance the functioning of the MLS, or on continuing intersessional work. GB 8 adopted other resolutions, including on farmers’ rights, conservation and sustainable use of PGRFA, and the Funding Strategy.

Recent Meetings

GB 9: At its ninth session (September 2022, New Delhi, India), the GB reestablished the Working Group to enhance the functioning of the MLS. GB 9 also addressed issues related to cooperation with the CBD, including on DSI/GSD, and finalized a set of Options for encouraging, guiding, and promoting the realization of farmers’ rights. The Working Group was composed of spokespersons from the FAO regions, including Africa, European Regional Group (ERG), Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean (GRULAC), Near East, North America, and Southwest Pacific, as well as from civil society, the seed industry, farmers’ organizations, and research and academia, including the CGIAR Consortium.

GB 10: At its tenth session (November 2023, Rome), the GB endorsed the suggestion of the Working Group to use the “June 2019 draft package,” which includes a draft revised SMTA, draft amendment of Annex I, and a draft resolution, as a starting point for further work. It requested the GB to focus on three identified “hotspots”: DSI/GSD; expansion of the list of crops in Annex I; and payment structure and rates. The meeting highlighted the need to ensure close collaboration with the CBD and reconvened the Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group on farmers’ rights.

Working Group on the MLS: The Working Group met four times (April 2024, September 2024, April 2025, and July 2025). It made progress on technical aspects of the draft revised SMTA and on the implementation and review of the new system, but remained divided on fundamental issues, including: whether access to MLS material should be upon subscription only or upon a dual system allowing users to choose between a subscription and a single-access option; benefit-sharing from the use of DSI/GSD; and an expansion of the list of crops in Annex I.

GB 11 Report

The Governing Body meeting opened on Monday, 24 November, featuring an Indigenous Peruvian blessing ceremony and statements from high-level officials and representatives of Parties, international organizations, stakeholders, and farmers’ organizations. Regions, Parties, and observers underscored their hopes and expectations for the session, with a focus on the enhancement of the MLS.

GB 11 Chair Alwin Kopše (Switzerland) highlighted the profound value of crop diversity, and called for the active engagement of all sectors with the Treaty.

Underlining differing views on the enhancement of the MLS, ITPGRFA Secretary Kent Nnadozie called the meeting “a generational opportunity” to set the Treaty on a renewed course to build a more balanced and predictable system.

Organizational Matters

On Monday, plenary adopted the agenda and timetable (IT/GB-11/25/1 and 1.2 Rev.2); approved the list of observers (IT/GB-11/25/1.3); and welcomed Bahrain, Barbados, Colombia, and South Africa as new Parties to the Treaty, bringing the number of Parties to 155. They elected Noluthando Netnou-Nkoana (South Africa) as rapporteur, and established committees on credentials and the budget.

On Saturday, plenary heard a report from Credentials Committee Chair Catherine Blanchard (Canada). Regions nominated, and plenary elected, the following members of the GB 12 Bureau: Modester Kachapila Milinyu (Malawi) for Africa; Shihomi Uzuhashi (Japan) for Asia; Fernanda Millicay (Argentina) for GRULAC; Neveen Abd El Fattah Hassan (Egypt) for Near East; Katlyn Scholl (US) for North America; Alwin Kopše (Switzerland) for the ERG; and Alison Curran (Australia) for Southwest Pacific. Millicay was elected as GB 12 Chair.

Report of the Chairperson

On Monday, plenary took note of the Chairperson’s report (IT/GB-11/25/05), with delegates commending Chair Kopše’s leadership.

Report of the Secretary

On Monday, plenary took note of Secretary Nnadozie’s report (IT/GB-11/25/06), which emphasized, among other issues, the approval of 28 projects under the fifth cycle of the BSF, representing an investment of USD 11 million; and emergency support to germplasm collections at risk in Ukraine, Yemen, Sudan, the Philippines, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, and Costa Rica, with operations underway in Guatemala and Vietnam.

Capacity Development Strategy

On Tuesday, the Secretariat introduced the document (IT/GB-11/25/6.1). On Friday, delegates addressed a draft resolution. Debate focused on proposals by JAPAN to note that Category 10 (legal measures for implementing farmers’ rights) of the Options for encouraging, guiding, and promoting the realization of farmers’ rights is excluded from the scope of the capacity development strategy and action plan. The plenary eventually agreed to delete Japan’s proposals.

A reference to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) remained bracketed, as requested by the US and ARGENTINA, pending discussions in an informal group on references to SDGs across draft resolutions. On Saturday morning, the US suggested referring to enhancing coordination and cooperation with capacity development under other relevant international frameworks and deleting specific references to the 2030 Agenda and its SDGs. Delegates agreed to the compromise and the resolution was approved as amended.

Final Outcome: In the final resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES Item 6.1/L2), among others, the GB:

• approves the Capacity Development Strategy of the International Treaty (2026–2030);
• approves the Action Plan (2026–2030);
• encourages Parties and other stakeholders with the capacity to do so, to promote access to available financial and other resources, in order to implement the Strategy and the Action Plan; and
• requests the Secretariat to report on progress in the implementation of the Strategy and the Action Plan at GB 12 and subsequent sessions of the GB.

Annex 1 contains the Capacity Development Strategy, which includes sections on: introduction; purpose; capacity development; overall goal and expected outcomes; guiding principles; strategic approaches for implementation; key players to enable implementation; resources for implementation; monitoring and review; and the description of the guiding principles.

Annex 2 contains the Action Plan, with sections on the Secretariat, and Contracting Parties and Stakeholders.

Fostering Biodiversity and Food Security: Preserving Heritage, Cultivating a Shared Future

On Monday, the Secretariat introduced the relevant documents (IT/GB-11/25/7 and 7/Inf.1). Discussion focused on references to youth, climate change, the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, and the rights of women. On Saturday morning, plenary addressed a draft resolution prepared by Chair Kopše in consultation with the Bureau. Following consultations between the US and PARAGUAY, delegates replaced a reference to the “shared responsibility” of conserving PGRFA with a reference to “shared interest.”

Regarding a call for increased recognition of women farmers’ contributions to food security, nutrition, and biodiversity conservation, no agreement was reached on including a reference for Parties to “protect and promote their rights and enhance their participation” in decision-making processes.

Plenary agreed on a paragraph recognizing that a wide range of Indigenous and traditional food crops still under cultivation are highly nutritious and adaptable to local conditions and erratic weather; and that despite being underutilized and underinvested, and often threatened with extinction, they offer great economic opportunities, including for women and youth, and hold potential for improved livelihoods through agriculture led-development, poverty alleviation, and broader sustainable development.

Pending ongoing consultations, a reference to “Indigenous and local communities” or “Indigenous Peoples, as well as local communities” was bracketed. No consensus was reached and plenary agreed to revert to Treaty language on “indigenous and local communities” throughout the resolutions.

On a paragraph noting with concern the growing challenges to food security, a lengthy discussion took place on references to biodiversity loss, pollution, and, in particular, climate change. FRANCE, TÜRKIYE, the UK, GERMANY, SPAIN, the UNITED ARAB EMIRATES, LIBYA, BHUTAN, and PARAGUAY supported including the references, while the US opposed.

Following consultations with the US, plenary agreed on compromise text replacing references to climate change with references to “changing environmental conditions.” Plenary further agreed on: “the role of biodiversity, traditional knowledge, plant breeding, research, and innovation in addressing challenges that threaten food security”; and “building sustainable and resilient agriculture and food systems grounded in diverse and nutritious crops adapted to a changing environment,” removing references to climate change or climate-resilient crops. Plenary approved the draft resolution with these and other minor amendments.

Final Outcome: In the final resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 7/L1), among others, the GB:

• encourages Parties to support the role of smallholder and family farmers, women farmers, indigenous and local communities, and youth in PGRFA conservation, and to promote policies that protect traditional knowledge relevant for PGRFA and promote farmers’ access to PGRFA;
• recognizes Peru as a center of origin and/or diversification of important crops;
• invites Parties and other stakeholders to: improve conservation of PGRFA of opportunity crops in seed banks; accelerate plant breeding efforts and enhance value chain development; improve sustainable agricultural practices and the efficiency and resilience of crop systems; and mainstream opportunity crops within national policies and plans for diversification of food production to reduce overreliance on a few staple crops;
• encourages Parties and other stakeholders to facilitate the active involvement of youth in the implementation of the Treaty; and
• invites Parties and other stakeholders to continue supporting the implementation of the Treaty’s objectives, especially through capacity development and effective engagement of women, youth, smallholder and family farmers, and indigenous and local communities.

Multilateral System of Access and Benefit-sharing

Implementation and Operations: On Monday, the Secretariat introduced documents on MLS implementation, including on MLS operations, reviews and assessments, the emergency reserve for germplasm collections at risk, and the Third Party Beneficiary (IT/GB-11/25/9.1.Rev.1, 9.1/Inf.1, 16.4.2, 9.1.2, 9.1/Inf.2, 9.1.3, 9.1/Inf.3, and 9.1.4). Many regional groups and Parties commended the Secretariat for the reports and made suggestions for further improvement, including on: data disaggregation by country, by the Netherlands for ERG; data on the number of recipients that upload results to the Global Information System (GLIS) and share non-monetary benefits, by Morocco for AFRICA; and the Third Party Beneficiary, by the US and ARGENTINA.

On Thursday, delegates addressed a draft resolution. They engaged in lengthy discussions on the content of future reports on MLS operations. They agreed to include, among others: information on transfers of PGRFA per individual country and a distinction between domestic and international transfers, as well as data gaps, following proposals by the US, ARGENTINA, CAMEROON, and CANADA. They further agreed to request the Secretariat to provide technical and administrative support to collection holders so they can include material in the MLS, and invite the Crop Trust and other donors to provide financial support for regeneration and multiplication, especially of unique materials with low visibility, following interventions by the NETHERLANDS, the US, CANADA, and TOGO.

On Friday, delegates addressed outstanding issues in the draft resolution, focusing on a request to the Secretariat to include additional types of information on the MLS data store and reporting tools.

On Saturday morning, the US reported on informal consultations regarding SDG references. Plenary agreed to the compromise, as amended by SWEDEN, to recognize the central role of the MLS in promoting the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic diversity and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their use, and encourage continued reporting to enhance policy coherence and visibility as to the MLS’s contributions to the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). The provision is accompanied by a footnote noting that reference is made to SDG Targets 2.5 (genetic diversity in food production) and 15.6 (fair and equitable benefit-sharing and appropriate access to genetic resources).

Following informal consultations, MOROCCO presented a compromise proposal to request the Secretariat to gather the information provided under Article 5(e) of the SMTA from the provider of MLS material and to make such information available exclusively to the GB, ensuring confidentiality of such information, as appropriate. CANADA opposed and the clause was deleted.

The paragraph on maintaining and improving the MLS data store and reporting tools was agreed upon without any references to recipients or providers. The resolution was approved as amended.

Final Outcome: In the final resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 9.1/L1), the GB, among other things:

• encourages Parties and other providers to ensure that materials made available in the MLS are accompanied, where possible, by high-quality passport data, characterization, and other available information;
• invites Parties to strengthen linkages between the MLS and global efforts to secure crop diversity and promote capacity development and awareness raising to increase the availability of PGRFA in the MLS;
• requests the Secretariat to continue exploring innovative solutions to enhance transparency and trust in SMTA reporting and maintain and improve the MLS Data Store and reporting tools;
• encourages closer collaboration with relevant international initiatives to harmonize data standards and improve interoperability of information systems;
• invites CGIAR Centers to report, where feasible, on the socio-economic impacts of PGRFA distributions, especially in developing countries;
• stresses the importance of Article 4.2 of the Third Party Beneficiary Procedures for cases of possible non-compliance; and
• requests the Secretariat to monitor progress on the voluntary inclusion of PGRFA in the MLS by natural and legal persons.

Enhancement of the MLS: On Monday, Michael Ryan (Australia) and Sunil Archak (India), Co-Chairs of the Working Group to enhance the functioning of the MLS, introduced the Co-Chairs’ report (IT/ GB-11/25/9.2.2). Co-Chair Ryan recalled that the Working Group used the 2019 draft package as the starting point for discussions, and received input from independent experts, including on DSI/GSD, sales and profitability of the seed sector, and from the Standing Group of Legal Experts (SGLE).

Debates focused on the three “hotspots” of the enhancement: DSI/GSD; expansion of the list of crops in Annex I (crops covered under the MLS); and payment structure and rates. Some Parties also stressed the need for mutually supportive implementation of different instruments to avoid double payments.

A contact group, co-chaired by Ryan and Archak, was established and met in the evening to address the suggestions of the SGLE. Isabel López Noriega, SGLE Facilitator, presented the changes, including suggestions on the definition of “affiliate” and “sales.”

On Tuesday, the contact group engaged in an open discussion on the three “hotspots.” Most developing countries expressed discomfort with expanding the MLS to “all PGRFA,” citing national sovereignty. Many developed countries opposed addressing DSI/GSD in the draft revised SMTA due to the lack of a definition. On the payment structure, developing countries supported a subscription-only system, while many developed countries advocated for maintaining a single-access option.

On Wednesday, delegates met in the contact group to discuss payment rates and how to reach agreement on a balanced package of measures. Regions presented their proposals on rates for the subscription and single-access options. Deliberations continued in various informal settings behind closed doors throughout the remainder of the week.

On Saturday evening, plenary received a compromise proposal by Chair Kopše that included a draft resolution on the enhancement of the MLS and a revised SMTA with payment rates and thresholds to be agreed at the next GB. The proposal involved:

• adopting the revised SMTA, while deciding that adequate payment rates and thresholds will be approved at GB 12;
• deciding that the amendment of Annex I will be finalized at GB 12;
• establishing an Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group on Farmers’ Rights (AHTEG) on Annex I expansion;
• requesting the Bureau to develop a draft text for the amendment;
• establishing an Ad Hoc Advisory Group to explore means to address expectations for sharing of monetary and non-monetary benefits from the use of DSI/GSD; and
• noting that benefit-sharing payments under the subscription option of the revised SMTA could be considered to address monetary benefit-sharing from the use of DSI/GSD on PGRFA.

India, on behalf of ASIAN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, GRULAC and the NEAR EAST, expressed regret about the lack of transparency of the process, noting that the proposal was brought in plenary in the evening, with little time to digest, in English only, following closed-door negotiations. They opposed the proposed SMTA, stressing disagreement with the payment structure, DSI/GSD provisions, and confidentiality clauses. They proposed “taking note of” the proposal for future consideration and continuing work intersessionally.

Uganda, for AFRICA, further expressed disagreement with the proposed process for the expansion of Annex I, and stated their unwillingness to adopt an SMTA without a transparent process. Many developing countries, including PERU, TOGO, and NEPAL, opposed adoption, highlighting insufficient time to process a complex text. BRAZIL recognized compromise efforts but lamented that bridge-building was not reciprocated in the SMTA process, further expressing discomfort due to unclear text in a legally-binding document such as the SMTA. MOROCCO stressed that the SMTA draft was immature and would cause problems if adopted.

SWITZERLAND highlighted the open and transparent Working Group process of the past 12 years and, with NORWAY, the US, the NETHERLANDS, GERMANY, the REPUBLIC OF KOREA, CANADA, FRANCE, and ITALY, supported the Chair’s proposal, with a view to adopting the full package at GB 12. The US specified that they do not have a mandate to extend the process beyond this session if the SMTA is not adopted.

In search of a compromise, Sweden for ERG proposed “taking note of” the draft resolution if it is not adopted, to preserve work done, while expressing hesitance about intersessional work. ARGENTINA said that “taking note of” the resolution would allow it to serve as the basis for future work without necessarily requiring intersessional meetings.

Chair Kopše warned that without consensus, there would be no process forward on other elements such as DSI/GSD, and proposed “approving” the package “with a view to adopting” it at GB 12. Delegates sought clarification on what this implies, including whether discussion and amendments will be allowed at GB 12. UGANDA queried whether and how the concept of “approval for adoption” will accommodate disagreement and, with ECUADOR, supported “taking note of” the proposal. The US reiterated that their engagement in intersessional work depends on the approval of the proposed SMTA and confidence that non-bracketed text will not be reopened for discussion. Chair Kopše explained that “approving” the package “with a view to adopting” provides an opportunity for Parties to “analyze the text, understand it, ask questions,” and return for adoption at GB 12, while allowing for further work on DSI/GSD and the expansion of Annex I.

NORWAY and SWITZERLAND supported the proposal. COLOMBIA, PERU, and ARGENTINA suggested “taking note of” the text, with ARGENTINA proposing continuing work at, or immediately prior to, GB 12. Chair Kopše suggested “taking note of the revised SMTA with a view to adopting it at GB 12.”

UGANDA, with many, proposed taking note of “the outstanding elements relevant to enhancing the MLS in the SMTA,” with a view to adopting it at GB 12. INDIA suggested analyzing the package as a whole, going through all its elements thoroughly and in a balanced manner, without freezing anything at this stage.

EGYPT proposed: taking note of the Chair’s proposal and the views expressed during the session; inviting Parties to submit any views on the MLS enhancement; requesting the Secretariat to compile submissions for GB 12 consideration; and deferring further consideration of the MLS enhancement to GB 12. The US preferred taking note of the whole package with no specific recommendation on the way forward. ARGENTINA suggested: taking note of the progress made on a revised SMTA and deciding that it will be finalized and adopted at GB 12; and adding in the meeting report that finalizing the work may require a short meeting before GB 12.

Acknowledging that consensus is not possible, Chair Kopše stated that his proposal will be recorded in the report of the meeting and closed discussions on the item.

Final Outcome: The GB failed to reach consensus on the enhancement of the MLS, and took note in the meeting report of a compromise proposal by Chair Kopše that included a draft resolution on the enhancement of the MLS and a revised SMTA.

Funding Strategy

On Tuesday, the Secretariat presented the report of the Standing Committee on the Funding Strategy and Resource Mobilization
(IT/GB-11/25/10) and the report on the Benefit-sharing Fund (BSF) (IT/GB11/25/10/Inf.1). Funding Committee Co-Chair Yasmina El-Bahloul (Morocco) urged finding a target range for the BSF that is realistic yet ambitious.

Spain, for ERG, noted that only 2% of the contributions to the BSF are mandatory user-based. The US, for NORTH AMERICA, opposed setting an overall target for the BSF. Egypt, for NEAR EAST, called for capacity-building and supported mobilizing additional resources and enhancing partnerships, including with the private sector. Togo, for AFRICA, called for diversifying financial sources, strengthening value chains and underutilized crops, and reinforcing technology transfer.

On Friday, delegates addressed a draft resolution. On resource mobilization for the BSF, Chair Kopše proposed setting a tentative target range of USD 6–8 million to assist future deliberations, based on regions’ proposals during the 11th meeting of the Standing Committee on the Funding Strategy. BRAZIL proposed including an alternative target range of USD 8–12 million. The US proposed, and delegates agreed, to delete a paragraph noting that the BSF received no voluntary contributions from the private sector in the 2024–2025 biennium.

On Saturday, on resource mobilization for the BSF, delegates stated they could not reach agreement on setting a funding target. The strategy was approved as amended.

Final Outcome: In the final resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 10/L1), the GB, among other things:

• encourages Parties to consider integrating the conservation and sustainable use of PGRFA in national policies and planning and to leverage funding opportunities within existing biodiversity and climate funding sources;
• requests the Secretariat to facilitate information to eligible Parties on how the Global Environment Facility (GEF), the Green Climate Fund, and other funding mechanisms could be supportive to Treaty implementation;
• encourages Parties and other stakeholders to mobilize resources from various sources to meet the targets of the Funding Strategy, and make financial contributions to the Fund for Agreed Purposes;
• welcomes user-based payments under the MLS to the BSF, recognizing the need for an enhanced and predictable flow of resources and for increasing user-based payments;
• welcomes the report on the BSF for 2024–2025 and recommends that future summary reports provide concrete references to the genetic diversity of the crops species addressed in projects supported by the BSF;
• calls upon Parties to share with the Secretariat information about the results of the further integration of PGRFA in national budgets and priorities, where appropriate; and
• welcomes the progress made in developing and testing the methodology for measuring non-monetary benefit-sharing.

The annex to the resolution contains the general policy and criteria for specific assistance under the agreed funding strategy for PGRFA conservation, with sections on: purpose of the policy and criteria for specific assistance; policy approach; and general criteria.

Global Information System

On Tuesday, the Secretariat introduced the report on GLIS implementation (IT/GB-11/25/11). Nepal, for ASIA, noted that information through the MLS should be fully captured under GLIS, including data on commercialization and benefit sharing.  

On Thursday, the Plenary considered a draft resolution. On a paragraph requesting the Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC) on GLIS to continue considering scientific and technical issues related to DSI/GSD, delegates agreed to note that GLIS is not currently serving as a repository for, or a tracking and tracing system of, DSI/GSD, “without prejudice to future decisions.”

On Friday, the Plenary continued its discussion of the draft resolution. Following lengthy discussions, delegates agreed to promote capacity development and technology transfer upon “mutually agreed terms,” and on the compromise reported by the US to “take note of the developments in relevant international fora related to DSI/GSD.” The plenary approved the draft resolution as amended.

Final Outcome: In the final resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 11/L1), among others, the GB:

• invites the Secretariat to actively promote the use of standardized descriptor lists existing for many crops and to facilitate the development of further descriptor lists;
• takes note of the progress made in the use of digital object identifiers (DOIs) and encourage the Secretariat to continue to promote their use, on a voluntary basis, in particular in genebanks, and to expand efforts to build the capacity of relevant stakeholders, especially in developing countries;
• requests the Secretariat to promote capacity development, technology transfer on mutually agreed terms, and the mobilization of financial resources from all sources for the improvement of national databases, the access, and use of information in the GLIS Portal;
• decides to reconvene the SAC with the same terms of reference (ToR) as the previous biennium, and request the Secretariat to continue to update the Committee on progress in the implementation of the GLIS Programme of Work (PoW-GLIS);
• requests the SAC to continue considering scientific and technical issues related to DSI/GSD related to PGRFA, while noting that GLIS is currently not intended to serve as a repository for, or a tracking and tracing system of DSI/GSD, without prejudice of future decisions by the GB;
• takes note of the developments in relevant international fora related to DSI/GSD;
• requests the SAC, in collaboration with the Secretariat, to undertake a detailed technical assessment of the capabilities of GLIS to integrate DSI/GSD and other emerging digital technologies;
• requests the SAC to evaluate the impact of assigning a new DOI to a given PGRFA after transfer from a provider to a recipient in comparison to assigning only one permanent unique identifier to an accession;
• invites Parties, other governments, and stakeholders to provide the necessary resources to implement the PoW-GLIS; and
• requests the Secretariat to follow up on the implementation of the recommendations of the SAC and to provide a summary report to the GB 12.

Conservation and Sustainable Use of PGRFA

On Tuesday, the Secretariat introduced the relevant documents (IT/GB-11/25/12 and 12.2). Qatar, for NEAR EAST, the Philippines, for ASIA, and others supported reconvening the Ad Hoc Technical Committee on conservation and sustainable use of PGRFA (ACSU) for the next biennium. Spain, for ERG, favored establishing a SAC with a composition like the one on GLIS. Costa Rica, for GRULAC, and Rwanda, for AFRICA, supported adopting the ACSU as a standing committee. A contact group was established to discuss the development of a package for future work, ToR for reconvening the ACSU, and the draft resolution. The group met in the evening.

On Wednesday, the contact group focused on the ToR of a technical committee, with ongoing discussion on whether it will be an ad hoc or a standing one, and on the draft resolution. On Thursday, the contact group continued deliberations on a draft resolution, focusing on the package for future work. Negotiations continued in a Friends of the Chair group, which also met on Friday and Saturday.

On Saturday afternoon, Uruguay, for GRULAC, proposed that the physical or hybrid meeting of the ACSU include interpretation. Delegates approved the draft resolution with this and other minor amendments

Final Outcome: In the final resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 12/L1), among others, the GB:

• decides to reconvene the ACSU with the ToR contained in the annex;
• encourages Parties to integrate, as appropriate, the implementation of Articles 5 and 6 into their National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) and other national policy frameworks;
• encourages Parties to promote the participation of women and youth in programmes and initiatives for the conservation and sustainable use of PGRFA;
• invites the Secretariat and the Global Crop Diversity Trust to work together on the establishment of an International Technical Advisory Committee and request the Advisory Committee, once established, to report to the ACSU;
• requests the Secretariat to continue to promote, disseminate, regularly update, and monitor the Toolbox for Sustainable Use of PGRFA; and
• requests the Secretariat to continue to support effective strategies for implementing Articles 5 and 6 of the Treaty, analyze and monitor the identified gaps and needs, as well as emerging challenges, and encourage Parties to share information on such challenges, as well as possible new initiatives to address them.

The GB also requests the Secretariat, in collaboration with relevant stakeholders, to:

• organize regional consultations on the implementation of Articles 5 and 6;
• facilitate and assemble information about the activities carried out by Parties, stakeholders, and international organizations in support of Articles 5 and 6;
• continue to facilitate training and capacity-building activities and initiatives aimed at advancing the conservation and sustainable use of PGRFA;
• include, as appropriate, activities with the peri-urban and urban food systems sector, including city networks; and
• support national programmes and processes for the conservation and sustainable use of PGRFA, as appropriate, and in building partnerships and mobilizing resources.

The GB also encourages Parties and other donors to provide additional financial resources for the implementation of Articles 5 and 6.

Farmers’ Rights

On Tuesday, the Secretariat presented: the report on the implementation of farmers’ rights (IT/GB-11/25/13); the report of the Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group on Farmers’ Rights (AHTEG-FR) (IT/GB-11/25/13.2); the executive summary of the draft assessment of the state of implementation of Article 9 (IT/GB-11/25/13.3); and the draft strategy on the “Options for Encouraging, Guiding, and Promoting the Realization of Farmers’ Rights” (IT/GB-11/25/13.4). Discussions focused on designating an international day for the observance of farmers’ rights; converting the AHTEG-FR into a standing committee; and the implementation of the activities foreseen in the strategy on the “Options.” Delegates also discussed the use of the terminology “Indigenous Peoples and local communities” (IPLCs).

A contact group was established, co-chaired by Malawi and the Netherlands, and convened on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday to discuss the elements of a package for future work, including: the ToRs and whether to extend the AHTEG-FR or its transformation to a standing committee; and the development of an action plan to address the needs and gaps indicated in the draft assessment of the state of implementation of Article 9. Delegates also addressed: the draft strategy on how the use of the “Options” can be promoted; the possibility of establishing an international day of observance for farmers’ rights; and the use of the terminology “IPLCs,” 

On Thursday, the group also discussed a footnote proposed by JAPAN to ensure that legal frameworks, measures, and actions in the strategy would not contradict the 1991 Act of the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV 1991), and debated, without reaching consensus, language on establishing measures of success as a means to measure governments’ efforts to implement farmers’ rights; hybrid meeting modalities for the AHTEG-FR; and a Party’s proposal to invite UPOV as an observer to the AHTEG-FR’s meetings. Contact group discussions continued on Friday, before moving into a Friends of the Chair group on Saturday.

On Saturday afternoon, Kim Van Seeters (the Netherlands) reported on the Friends of the Chair discussions. She outlined the agreed package of tasks for the intersessional work of the AHTEG-FR. She noted that the draft action plan and resolution have some remaining brackets. Plenary then addressed the draft resolution, agreeing on the amendments made during contact group and informal discussions.

A lengthy debate took place on a provision inviting Parties to explore the possibility of the establishment of an international day for farmers’ rights. Many delegates, including NIGER, BRAZIL, ECUADOR, INDIA, SUDAN, NORWAY, ALGERIA, CONGO, CHILE, PERU, SOUTH AFRICA, COLOMBIA, NEPAL, and YEMEN, expressed their support. The US noted they can accept either “an international day of recognition of farmers as custodians of PGRFA” or “national days of observance for farmers’ rights.” The provision remained bracketed.

On the ToR of the AHTEG-FR, delegates debated reference to decision-making by consensus. Following informal consultations, they agreed to delete it and request the Bureau to develop rules of procedure for the AHTEGs. Plenary approved the ToR as amended. Following lack of agreement on the enhancement of the MLS, delegates agreed to remove text related to DSI/GSD from the draft strategy on how the use of the “Options” can be promoted. Plenary approved the draft strategy with these and other minor amendments.

Final Outcome: In the final resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 13/L2), the GB, among other things:

• encourages Parties and other stakeholders to consider using the “Options,” noting that the options under Category 10 are a Co-Chairs’ proposal;
• reconvenes the AHTEG-FR for the biennium 2026–2027;
• invites Parties and other stakeholders, especially farmers’ organizations, to continue submitting to the Secretariat, for inclusion in the Inventory, views, experiences, and best practices for national implementation of Article 9 of the Treaty;
• requests the Secretariat to update the Educational Module on Farmers’ Rights, as appropriate, and to continue disseminating and promoting its use;
• requests the Secretariat, subject to the availability of financial resources, to continue outreach and communication on Farmers’ Rights;
• requests the Secretariat to strengthen collaboration between the Treaty and other units and partners that work for the promotion of Farmers’ Rights;
• reaffirms the request to the Secretariat to include the possible impact of DSI/GSD on Farmers’ Rights; and
• invites Parties and other stakeholders, especially farmers’ organizations, to continue submitting to the Secretariat, for inclusion in the Inventory, views, experiences and best practices for national implementation of Article 9 of the Treaty.

The resolution includes the ToR for the AHTEG-FR in the appendix, referring to, among others:

• development of a draft action plan for the GB to address identified gaps and needs from the assessment to support Parties in farmers’ rights implementation;
• two webinars on seed marketing/certification regulation and plant variety protection systems; and
• exploration of the possibility to establish a standing committee.

Compliance

On Tuesday, Compliance Committee Co-Chair Priya Bhanu (US) presented the relevant report (IT/GB-11/25/14). Tunisia, for AFRICA, Indonesia, for ASIA, and Spain, for ERG, regretted that the submission target of 80% of the Parties reporting on compliance has not been reached, with ASIA urging identifying and addressing the underlying reasons for underreporting.

On Friday, delegates agreed to encourage Parties and other donors to consider providing financial resources for capacity-development activities, including on reporting capacities, and approved the resolution with this and other amendments.

Final Outcome: In the final resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 14/L2), among others, the GB:

• invites Parties to provide more detailed information in their reports, in line with national capacities, on the following themes: threats to PGRFA; measures taken to implement Article 9 and measures taken to notify the material available under the MLS; and facilitated access to Annex I PGRFA with the SMTA;
• invites Parties to continue submitting or updating their reports, noting that such reports are to be submitted every five years;
• requests the Secretariat to support Parties in the use of the Online Reporting System; and
• encourages Parties and other donors to consider providing support and financial resources for capacity-development activities.

The members of the Compliance Committee are listed in the annex of the resolution.

Contribution of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the UN (FAO)

On Tuesday, Kaveh Zahedi, FAO, presented the FAO report (IT/GB-11/25/15). Plenary welcomed FAO’s continued financial and administrative support to the Treaty. On Thursday, when discussing the resolution, on a paragraph inviting FAO to continue its support to the Treaty, delegates decided to refer to “active” support to the Treaty “as a key international instrument” for PGRFA conservation and sustainable use, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits derived from their use.

On Friday, delegates agreed to encourage FAO to continue identifying and pursuing cooperation between the BSF and other multilateral funding mechanisms; and approved the resolution as amended.

On Saturday morning, the US reported on informal consultations regarding SDG references. They highlighted a compromise to recall paragraph 5 of Resolution 9/2023 (which emphasizes the importance of FAO’s continuous assistance with Treaty implementation at the national level) and to invite FAO to continue its support to the Treaty as a key international instrument for PGRFA conservation and sustainable use and fair and equitable benefit-sharing, recognizing that the reporting under the Treaty contributes to FAO’s role in monitoring progress toward the achievement of international frameworks addressing food security, biodiversity, and conservation. The provision is accompanied by a footnote noting that reference is made to SDGs 2 (zero hunger) and 15 (life on land). Plenary agreed to the compromise and approved the resolution as amended.

Final Outcome: In the final resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 15/L2.Rev.1), among others, the GB invites FAO to:

• continue supporting the efforts to increase the membership of the Treaty;
• facilitate policy dialogue at country or regional level on the ratification and implementation of, and reporting against, the Treaty; and
• integrate the Treaty into the implementation of relevant initiatives and strategies.

The GB also encourages FAO to engage the Treaty Secretariat to further integrate the objectives of the Treaty in its activities and initiatives targeting youth and women farmers, taking into account the observance of 2026 as the International Year of Woman Farmers and the special role of youth as future stewards of agricultural biodiversity.

Cooperation with International Instruments and Organizations

CGRFA: On Tuesday, the Secretariat introduced the relevant document (IT/GB-11/25/16.1). Dan Leskien, CGRFA, presented the report of the CGRFA Secretariat (IT/GB-11/25/16.1/ Inf.1), focusing on collaboration on the implementation and review of the Second Global Plan of Action for PGRFA and the Third Report on the State of the World’s PGRFA.

On Thursday, Parties agreed to request the Secretariat to strengthen collaboration in assembling relevant information for “assessing, measuring, and monitoring” monetary and non-monetary benefit-sharing.

Discussions continued on Friday, focusing on a paragraph requesting the Secretariat to continue collaboration with the CGRFA Secretariat, including on a desk study on the effects of seed policies, laws, and regulations on farmers’ ability to access seeds. The Plenary agreed on language acknowledging respect for Parties’ national sovereignty and recalling the ITPGRFA objectives. With this and other minor changes, delegates approved the draft resolution.

Final Outcome: In the final resolution (IT/GB-10/23/RES-Item 16.1/L2), the GB, among others, requests the Secretariat to continue strengthening collaboration and coordination with the CGRFA Secretariat to promote coherence in the development and implementation of the respective programmes of work of the two bodies, and in particular with regard to:

• the dissemination of the key findings of the Third Report on the State of the World’s PGRFA;
• the review of the Second Global Plan of Action, and the development of a proposal for the revision and simplification of the reporting format;
• the organization of symposia on in situ conservation and on-farm management of PGRFA;
• the effects of seed policies, laws, and regulations on farmers’ ability to access seeds;
• the implementation and monitoring of the Second Global Plan of Action;
• assembling relevant information for assessing, measuring, and monitoring monetary and nonmonetary benefit-sharing;
• ABS and DSI/GSD on PGRFA, including through a hybrid open-ended multi-stakeholder workshop on the implications of CBD Decision 16/2 for research and development in the food and agriculture sector, the need for capacity-building and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the use of DSI/GSD on PGRFA;
• the better division of mandates between GLIS and the World Information and Early Warning System on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, and how they relate to relevant targets and indicators of the revised second Global Plan of Action for PGRFA; and
• the development and implementation of national strategies for PGRFA.

Global Crop Diversity Trust: On Tuesday, the Secretariat presented the draft resolution to provide policy guidance to the Global Crop Diversity Trust (IT/GB-11/25/16.2) and the report on the Emergency Reserve for Germplasm Collections at Risk (IT/GB-11/25/9.1.3). CROP TRUST presented its report (IT/GB-11/25/16.2.2). Delegates highlighted activities supported by the Crop Trust and recommended further cooperation. On Thursday, Plenary approved a draft resolution, with a bracketed reference to the ACSU, pending agreement on its establishment.

Final Outcome: The final resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 16.2/L1) contains two parts, on policy guidance, and on other matters: scientific and technical matters, GLIS, communication and outreach, and mainstreaming global crop conservation strategies.

On policy guidance, the GB, among others, requests the GB Chair and the Secretariat to inform the Crop Trust Executive Board on the decisions made by the GB, and provide policy guidance for resource mobilization, scientific, and technical matters, the GLIS, communication and outreach, and mainstreaming global crop conservation strategies. The GB, among others, recommends that the Crop Trust continue sustaining and expanding its cooperation with the Treaty on mobilizing resources.

On scientific and technical matters, the GB encourages further collaboration with the Secretariat to undertake joint capacity-building of national partners on Treaty implementation.

On GLIS, the GB invites the Crop Trust, the Treaty, and FAO to continue collaborating on training and capacity-development activities in information systems and documentation of PGRFA; and invites the Crop Trust to continue participating in the GLIS SAC.

On communication and outreach, the GB encourages the continuation of joint communication initiatives and events. On mainstreaming global crop conservation strategies, the GB invites the Crop Trust and the Secretariat to continue supporting the development and implementation of Global Crop Conservation Strategies.

CBD and Nagoya Protocol: On Tuesday, the Secretariat introduced the relevant document (IT/GB-11/25/16.3) and the CBD Secretariat presented their report (IT/GB-11/25/16.3/ Inf.1). Noting that it does not affect the rights and obligations of the Parties to the Treaty, Italy, for ERG, welcomed CBD Decision 16/2 (DSI on genetic resources). Zambia, for AFRICA, and JAPAN suggested avoiding duplication between the implementation of the CBD multilateral mechanism (MLM) and its Cali Fund, and the MLS and its BSF.

On Thursday and Friday, delegates addressed a draft resolution, with a lengthy debate on the IPLC terminology. They decided to use “indigenous and local communities,” following their agreement to revert to Treaty language.

On Saturday morning, the US reported on informal consultations, noting a compromise to request the Secretariat to continue working with the CBD Secretariat to harmonize information-sharing and reporting through initiatives such as InforMEA and to explore possible synergies in monitoring benefit-sharing and genetic resources, removing references to the GBF and SDG Target 15.6 (fair and equitable benefit-sharing). Plenary agreed to the compromise. 

In the evening, following a lack of agreement on the enhancement of the MLS and on setting a funding target for the BSF, delegates amended a paragraph requesting, among others, the Secretariat to report to the Funding Committee on DSI/GSD-related processes with the CBD. Delegates approved the draft resolution as amended.

Final Outcome: In the resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 16.3/CRP1), among others, the GB:

• emphasizes the importance of maintaining cooperation, complementarity, and coherence, as well as avoiding duplication between the Treaty and the CBD;
• stresses the importance of integrating PGRFA in the NBSAPs as well as in Biodiversity Finance Plans, as appropriate, and requests the Secretariat to continue strengthening collaboration within FAO and with the UN Development Programme Biodiversity Finance Initiative (BIOFIN) to support further integration of PGRFA into such plans and facilitate their implementation;
• encourages increased cooperation in the implementation of strategies for resource mobilization adopted by biodiversity-related conventions;
• takes note of the adoption, through CBD Decision 16/2, of the modalities for operationalizing the MLM, and encourages mutual supportiveness and non-duplication in the implementation of the MLM and its Cali Fund, and the MLS and its BSF; and
• requests the Secretariat to continue working with the CBD Secretariat to harmonize information-sharing and reporting through initiatives such as InforMEA, and to explore possible synergies in the monitoring on benefit-sharing and genetic resources.

Other Bodies and Organizations: On Wednesday, the Secretariat introduced reports: on cooperation with other international bodies and organizations (IT/GB-11/25/16.4); from institutions that have concluded agreements with the GB under Article 15 (ex situ collections held by international agricultural research centers) (IT/GB-11/25/16.4.2); and from Norway on the management and operations of the Svalbard Global Seed Vault (IT/GB-11/25/16.4.3). Several international organizations reported on their activities of relevance to, or in support of, the implementation of the Treaty.

On Friday, delegates considered a draft resolution, focusing, among others, on a paragraph welcoming the community of practice of National Genebanks of Latin America and the Caribbean and inviting Parties to recognize and support it.

On Saturday morning, plenary resumed consideration of the draft resolution by revisiting the provision on the community of practice of National Genebanks of Latin America and the Caribbean. TOGO proposed removing the specific reference to Latin America and the Caribbean, and specifying that the initiative is coordinated by the CGIAR. The resolution was approved as amended.

Final Outcomes: The GB adopted three resolutions: on international bodies and organizations, Article 15 Institutions, and the Svalbard Global Seed Vault.

In the resolution on international bodies and organizations (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 16.4/L2), the GB requests the Secretariat to, among others:

• continue participating in relevant activities of the InforMEA Initiative and collaborating with the UN Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Center (UNEP-WCMC) on the Online Reporting System;
• continue to foster cooperation with other international organizations, regional initiatives, and relevant stakeholders and to strengthen existing cooperative arrangements; and
• continue to report to the GB on cooperation with relevant international bodies and organizations and related collaborative activities.

In the resolution on Article 15 Institutions (IT/GB-11/25/RES Item 16.4.2/L2), the GB, among others, requests the Secretariat to continue holding regular or periodic consultations with the CGIAR centers on implementation of the agreements and policy guidance, including on the transfer of PGRFA in the collections with the SMTA.

The GB requests the Secretariat to, subject to the availability of financial resources, continue holding regular or periodic consultations with institutions that signed agreements under Article 15 of the Treaty, on the implementation of the agreements and the policy guidance provided by the GB, including on the transfer of plant genetic resources in their collections with the SMTA, and report to the GB at each session; and continue efforts to secure new agreements under Article 15 of the Treaty with all relevant institutions and their host governments, as appropriate.

In the resolution on the Svalbard Global Seed Vault (IT/GB-11/25/RES Item 16.4.3/L2), the GB notes the new deposits of seed samples during the three openings of the Seed Vault between 2023 and 2025 and requests the Secretariat to explore further with the Government of Norway other practical means to enhance the linkages between the Treaty and the Seed Vault, including linking data through the GLIS.

Multi-Year Programme of Work (MYPOW)

MYPOW: On Wednesday, the Secretariat introduced the document (IT/GB-11/25/17.1).

Final Outcome: Acknowledging the lack of time to engage in negotiations, delegates agreed to suggest the Bureau review and update the MYPOW according to the resolutions of GB 11.

DSI/GSD: On Wednesday, the Secretariat introduced: a review of relevant developments in other international fora, in particular the CBD and its Decision 16/2 (DSI on genetic resources) (IT/GB-11/25/17.2); and a compilation of Parties’ and stakeholders’ submissions on activities aimed at reducing capacity gaps regarding DSI/GSD (IT/GB-11/25/17.2/Inf.1).

Canada, for NORTH AMERICA, noted that CBD Decision 16/2 is a significant development on how benefit-sharing can function on DSI/GSD. Japan, for ASIA, emphasized the importance of cross-coordination, in particular with the CBD, and urged keeping the GB fully informed of any relevant developments. Germany, for ERG, welcomed the decision, and called for: an open-ended, multi-stakeholder workshop, organized by the CGRFA in partnership with the CBD and the Treaty, on the implications of Decision 16/2.

Tunisia, for AFRICA, and Egypt, for NEAR EAST, pointed to the lack of an internationally agreed definition on DSI/GSD and called on recipients, including Article 15 institutions, to generate and publish DSI/GSD only after obtaining the explicit consent of the provider country, until DSI/GSD is addressed comprehensively under the Treaty.

On Friday, delegates addressed a draft resolution. They agreed to: take note of CBD Decision 16/2; state that it does not affect the rights and obligations of ITPGRFA Parties; and delete text on state sovereignty over PGRFA in the MLS.

On Saturday, plenary resumed consideration of the draft resolution. BRAZIL proposed requesting cooperation between the Secretariats of the CBD and the Treaty on issues related to DSI/GSD, to promote mutual supportiveness in implementation. The US suggested the implementation should be “non duplicative.” The paragraph was deleted, following the outcome of the negotiations on the enhancement of the MLS, similar to other provisions related to the enhancement of the MLS and its implementation. Plenary approved the draft resolution as amended.

Final Outcome: In the final resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 17.2/L1), the GB, among other things:

• takes note of CBD Decisions 15/9 and 16/2 and notes that the establishment of the MLM for benefit-sharing from the use of DSI on genetic resources does not affect the rights and obligations of Parties under the Treaty;
• encourages CBD Parties to take into account the relevant Treaty provisions and the need for mutual supportive implementation of the CBD and the Treaty in implementing the MLM for benefit-sharing;
• requests the Secretariat to continue monitoring developments in all relevant international fora with regard to DSI/GSD and to report to GB 12;
• welcomes the convening of an open-ended multi-stakeholder workshop, organized by the CGRFA Secretariat in partnerships with the CBD and Treaty Secretariats, on the implications of CBD Decision 16/2; and
• requests the Secretariat, as appropriate, to facilitate activities to reduce the existing gap on capacity between developed and developing countries regarding generation, access to, and use of DSI/GSD.

Work Programme and Budget

On Monday, the Secretariat presented the draft work programme and budget for 2026–2027 (IT/GB-11/25/18 and 18 Add.1), noting it proposes zero nominal growth and highlighted concerns about the low number of Parties contributing to the Core Administrative Budget. ARGENTINA, ECUADOR, and URUGUAY urged Parties to make contributions. The US, for NORTH AMERICA, and ARGENTINA stressed prioritizing the Treaty’s core objectives and avoiding overburdening the Secretariat. JAPAN called for increased effectiveness, transparency, and accountability.

On Saturday morning, plenary accepted a compromise, presented by the US, to delete reference to the SDGs in a preambular paragraph of the draft resolution.

On Saturday afternoon, Budget Committee Co-Chair Vlastimil Zedek (Czechia) reported back to plenary on the deliberations of the Committee during the week, noting a zero nominal growth for the next biennial. Denmark, for ERG, expressed concern that only 64% of Parties contribute to the Core Administrative Budget, creating significant risks to the Treaty’s long-term sustainability as implementation increasingly relies on extra-budgetary funding, and requested the Bureau develop proposals to increase transparency and encourage Parties to meet their indicative contribution amounts.

Tanzania, for AFRICA, opposed making contributions mandatory, arguing that evidence from other fora does not support that mandatory systems enhance contributions, and advocated exploring graduated response measures and other mechanisms to address non-compliance. The draft resolution was agreed without further discussion.

Final Outcome: In the final resolution (IT/GB-11/25/RES-Item 18/L1), the GB, among others:

• adopts the Work Programme and budget of the Treaty for the biennium 2026–2027, as well as the indicative scale of contributions;
• urges all Parties to provide the resources required in the budget, noting with concern that the number of Parties that contribute remains low;
• recommends a list of project proposals to donor governments and institutions, and invites them to provide the necessary funding for implementation;
• takes note of the contribution from FAO of USD 2 million and encourages it to consider increasing the contribution and mobilizing additional voluntary financial resources; and
• encourages Parties to contribute to the Special Fund for Agreed Purposes, and Parties and donors to replenish the Fund to Support the Participation of Developing Countries.

The GB further requests the Secretariat to:

• continue to inform Parties of the status of contributions and follow up with those from whom no payment or partial payment has been received;
• continue to seek opportunities to hold Treaty meetings virtually and back-to-back with other relevant meetings; and
• continue efforts to improve efficiency in the management and delivery of the Work Programme, including through the use of digital tools and joint event organization.

The resolution contains three annexes. Annex 1 includes the Work Programme and the Core Administrative Budget for the biennium 2026–2027, with its addendum containing donor-supported activities under the Special Fund for Agreed Purposes. Annex 2 contains the Secretariat staffing structure for the biennium 2026–2027. Annex 3 includes an indicative scale of contributions.

Adoption of the Report and Closing Plenary

On Saturday evening, rapporteur Noluthando Netnou-Nkoana (South Africa) presented GB 11 draft report (IT/GB-11/25/Draft Report). ARGENTINA recalled their dissociation from any reference to SDGs, requesting the addition of a relevant footnote. On the enhancement of the MLS, Chair Kopše noted that “the GB took note of the Chair’s proposal on the enhancement of the MLS.” Following lack of agreement on the enhancement of the MLS, delegates agreed to take note of Switzerland’s proposal on amendment of Annex I, with SWITZERLAND noting it will not submit it again. Plenary then adopted the report.

Canada, for NORTH AMERICA, highlighted significant elements of convergence coming out of GB 11, noting that the gap on the three hotspots on the MLS enhancement remains out of reach despite the efforts since 2013. Uganda, for AFRICA, noted that “we have achieved a lot on our agenda,” despite the sense of disappointment for not being able to seize the opportunity to enhance the functioning of the MLS. PERU underscored the need to continue pursuing consensus based on national sovereignty over genetic resources, stressing that efforts on the way forward “should be carried out transparently and responsibly as required by a process as important as ours.”

Nepal, for ASIA, emphasized that the intense and often overwhelming negotiations at GB 11 portrayed the value of multilateralism and the collective will of Parties to strengthen the Treaty. They noted that, despite being unable to reach consensus on the enhancement of the MLS, discussions clarified concerns and set the stage for more work in the future, and highlighted progress on farmers’ rights, conservation and sustainable use, and other agenda items.

Sweden, for ERG, noted that “the challenging negotiations reflected our different perspectives and needs.” They noted that several issues were resolved during GB 11, adding that it is regrettable that consensus could not be reached on the enhancement of the MLS.

SWITZERLAND emphasized that “even if we did not reach all the results we wanted, we will keep working to reach the Treaty’s objectives that we all believe in and support.” Egypt, for NEAR EAST, noted that GB 11 reflected “our common objective to strengthen international cooperation,” reiterating the central role farmers and local communities play in conserving biodiversity.

BRAZIL, for GRULAC, highlighted progress on farmers’ rights, and conservation and sustainable use, stressing that the region remains engaged in the task to enhance the MLS in an equitable and balanced way. Australia, for SOUTHWEST PACIFIC, thanked all participants for the efforts to reach consensus, despite the fact “we did not reach agreement on everything we set out to,” stressing they will reflect on lessons learned at GB 11.

THIRD WORLD NETWORK expressed disappointment over a process that has failed Parties, adding that the proposed SMTA, if adopted, would have entrenched the imbalance between expanded access and postponed obligations on equity and benefit-sharing.

Stressing that the Treaty faces the task of adapting to new challenges, GB 12 Chair Fernanda Millicay (Argentina) expressed confidence in finding the path forward at GB 12. ITPGRFA Secretary Kent Nnadozie expressed disappointment at not reaching the anticipated outcome “despite many years of efforts, the significant investment of time and resources, and the sincere commitment shown by many.”

Despite failure to find consensus on the enhancement of the MLS, Chair Kopše emphasized progress made on the capacity-development strategy and action plan, farmers’ rights, and conservation and sustainable use. He gaveled the meeting to a close at 12:05 am on Sunday, 30 November 2025.

A Brief Analysis of GB 11

“Does travel bring wisdom? I think there is probably no better place to find out than Peru”- Anthony Bourdain

Adoption of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) back in 2001 was a milestone for the agricultural research sector and the biodiversity community alike. Its Multilateral System (MLS) of access and benefit-sharing (ABS) would ensure the flow of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture (PGRFA) needed to safeguard development of new crop varieties for global food security. It would also enhance fairness and equity in agricultural development, by institutionalizing monetary and non-monetary benefit-sharing and combating biopiracy¾the unauthorized use and misappropriation of genetic resources and traditional knowledge. The ITPGRFA’s recognition of farmers’ rights would contribute to the reward and continuation of farmers’ practices that have provided the basis for agricultural biodiversity and production. Balancing between the public agricultural research sector and farming communities, and between ex situ conservation of PGRFA in genebanks and in situ conservation and sustainable use on-farm has been at the heart of the efforts.

Some 25 years later, both the policy and the agricultural research landscape have changed immensely. Biological sciences and technologies have evolved dramatically entering the information and artificial intelligence era, while public agricultural research is in retreat, with a handful of private companies controlling the commercial seed sector.

Adoption of the Nagoya Protocol on ABS under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 2010 boosted the expectations of biodiversity-rich developing countries to gain benefits from their genetic resources through bilateral agreements. The CBD agreement in 2022 to establish a multilateral benefit-sharing mechanism (MLM) from the use of digital sequence information (DSI) on genetic resources, albeit non-legally binding, opened the way for the realization of benefit-sharing from DSI use, following a decade of debates across international processes.

Facing such a shifting policy landscape, the ITPGRFA needed to change. Initiated in 2013, the process to enhance the functioning of the MLS aimed to adapt to these new realities, and as a priority, increase user-based payments and contributions to the Benefit-sharing Fund (BSF). The benefit-sharing component of the system was not living up to expectations. Following a proposal by Switzerland to expand the list of crops in Annex I to “all PGRFA,” the focus on improving user-based payments was coupled by discussions on an expansion of the list of crops in the MLS.

Following 12 years of negotiations and hundreds of pages of legal and technical documents and studies, the 11th meeting of the Governing Body (GB 11), however, was unable to reach consensus on a package of measures on the enhancement of the MLS, and the process came to a halt. This brief analysis will explain what happened and why, placing developments on the MLS and on farmers’ rights in the broader policy context.

Enhancement of the MLS: The Beginning and the End of a Journey

Reaching an agreement on enhancing the MLS was the focus of GB 11. The path since negotiations began in 2013 was long, with both high and low points, most notably the collapse of the negotiations in 2019 and their resumption in 2022. The inability of the MLS to generate monetary benefits resulted in lack of funding for the BSF but also, of equal importance, in lack of trust for developing countries and their farmers that offered their genetic resources to the world.

Developed countries asserted that increasing availability of crops in the system would improve its attractiveness to users, thus increasing contributions to the BSF. Historically interested in access to genetic resources for industries within their jurisdiction, developed countries thus linked benefit-sharing to the expansion of the list of crops. User-based payments and expansion of Annex I were treated as two sides of the same coin, with developing countries pushing for the former and developed countries for the latter.

Given technological advances and the risk of bypassing benefit-sharing obligations, the negotiations were soon coupled by issues surrounding digital sequence information/genetic sequence data (DSI/GSD) to form the three so-called “hotspots”: expansion of Annex I (list of crops in the MLS), benefit-sharing from DSI/GSD, and the payment structure and rates for access to MLS material.

Parties held four Working Group meetings over the last two years with the hope of reaching an agreement in Lima. The busy intersessional period helped crystallize positions and increase awareness about each region’s needs around the hotspots. Despite technical work, however, positions remained divergent, and trust in the process was limited, given the lack of user-based benefit-sharing contributions to date.

In an effort to build trust, the Working Group explored different ideas on the expansion of the list of crops, including either expanding Annex I gradually through “positive lists” of crops, or allowing ample room for exemptions. This was aimed at alleviating provider countries’ concerns that they are offering their PGRFA for free, with no evidence about monetary benefit-sharing flowing in the BSF. It would require a leap of faith. As evidenced from the beginning of GB 11, it was not enough; trust was evidently lacking, with one region supporting that expansion be voluntary only.

On the payment structure, most supported a single subscription system that was expected to provide timely and predictable monetary flows to the BSF. Some developed countries, however, opted to keep the current single-access option in parallel, arguing it would increase attractiveness to users. Regions had also divergent views on payment rates, in some cases differing by an order of magnitude. During negotiations in the contact group during GB 11, there seemed to be some convergence towards balancing the payment structure on the one hand with rates on the other, with deliberations continuing in various informal settings throughout the week.

Perhaps the most contentious issue, and the one that largely led to the collapse of the enhancement process in 2019, was monetary benefit-sharing from the use of DSI/GSD. Some developed countries insisted on voluntary benefit-sharing, noting DSI/GSD falls outside the scope of the Treaty. Developing countries argued that use of DSI/GSD must be addressed in the Standard Material Transfer Agreement (SMTA) through mandatory payments. With no room for compromise, regions remained divided during negotiations in the Working Group, as well as during GB 11.

Owing to geopolitical circumstances, lack of trust, or simply different priorities for each region, the week-long deliberations failed to reach a compromise. During the closing plenary, Chair Kopše made a last-minute attempt to salvage the process and provide a way forward. His proposal included a draft resolution on the enhancement of the MLS and a revised SMTA with payment rates and thresholds to be agreed at GB 12. Intersessional work was outlined for the expansion of Annex I and for addressing expectations on the sharing of monetary and non-monetary benefits from the use of DSI/GSD.

Developed countries welcomed the proposal, noting it provides a narrow path toward an agreement at GB 12. But for developing countries, largely conceding a single-access payment option while also excluding mandatory payments from use of DSI/GSD from the SMTA, in return for the continuation of the process, proved insufficient. Many also expressed regret about the lack of transparency, noting that the proposal for a legal instrument was only presented late during the closing plenary, in English only, and with no time left for negotiations, following several days of closed-door negotiations. While it is unlikely that an additional day or even week of negotiations would lead to a convergence of views, given the lengthy history of the deliberations, many participants noted that the process followed during GB 11 was not conducive to building trust.

Farmers’ Rights: The Long and Winding Road

Policy making on farmers’ rights has been a matter of controversy since the Treaty’s inception. While all Parties claim to recognize farmers’ contribution to the conservation and sustainable use of PGRFA, policy choices and implementation priorities depend on each country’s particular agricultural production and socioeconomic circumstances. Implementation of farmers’ rights depends on the degree of industrialization of agricultural production, and ultimately on whether farmers are considered innovators or simply users of seed produced by professional breeders. It also depends on law and policy choices. Parties take largely different approaches with regard to the linkages between farmers’ rights, including seed-related rights, and intellectual property rights, in particular plant variety protection under the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV Convention) Some give priority to plant variety protection over farmers’ rights, while others consider peasant and farmers’ rights as collective human rights in need of protection, in the context of both the ITPGRFA and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants.

These opposing positions took center stage at GB 11 as delegates debated seemingly unimportant things: references to a set of options for encouraging, guiding and promoting the realization of farmers’ rights, given that some of these options had not been agreed by the GB and were put forward as Co-Chairs’ text; and calls for an international day of observance for farmers’ rights. Consultations continued until the last day, with the proposal for an international day failing to achieve consensus, although agreement on an intersessional process allows for continued work on the topic.

The Treaty at a Crossroads

“Coming back to where you started is not the same as never leaving.” - Terry Pratchett

A long journey has come to an end. The inability to adopt an enhanced MLS in Lima provides the opportunity for reflection, and asking difficult questions. How can the Treaty remain relevant and fulfil its objectives of sustainable agriculture and global food security at times of dramatic technological change? How can it remain useful for both agricultural researchers and farmers within an increasingly complex global policy landscape? How can it secure legal certainty and enhance fairness and equity in an increasingly unfair and inequitable global system? How can it successfully address emergencies amidst geopolitical turmoil?

Multilateralism, perhaps more necessary than ever, is in retreat, with processes increasingly failing to find common ground and agreements falling to the lowest common denominator. Hopefully, lessons from this long journey and time for reflection will result in finding a new path and keep pace with the rapidly evolving technological and legal landscape, for sustainable agriculture and global food security. 

Citation

For summary report citation, please use: Tsioumani, Elsa, Mike Muzurakis, María Ovalle, Gabriella Prado, and Asterios Tsioumanis. 2025. 11th Session of the ITPGRFA Governing Body. Earth Negotiations Bulletin/IISD, Vol. 9 No. 880.