This article examines the legal challenges associated with the utilization of marine genetic resources (MGR) at both the national level and beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ). The legal challenges addressed are as follows: 1) MGR are located across various jurisdictions, encompassing both national and international domains. The analysis starts with an overview of the international regulations that govern the utilization of genetic resources (GR) and their influence on national legislation. It emphasizes the principle of state sovereignty over natural resources while defining MGR and determining ownership; 2) It further highlights the intersection of national and international laws, particularly in transboundary contexts and within Indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples (IADP) territories, analyzing how these regulations are interpreted and applied in such scenarios; 3) The legal challenges related to the use of MGR in international waters are examined. Special emphasis is placed on the recent United Nations (UN) Agreement concerning this issue. This includes an analysis of its impact and specific provisions related to the utilization of MGR, such as the quantity to be collected, the methodology employed, collection sites, among others. The article concludes by asserting that the equitable distribution of benefits from the use of GR should begin at the earliest stages of access to these resources, including project planning and sample collection, rather than being delayed until the patenting and commercialization phases. Early benefit-sharing is essential for promoting fairness and equity in the use of MGR.

Angstadt, J. M. (2023). Can Domestic Environmental Courts Implement International Environmental Law? A Framework for Institutional Analysis. Transnational Environmental Law, 12(2), 318–342. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102523000092

Bhatia, P., & Chugh, A. (2015). Role of marine bioprospecting contracts in developing access and benefit sharing mechanism for marine traditional knowledge holders in the pharmaceutical industry. Global Ecology and Conservation, 3, 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2014.11.015

Bilder, R. B. (1980). International law and natural resources policies. Natural Resources Journal, 20, 451.

Blasiak, R., Wynberg, R., Grorud-Colvert, K., Thambisetty, S., Bandarra, N. M., Canário, A. V. M., da Silva, J., Duarte, C. M., Jaspars, M., Rogers, A., Sink, K., & Wabnitz, C. C. C. (2020). The ocean genome and future prospects for conservation and equity. In Nature Sustainability (Vol. 3, Issue 8, pp. 588–596). Nature Research. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0522-9

Blasiak, R., Wynberg, R., Grorud-Colvert, K., Thambisetty, S., Bandarra, N. M., Canário, A. V. M., Silva, J. da, Duarte, C. M., Jaspars, M., Rogers, A. D., Sink, K., & Wabnitz, C. C. C. (2023). The Ocean Genome: Conservation and the Fair, Equitable and Sustainable Use of Marine Genetic Resources. In The Blue Compendium (pp. 91–140). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-16277-0_4

Bodansky, D. (2012). What’s in a concept? Global public goods, international law, and legitimacy. European Journal of International Law, 23(3), 651–668. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chs035

Cepic, M., Bechtold, U., & Wilfing, H. (2022). Modelling human influences on biodiversity at a global scale–A human ecology perspective. Ecological Modelling, 465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2021.109854

Conway, D. M. (2023). Indigenizing Intellectual Property Law: Customary Law, Legal Pluralism, and the Protection of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights, Identity, and Resources. Texas Wesleyan Law Review, 15(2), 207–256. https://doi.org/10.37419/twlr.v15.i2.1

Deplazes-Zemp, A. (2018). ‘Genetic resources’ an analysis of a multifaceted concept. In Biological Conservation (Vol. 222, pp. 86–94). Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.03.031

Fernandes, P. (2014). Marine enzymes and food industry: Insight on existing and potential interactions. In Frontiers in Marine Science (Vol. 1, Issue OCT). Frontiers Media S. A. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2014.00046

García, J. G. A. (2020). Challenges of compensation and reparation for loss and damage related to the adverse effects of climate change. In Mexican Law Review (Vol. 13, Issue 1, pp. 183–199). Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico. https://doi.org/10.22201/iij.24485306e.2020.1.14813

Guifarro, O. A. S. (2023). Collaborative learning: a didactic proposal for the promotion of research competencies. Proceedings of the LACCEI International Multi-Conference for Engineering, Education and Technology. https://doi.org/10.18687/LEIRD2023.1.1.273

Hosseini, H., Al-Jabri, H. M., Moheimani, N. R., Siddiqui, S. A., & Saadaoui, I. (2022). Marine microbial bioprospecting: Exploitation of marine biodiversity towards biotechnological applications—a review. In Journal of Basic Microbiology (Vol. 62, Issue 9, pp. 1030–1043). John Wiley and Sons Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/jobm.202100504

International Labour Organization. (1989). Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169).

Kumala, M. T., Sunyowati, D., Narwati, E., & Vinata, R. T. (2023). The Philosophical Basis of the Authority of Coastal States to Manage Natural Resources in Their Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). Transactions on Maritime Science, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.7225/TOMS.V12.N01.W05

Leal, M. C., Puga, J., Serôdio, J., Gomes, N. C. M., & Calado, R. (2012). Trends in the discovery of new marine natural products from invertebrates over the last two decades - where and what are we bioprospecting? PLoS ONE, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0030580

Liu, O. R., & Molina, R. (2021). The Persistent Transboundary Problem in Marine Natural Resource Management. Frontiers in Marine Science, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.656023

Mendenhall, E., De Santo, E., Jankila, M., Nyman, E., & Tiller, R. (2022). Direction, not detail: Progress towards consensus at the fourth intergovernmental conference on biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction. Marine Policy, 146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2022.105309

Minnerop, P. (2023). Intergenerational Preparedness: Climate Change, Community Interest Obligations and the Environmental Rule of Law. Global Policy. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13219

Nobel, A., Lizin, S., Brouwer, R., Bruns, S. B., Stern, D. I., & Malina, R. (2020). Are biodiversity losses valued differently when they are caused by human activities? A meta-analysis of the non-use valuation literature. In Environmental Research Letters (Vol. 15, Issue 7). Institute of Physics Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ab8ec2

Nunes Chaib, A. (2022). Multinaturalism in International Environmental Law: Redefining the Legal Context for Human and Non-Human Relations. Asian Journal of International Law, 12(1), 82–104. https://doi.org/10.1017/S204425132200008X

Palacios-Abrantes, J., Reygondeau, G., Wabnitz, C. C. C., & Cheung, W. W. L. (2020). The transboundary nature of the world’s exploited marine species. Scientific Reports, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74644-2

Pat Roy Mooney. (1983). The Law of the Seed – Another Development and Plant Genetic Resources (Development Dialogue, Vols. 1–2). Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation.

Rafaly, V. (2022). The Concept of Marine Living Resources: Navigating a Grey Zone in the Law of the Sea. Canadian Yearbook of International Law, 59, 285–312. https://doi.org/10.1017/cyl.2022.14

Turpin, G., Ritmejerytė, E., Jamie, J., Crayn, D., & Wangchuk, P. (2022). Aboriginal medicinal plants of Queensland: ethnopharmacological uses, species diversity, and biodiscovery pathways. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-022-00552-6

United Nations. (1973). Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

United Nations. (1974). Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States. https://legal.un.org/avl/ha/cerds/cerds.html

United Nations. (1982). United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.

United Nations. (1983). Resolution 8/83: International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources.

United Nations. (1992a). Convention on Biological Diversity text and annexes.

United Nations. (1992b). Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. http://www.un.org/documents/ga/conf151/aconf15126-1annex1.htm

United Nations. (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples United Nations.

United Nations. (2010). Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from Their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity: Text and Annex.

United Nations. (2022). Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. https://www.cbd.int/conferences/post20202CBD/WG8J/11/7,CBD/SBSTTA/23/9,CBD/SBSTTA/24/12andCBD/SBI/3/21,respectively.

United Nations. (2023). Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction.

United Nations. (2024, June 16). Status of Treaties. Https://Treaties.Un.Org/Pages/ViewDetails.Aspx?Src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXI-10&chapter=21&clang=_en#:~:Text=The%20Agreement%20was%20adopted%20in,Marine%20biological%20diversity%20of%20areas).

Williams, S. E., Stennett, H. L., Back, C. R., Tiwari, K., Gomez, J. O., Challand, M. R., Hendry, K. R., Spencer, J., Essex-Lopresti, A. E., Willis, C. L., Curnow, P., & Race, P. R. (2020). The bristol sponge microbiome collection: A unique repository of deep-sea microorganisms and associated natural products. Antibiotics, 9(8), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics9080509

Wynberg, R., Laird, S., Van Niekerk, J., & Kozanayi, W. (2015). Formalization of the Natural Product Trade in Southern Africa: Unintended Consequences and Policy Blurring in Biotrade and Bioprospecting. Society and Natural Resources, 28(5), 559–574. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2015.1014604

Zhang, Y., Xu, J., Yao, Y., Yan, Z., Teng, M., & Wang, P. (2022). What Is the Relationship between Natural Protected Areas and Stakeholders? Based on Literature Analysis from 2000–2021. Forests, 13(5). https://doi.org/10.3390/f13050734