Who should get paid for nature's sequenced genes?

But rich nations and many researchers oppose such a model which they fear will be too onerous, potentially putting the brakes on scientific pursuits that could benefit all humankind.

.

Also cutting into rich nations wealthiest members/companies profits.

Billions is made from such discoveries and it seems the poor countries never get a share of profits that came from discoveries of plants etc in their own countries.

The International Wheat Genome Sequencing Consortium sequenced the incredibly complex double haploid bread wheat genome in 2018. The researchers who unlocked the achievement were publicly or farmer funded academics from around the world.

The genome is now in the public domain for the betterment of humanity. Private companies are free to use the data to risk investing in the development of patentable traits and if successful earn royalties and profit from taking that risk. No poor people were harmed in sequencing wheat.

Likewise the genome sequence for the vanilla plant is open to the public for the betterment of humanity. No royalties, at all, should go to people who happen to live in a place where the plant grew wild.

No royalties, at all, should go to people who happen to live in a place where the plant grew wild.

This idea seems to be laudable superficially, but when considering the realities of the world it also have quite negative repercussions. As the article mentions "The issue is a complex one."

Biodiversity is objectively something good to protect, and royalties are a very straightforward way to do it, considering only the currently available resources may convince people to just put everything out for free and let anybody develop things for cheap for "the good of humanity" but doing this would condemn countless unidentified things to destruction and extinction. A country that "happens to be where the plants grew wild" eventually has to choose between dedicating huge amounts of resources to protect those species or handsomely profit from their destruction by sacrificing the ecosystem they depend on toward development of industry.

If there is no royalties to think about then the temptation to just let everything burn may be too strong, specially when the worst consequences of climate change will affect the economies that have the most diverse life. But if you put some protections and let them make a profit from protecting those species this may could be the justification necessary to resist that temptation. Countless species saved with each of them a possibility of benefit for the whole human race.