Arya News - As scientific research increasingly shifts toward digital sequence data, biodiversity-rich nations like Bhutan face critical questions about how to secure fair compensation and protect their natural heritage in a digitalised global economy.
YEREVAN, ARMENIA – In the digital age, companies can use genetic information from plants to research and develop products without ever collecting the plants themselves. For biodiverse countries such as Bhutan, this raises a pressing question: how can they ensure benefits flow back when their resources help generate profit thousands of miles away?
Bhutan’s medicinal plants already feature in international products. Swertia chirayita, known locally as jatig or khalu and grown by farmers in Lauri Gewog, Samdrup Jongkhar, became an active ingredient in French luxury beauty house Chanel’s SUBLIMAGE L’EXTRAIT skincare product, launched in October 2022 after nearly a decade of collaboration with Bhutan. The agreement provides a framework for sharing benefits, while the partnership has helped farmers access markets, training and equipment.
But what happens when companies no longer need the plants themselves? Scientists can now digitise plant DNA and share the information globally, allowing companies to research and develop products without collecting another sample or visiting Bhutan. How can Bhutan ensure its people and communities still benefit when the value of their biodiversity is realised thousands of miles away?
That question is at the centre of discussions at the United Nations biodiversity summit, COP17, taking place in Yerevan, Armenia, from 19 to 30 October. Governments are negotiating how the Cali Fund, a new global mechanism, can share benefits from the commercial use of digital sequence information (DSI).
From plants to digital information
Every living organism carries DNA, which contains the biological instructions that help determine how it grows and functions.
Scientists can take a leaf from a medicinal plant, analyse its DNA and record the sequence of its building blocks in a digital file. That information can be uploaded to an online database, where researchers anywhere in the world can access it.
This is known as digital sequence information, or DSI, in international biodiversity discussions.
Researchers can use DSI to understand how a plant produces particular compounds, investigate its medicinal properties or identify genetic characteristics that could be useful in cosmetics, medicines and agriculture. Companies can then draw on these findings to develop commercial products.
The technology has clear benefits. Sharing genetic information allows scientists to collaborate, compare results and advance research without repeatedly collecting physical samples.
But it also creates a challenge for countries rich in biodiversity. Once genetic information is available online, it can travel far beyond the country where the original organism was found. Tracking its subsequent use and ensuring that benefits return to the country and communities connected to that biodiversity can become difficult.
A company using information from a Bhutanese medicinal plant might eventually develop a skincare ingredient or medicine without returning to Bhutan to collect the plant or negotiate a new agreement. Whether a particular use falls under existing access and benefit-sharing rules depends on the applicable legal framework.
The result is a growing gap between where genetic resources originate and where the value derived from them may be created.
Countries have long recognised that those who benefit from nature’s genetic resources should share the gains with those who provide and protect them which is called access and benefit sharing (ABS)
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), adopted in 1992, established the international framework for conserving biodiversity, using it sustainably and sharing the benefits arising from genetic resources fairly and equitably.
The Nagoya Protocol, adopted in 2010 and in force since 2014, provides a framework for ABS. Under such arrangements, access to biological resources may require permission and mutually agreed terms covering how benefits will be shared.
These benefits need not be limited to money. They can include training, technology transfer, research collaboration, equipment and opportunities for local communities.
Bhutan began its ABS programme in 2009 and has since developed a legal framework that includes the Biodiversity Act of Bhutan 2022 and the Biodiversity Rules and Regulations 2023. National reporting records 14 ABS agreements and 14 products developed with national and international partners and local communities.
Beyond the Chanel collaboration, ABS-linked for local products initiatives include Zhinor Balm and Liniment Oil, developed using wild ginger (Zingiber cassumunar)through collaboration involving the Dzedokha community and the National Biodiversity Centre.
Menjong Sorig Pharmaceuticals Corporation Ltd. has developed products including herbal soaps, hand sanitisers and anti-wrinkle creams using resources such as soap nut, rhododendron and Himalayan gooseberry. Bio Bhutan has also worked with the Dagala community and German company Primavera Life on products including soap, massage oil and perfume.
These examples show how biodiversity can become a source of research, enterprise and local income when access and benefit-sharing arrangements connect the use of biological resources with the people and places associated with them.
But DSI complicates this model. Traditional ABS arrangements often begin with access to physical material. Digital genetic information can be copied, shared and reused without the original specimen changing hands.
The challenge is not that existing ABS rules have become irrelevant. It is that they may not, on their own, provide a complete answer to benefit-sharing from every commercial use of genetic information.
The Cali Fund
Governments began addressing this challenge at the CBD’s COP15 meeting in 2022, agreeing to establish a multilateral mechanism for sharing benefits from DSI. At COP16 in 2024, they agreed on the mechanism’s operation and established the Cali Fund.
The fund is intended to receive contributions from companies that benefit commercially from DSI, including businesses in pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, biotechnology, agriculture and other relevant sectors.
Under the agreed framework, companies meeting the relevant criteria are invited to contribute an indicative amount equivalent to 1% of profits or 0.1% of revenue.
The money is intended to support biodiversity conservation and the sustainable use of biological resources in developing countries, as well as scientific research and capacity-building. At least half of the fund’s resources are intended for the self-identified needs of Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
For Bhutan, this could provide another route to benefit from the commercial use of genetic information derived from nature, including where it is difficult to trace individual digital uses back to a particular country.
However, the fund is not a guaranteed payment to every biodiversity-rich country. Its effectiveness will depend on how much companies contribute, how the money is allocated and whether the intended beneficiaries can access it.
Early contributions illustrate the challenge.
Five companies have committed a total of USD10,656 to the Cali Fund. But only USD 7,085 has been deposited so far.
Prozomix Limited has contributed USD 5,000, E-BIOM SA USD 1,085 and TierraViva AI Limited USD1,000. Disyn Biotec, which committed USD1,984, and Verna Earth Solutions, which committed USD 1,587, have yet to make their payments.
The amounts are a small beginning for a mechanism intended to mobilise contributions from commercial users of genetic information around the world.
The contrast is striking: while genetic data can be shared globally and used across industries, the financial benefits flowing into the new fund remain limited.
What is at stake at COP17?
In Yerevan, governments are discussing how to turn the Cali Fund into a more effective benefit-sharing mechanism.
Key questions include which companies should contribute, how their contributions should be calculated and how money should be distributed among developing countries and local communities.
At COP16, governments agreed on the fund’s broad purpose but left important details of its implementation to further negotiations. COP17 is an opportunity to address these questions and strengthen the system.
Raising money is only part of the challenge. Countries and communities also need transparent arrangements to determine who receives funding, how priorities are identified and whether the money supports conservation and local livelihoods.
This is particularly important because many countries lack the systems needed to distribute and monitor benefit-sharing funds effectively. A global mechanism can promise support, but its impact will depend on whether resources reach the people and places they are intended to help.
For Bhutan, that means preparing to engage with the emerging system while strengthening its own scientific and institutional capacity.
The country has identified constraints including limited technical capacity and infrastructure, low public awareness of ABS and DSI, and weaknesses in product certification and market access, according to seventh national report submitted to CBD.
This story was produced as part of the 2026 CBD COP17 Fellowship, operated by Informed Earth, in collaboration with Internews’ Earth Journalism Network.