Digital Sequence Information between Benefit-Sharing and Open Data
Open accessAbstract
Currently, parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) are negotiating a strategic plan to save biodiversity. One crucial element of an agreement is the question of whether and how digital sequence information (DSI) is subject to access and benefit-sharing from the utilization of genetic resources, one main instrument of the CBD. In the EU, the Open Data Directive (ODD) of 2019 and the recently adopted Data Governance Act (DGA) already cover research data and to some extent DSI. An analysis of the ODD and the DGA throws a spotlight on the legal uncertainty of utilizing DSI and reveals systemic tensions between open data principles and benefit-sharing restrictions on non-commercial use. It also suggests that a future benefit-sharing mechanism for DSI should avoid distinguishing between commercial and non-commercial use upstream, but should instead favor a solution, which imposes benefit-sharing obligations further downstream or outside of the DSI life cycle.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Collective Benefit can be implemented through automated benefit-sharing systems that track AI applications built on Indigenous data and distribute returns according to community-specified algorithms, or via a multinational trust that distributes the benefit per agreed terms.
“Collective Benefit can be implemented through automated benefit-sharing systems that track AI applications built on Indigenous data and distribute returns according to community-specified algorithms, or via a multinational trust that distributes the benefit per agreed terms (Klünker and Richter 2022).”
From Preventing AI extractivism: the case for braiding indigenous data justice with ABS for stronger AI data governance (2026) · cites this paper as Klünker and Richter 2022
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Schulz, M., & Loewen-Colón, J. (2026) · AI & SOCIETY · doi:10.1007/s00146-026-02931-z · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Klünker, I., & Richter, H.
- Affiliations
- Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (DE)
- Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Richter, Heiko
- Venue
- Journal of Law and the Biosciences
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2022-07-01
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- lsac035-lsac035
- ISSN
- 2053-9711 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC9682569
- OpenAlex
- W4310330806
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2023: 1
- FWCI
- 1.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Law and the Biosciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Universität Mannheim
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › International Maritime Law Issues
- Social Sciences › Law › Digitalization, Law, and Regulation
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Research Data Management Practices
- Keywords
- digital sequence information, access and benefit sharing, genetic resources, Convention on Biological Diversity, Open Data Directive, Data Governance Act, open data, research data, commercial use, non-commercial use, biodiversity conservation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review