The Amazon is one of the most biologically diverse and culturally rich regions in the world. There, Indigenous peoples and local communities have developed unique knowledge systems over centuries. Matching traditional knowledge with science and technology is crucial to unlocking the development potential of the bioeconomy in the Amazon. This chapter discusses what is needed to enable innovation in the bioeconomy in the Amazon, with a focus on the Amazon region in Brazil, but also addressing the other Amazonian countries. It calls for updated knowledge governance mechanisms in which public policies, communities, the private sector and international partners have a role to play to enable innovation and ensure equitable benefit sharing.
Production Transformation Policy Review
Spotlight on Bioeconomy for Sustainable Development in the Amazon Region (Brazil)
Abstract
The Amazon is one of the most biologically diverse and culturally rich regions in the world. Indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) have developed unique knowledge systems over centuries. Blending traditional knowledge with science and technology can unlock the sustainable development potential of this unique ecosystem.
Bioeconomy in the Amazon cannot succeed by only replicating conventional models of innovation. It requires blending science with traditional knowledge, ensuring that technology works for all by engaging all individuals and communities. Knowledge governance and innovation frameworks need to be designed to ensure equitable benefit-sharing, to benefit and preserve local diverse culture and knowledge, and to balance preservation and restoration with value addition.
Ensuring that innovation is not extractive, but equitable, requires new governance arrangements and accountability mechanisms that empower communities as co-creators of value, based on new forms of partnerships able to foster innovation with local impact.
This chapter explores the frameworks, partnerships and policy instruments needed to position innovation for the bioeconomy as a driver of inclusive and sustainable development in the Amazon region in Brazil. It reviews lessons from Brazil and other countries, identifies bottlenecks in benefit sharing and knowledge protection, and highlights opportunities for domestic partnerships and international co-operation. By focusing on knowledge governance and innovation partnerships, it aims to provide actionable recommendations for policymakers, communities and firms to align Amazon’s local development aspirations with global sustainability goals. This chapter is structured in three sections: the first section discusses the need and the options available to update the knowledge governance framework for equitable benefit sharing in the Amazon region; the second focuses on partnerships in science and technology as enablers for innovation in bioeconomy in the Amazon; and the third one identifies potential game changers to update knowledge governance in the Amazon to promote innovation in bioeconomy in the region.
Innovation breakthroughs for the Amazonian bioeconomy require blending and complementing scientific and traditional knowledge. To do so, adequate knowledge governance mechanisms need to be in place to allow commercial exploitation of innovations and enable equitable benefit sharing, in accordance with the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), its Protocols and its Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, and in line with national rules and regulations.
Traditional knowledge is a cornerstone for the bioeconomy, especially in the Amazon region in Brazil, where 51% of the Brazilian Indigenous population lives (IBGE, 2022[1]). Defined by CBD as the “know-how, innovations, and practices of Indigenous and local communities”, traditional knowledge is rooted in centuries of cultural and territorial identity. In general, it refers to traditional knowledge in the strict sense (know-how, practices and skills), cultural expressions (such as music and arts) and genetic resources (WIPO, 2023[2]).
Traditional knowledge has major implications for economic value creation across multiple sectors, from agro-food to pharmaceuticals. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), 40% of modern medicines are derived from natural products and their associated traditional knowledge (WHO, 2023[3]). Similar to scientific discoveries, it also requires protection mechanisms to ensure that benefits are shared equitably across knowledge holders. Without effective governance mechanisms, communities risk being excluded from the potential gains from value chains created based on their knowledge.
Unlike conventional scientific knowledge, traditional knowledge is collective, dynamic and often transmitted orally, making it difficult to regulate and protect it through standard legal tools and conventional intellectual property rights. Traditional knowledge may also be dispersed across multiple communities, often spanning different countries. The rooibos case in South Africa illustrates these complexities: while the San and Khoi Indigenous communities were eventually recognised as the original holders, small farmers also successfully claimed co-ownership due to their contributions in refining cultivation techniques. The case highlights the evolving nature of traditional knowledge and underscores the need for flexible governance frameworks that can accommodate multiple stakeholders and historical contributions (Meyer and Naicker, 2023[4]).
The CBD, presented at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit and which entered into force in 1993, was the first international treaty to recognise the link between biodiversity conservation, sustainable use and equitable benefit sharing. The Nagoya Protocol (ratified in 2010) operationalised these principles, requiring prior informed consent (PIC), mutually agreed terms, and benefit-sharing mechanisms for the use of genetic resources and traditional knowledge. These global commitments were reaffirmed in the Kunming Declaration (2021) and integrated into the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (2022), which emphasises the importance of equitable benefit sharing. Despite the progress in terms of legal frameworks, effective enforcement remains uneven, and capacity gaps hinder communities from fully engaging in access and benefit-sharing (ABS) mechanisms. Moreover, asymmetries in bargaining power between parties, difficulties in reaching consensus and limited capacity to value monetary benefits fairly for communities can also limit the effectiveness of ABS mechanisms (Laird and Wynberg, 2008[5]).
The “Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing”, adopted under the CBD, establishes a legal framework to ensure that benefits arising from the utilisation of genetic resources as well as subsequent applications and commercialisation shall be shared in a fair and equitable way with the Party providing such resources, including the traditional knowledge of IPLCs. It requires countries to adopt measures in the framework of their national laws to ensure PIC from knowledge holders and regulate mutually agreed terms between providers and users to define how resources will be accessed, utilised, and how benefits – both monetary (e.g. royalties, license fees) and non-monetary (e.g. training, technology transfer, capacity-building) – will be shared. These provisions are designed to reward IPLCs while strengthening their participation in partnerships for research and innovation.
While the Nagoya Protocol established rules for access to genetic resources and benefit sharing, the emergence of new technologies, such as digital sequence information (DSI) on genetic resources, has raised additional concerns and required further attention under the CDP. New sequencing technologies for genetic information, coupled with the increasing capacity of data storage, enable scaling up research with the use of genetic resources data (Karger, Plessis and Meyer, 2019[6]). Nevertheless, concerns have been raised on these technologies’ implications for benefit-sharing agreements, as access to genetic resources information is now intermediated through databases, often not held by developing countries, that own an important share of genetic resources. Discussions on DSI under the CDB began at the CDB Conference of Parties (COP) 13 in Cancun, leading to the future creation of a specific multilateral mechanism for benefit sharing, the “Cali Fund for the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits from the Use of Digital Sequence Information on Genetic Resources”, which had its operationalisation modalities announced during the CDP COP16, in 2024 in Cali. The fund will receive contributions of 1% of profits (0.1% of revenues) from the commercial use of DSI (CBD, 2023[7]). In addition, parties also decided, during CDP COP16, to explore tools and models for making DSI publicly available and accessible to all parties.
In practice, the Nagoya Protocol has inspired numerous bilateral benefit-sharing agreements. A well-known example comes from Mexico in the 1990s, where a bioprospecting project involved a European pharmaceutical company, Mexican researchers, and the Unión de Comunidades Productoras Zapotecas-Chinantecas (a co-operative of 950 local producers across four villages in Oaxaca). The agreement included royalty payments to the communities as well as significant non-monetary benefits, such as investments in laboratory infrastructure, training for local producers, and the transfer of technology and know-how (Carrizosa, 2004[8]). By formally recognising community participation and aligning benefits with local development needs, this project demonstrated how ABS contracts can foster trust and engagement, while building long-term scientific and economic capacity in the region. More recently, ABS has been operationalised in new sectors and regions:
India (2014-present): The National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) has already negotiated several ABS agreements between companies and Indigenous communities for the use of medicinal plants, cosmetics, and agricultural biodiversity. For example, a 2019 agreement with a cosmetics company provided both royalties and commitments to capacity building in communities supplying raw materials (Government of India, 2025[9]).
South Africa (2019): The San Council of South Africa, representative of the San’s Indigenous community, signed an ABS agreement with the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), the Khoi people representatives and private companies for the commercial development of products based on Rooibos (a medicinal plant). The deal included upfront payments, royalties, and non-monetary benefits, with the San represented as full partners in the governance of benefit-sharing funds (Schroeder et al., 2020[10]).
These cases highlight two critical lessons for future ABS agreements in the Amazon and beyond:
Benefit sharing needs to go beyond monetary transfers to promote lasting capacity-building and empower local communities, including access to research and quality test facilities, training programmes, technology transfer and investment in local infrastructure.
Community involvement from the outset, in negotiation, project design and monitoring, is essential to ensure consent, legitimacy, fairness and sustainability. For example, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples grants a specific right to indigenous peoples, the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) Protocol, which allows them to engage in project negotiations and provide or withdraw consent to it (FAO, 2016[11]).
Since the end of the 1990s, several countries have introduced domestic legislation to operationalise the CBD principles:
Costa Rica has been a pioneer in this field with its Biodiversity Law no. 7788, introduced in 1998. This law regulates the use of biological and genetic resources and defines mechanisms for ABS (OECD, 2023[12]).
The law has created the “CONAGEBIO” (National Commission for Biodiversity Management), a multi-stakeholder commission with representatives from government, private sector and Indigenous and rural communities. The commission oversees biodiversity use and ABS agreements in the country.
The law establishes a list of genetic and natural resources that are excluded from any form of direct appropriation and specifies that any innovation derived from biodiversity components must have the approval of the CONAGEBIO before having its property rights granted by official authorities.
The law also establishes royalty-sharing standards, stating that 50% of the revenues from royalties deriving from biodiversity-based innovation should be directed to either conservation and community funds or Indigenous representatives.
Peru approved in 2002 a Traditional Knowledge Protection Law (the “Regime for Protection of the Collective Knowledge of Indigenous Peoples Linked to Biodiversity”, Law no. 27811) that established a registry of Indigenous collective knowledge and set minimum benefit-sharing percentages. At least 5% of the future sales revenues of innovative products have to be channelled to communities and 10% to a state-owned trust fund.
Despite this strong legal framework, widespread patents on the use of maca, a genetic and biological resource found in the Peruvian Andes with nutritional and medical properties, emerged abroad without consent, underscoring the limits of national registries in the absence of binding international rules. Institutional capacity constraints, including limited budget for the national registry, and weak enforcement capacity in foreign jurisdictions have limited the impact of Peru’s Traditional Knowledge Protection Law. Moreover, national systems alone may lack the resources to prevent biopiracy, requiring co-operation with international patent offices.
South Africa recognises the importance of traditional knowledge in its 2014 Bioeconomy Strategy, but it does not specify a minimum percentage for benefit sharing and leaves it to be determined on a case-by-case basis, therefore limiting the capacity of the current framework to protect local communities.
Brazil introduced, in 1994, its first national Biodiversity Policy (Government of Brazil, 2020[13]) and further advanced its regulatory framework in 2015 with the approval of the National Biodiversity Law to regulate the use of biodiversity genetic resources and traditional and Indigenous knowledge (Government of Brazil, 2022[14]). The law creates two instruments to incentivise innovation with benefit sharing:
The National Fund for Benefit-sharing (FNRB). This fund collects up to 1% of future product revenues to redistribute to knowledge-holding communities. While innovative, the fund’s budget remains small – USD 2.3 million in October 2025 (Government of Brazil, 2025[15]), less than 1% of Brazil’s public bioeconomy budget – and royalty rates are below those of Costa Rica and Peru. FNRB’s budget has consistently increased since 2000, by an average of 33% yearly, despite legal exemptions from benefit-sharing agreements for certain types of products and sectors, such as intermediate products and agricultural inputs (Lopes, Corleto and Chiavari, 2025[16]).
Knowledge-holding communities can also benefit from non-monetary benefit-sharing tools, which are not intermediated by the FNRB and are regulated by Brazil’s national biodiversity law. These tools include knowledge transfer mechanisms, projects for biodiversity conservation, training and technical assistance, among others. Considering both monetary and non-monetary, a total amount of about USD 7 million has been mobilised for IPLCs.
The National System of Genetic Resource Management and Associated Traditional Knowledge platform (SisGen). This is a national registry for genetic resources and traditional knowledge related research and development, in which public and private entities are required to register their use for research and commercial purposes. The registered information also enables authorities to regulate and protect these resources and knowledge. In practice, the SisGen implements the decisions of the National Genetic Resources Council (CGen), the competent national authority set up in 2001 and reformed in 2005, and currently co-ordinated by the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change and composed of 19 other members (10 representatives of Brazil’s federal government and 9 from the civil society and private sector, including industrial and research associations and communities). The Council defines the conditions for the use of traditional knowledge and benefit sharing and grants a certification of compliance for the user in order to do so, in line with the Nagoya Protocol’s “Internationally Recognised Certificate of Compliance”. The Council has the power to regulate and issue normative resolutions regarding the elaboration and implementation of policies and the authorisation of benefit-sharing arrangements.
The number of registered R&D activities at the SisGen increased from 3 000 to 85 180 from 2015 to March 2026. This increase is related to an innovation implemented by Brazil, which differentiates this system from other platforms worldwide: the use of an ex-post approach for R&D activity registration. This means that the start of a research activity and its publication in the system do not require previous authorisation of the CGen. This prior consent is only mandatory for activities concerning associated traditional knowledge. When only genetic resources are involved, users are only required to register, through the SisGen, at more advanced stages of the research, and only those with concrete outputs, such as patent applications, publication of results or product commercialisation. This decreases innovation risks and costs during initial research stages, when uncertainty is still high.
In addition to the country’s National Biodiversity Law, Brazil has a well-established network of institutions fostering innovation at the federal and state levels. In the Amazon region, institutions such as the Emilio Goeldi Museum, the National Institute of Amazonian Research and the Amazon Bio-Business Centre have vast experience in exploring bioeconomy opportunities for the use of Amazonian biodiversity. In addition, the country is home to two world-leading institutes that operate in the Amazon region and are crucial to fostering innovation in the bioeconomy:
The Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (EMBRAPA). Created in 1973, under the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, to modernise Brazilian agriculture through science and technology, EMBRAPA operates in the Amazon through two regional research centres: Embrapa Amazônia Oriental (Belém, in the State of Pará) and Embrapa Amazônia Ocidental (Manaus, in the State of Amazonas). These local branches focus on adapting agricultural technologies to the unique conditions of the rainforest as well as developing innovation models that reconcile production with biodiversity conservation, including solutions for agroforestry, non-timber forest products, and sustainable agriculture.
EMBRAPA’s approach to innovation in the Amazon combines traditional knowledge with scientific research. For example, it has developed genetic improvements of native Amazonian species, such as the açaí and cupuaçu, increasing productivity while also working with community-based enterprises to design solutions and deliver technical assistance. The company has also developed new processing methods and quality standards for açaí berries, helping transform the fruit from a local staple into an exportable product. In addition, EMBRAPA partners with international institutions as the French Agricultural Research Centre for International Development (CIRAD), in the “Partnership Facility Amazonia”, to strengthen cross-border research and innovation on sustainable value chains in the Amazon.
The Oswaldo Cruz Foundation (Fundação Oswaldo Cruz – Fiocruz) is a public health science and technology institution, affiliated to the Ministry of Health, and was created in 1900. The foundation carries out research and innovation activities in public health, biotechnology, and pharmaceuticals, and it is also involved in the training of health professionals and the production of vaccines, medicines, and other health-related medical technological solutions. In the Amazon, Fiocruz operates through regional units, including the Fiocruz Amazônia in Manaus, which conducts research on Amazonian biodiversity, infectious diseases, and regional-specific public health challenges to deliver tailor-made solutions. Fiocruz has experience in validating and clinically testing traditional medicines derived from biodiversity, which is essential to transform traditional knowledge into marketable and safe health solutions. The foundation has partnered with local research centres and communities to test plants, ensuring they meet regulatory requirements for broader commercialisation.
Fostering effective collaboration between federal and state institutions in charge of innovation in Brazil, together with the private sector, is essential to deliver outcomes that are relevant to the specific territorial realities and to bridge the national innovation gap. Brazil, albeit the country with the highest R&D investment to GDP ratio in the Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) – around 1.19% in 2023 versus a continental average of 0.6% (RICYT, 2025[17]; Government of Brazil, 2025[18]) – still lags with respect to the OECD average – 2.7% in the same year (OECD, 2025[19]). In addition, despite the huge need for R&D to support bioeconomy in the Amazon, public investments in R&D in the Legal Amazon make up only 6.5% of total national spending as of 2021 (Government of Brazil, 2024[20]), almost half the region’s share in the country’s GDP (10.9%) and 9 times lower than São Paulo, the top investing state in Brazil in terms of R&D.
The experiences of Brazil, Costa Rica, Peru and South Africa show that domestic institutions, digital and publicly available updated registries, and minimum benefit-sharing thresholds are essential to enable innovation and to operationalise equitable benefit sharing. These national experiences also reveal the asymmetries at the international level in terms of knowledge and innovation governance and call for more global co-ordination in this field. These cases showcase the importance of having institutions with local presence to ensure meaningful community participation in knowledge governance. Effective community engagement is essential to turn legal advances into actions that really benefit the local communities.
A recent milestone to encourage alignment of frameworks for the recognition of traditional knowledge was marked by the 2024 WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge. This treaty represents a major advance as it requires patent applicants to disclose the country of origin or source of the genetic resources and, where applicable, the Indigenous peoples or local communities providing the associated traditional knowledge (WIPO, 2024[21]). It applies only to patent applications filed after the treaty entered into force and non-compliance with the agreement may be subject to sanctions if the information provided is not amended. This 2024 WIPO Treaty contributes to increasing transparency on what is known as “prior art” but also requires strengthening intellectual property management capacities locally and internationally, as it demands updating knowledge registries. India’s Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL), introduced in 2001, offers a model in this respect (Box 3.1). The TKDL was developed through a collaboration between different ministries and agencies (including those in charge of science and technology and health) to protect traditional knowledge and prevent misappropriation or biopiracy through patents (CSIR, 2023[22]).
The Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) in India was set up in the aftermath of judicial cases that claimed the recognition of the rights of local communities on foreign-issued patents.
In 1994, the European Patent Office granted a patent to a US corporation and the United States Department of Agriculture to control fungi on plants using an extract from Neem oil. In 1995, a group of international NGOs and representatives of Indian farmers opposed the patent, which was thus revoked in 2000.
In 1995, the United States Patent Office granted a patent to a US university on the use of turmeric oil for wound healing. The Indian Council for Scientific and Industrial Research demanded its re-examination. In 1997, this patent was revoked based on documentation proving the turmeric oil’s historical use by Indian communities.
By systematically documenting traditional knowledge, such as that related to Ayurvedic, Unani and Siddha, the TKDL contributes to reducing biopiracy cases. As a matter of fact, patent applications on Indian traditional medicine in Europe dropped by 44% after 2001 (Gupta, 2011[23]).
Source: (Government of India, 2022[24]) and discussions during the Peer Learning Group (PLG) Meeting “Bioeconomy for Sustainable Development in the Amazon Region” hosted by the Regional Government of the Azores, Portugal, on 2 July 2024.
Brazil is the country with the second-largest number of scientific publications on bioeconomy in the Amazon. From 2000 to 2023, Brazilian research institutions authored 7.8% of the 30 863 publications on the topic, a share comparable to the People’s Republic of China (hereafter “China”) (also 7.8%) but lower than that of the United States, which leads the scientific publication ranking with 11.6% of the total (Figure 3.1). Brazil’s research efforts rely on a global collaboration network with strong ties to Europe and the United States. More than 90% of the publications from Brazil were undertaken through international collaboration, especially with the EU (which accounts for 31% of these partnerships), the United States (with 15%) and the United Kingdom (with 8%). However, only 7% of its research partnerships involve Amazonian countries (Colombia, Peru, Ecuador and Mexico).
Global research network for bioeconomy in the Amazon, 2000-2023: Publications by top 30 countries and Amazon countries
Note: (i) Bubble size represents the number of publications, while grey lines represent the collaborations between countries (the larger the bubble and the thicker the line, the larger the number of publications or co-authored publications). (ii) Bioeconomy and Amazon-related scientific publications include all scientific publications that contain either bioeconomy, biotechnology, bioindustry, ecosystem services, agroforestry, sustainable agriculture and Brazil or Amazon forest-related keywords in the title or abstract. Only journal publications referenced at least once were included in the final set that covers the years from 2000 to 2023.
Source: Authors’ elaborations based on Scopus (Elsevier, 2024[25]).
Despite being a global leader in scientific publications on the Amazon bioeconomy, Brazil accounts for only 0.2% of global biotechnology patents (Figure 3.2). From 2011 to 2020, OECD economies generated 87% of biotechnology patents, while China filed 35 times more patents than Brazil and India filed four times more. This imbalance reflects a weak translation of research into marketable products. Moreover, the capabilities of the country in biotechnology are uneven: the Amazon region in Brazil is home to only 8% of all biotechnology and life science firms in Brazil, and accounts for about 6% of the total revenues in the sector, low compared to the region’s contribution to the country’s GDP overall at 11% [authors’ elaboration based on Moody’s (2025[26]) and IBGE (2024[27])]. Partnerships between universities, co-operatives, and firms – such as the Brazilian cosmetics private firm Natura’s long-term contracts with Amazonian communities – show the potential of inclusive models but remain limited. To scale up, Brazil needs innovation ecosystems that connect laboratories, traditional knowledge holders, and firms, supported by regulatory certainty and financing instruments that reward community-based innovation.
Patent applications for biotechnology (IP5 patent family), inventor count and priority date, top 20 countries in the world and top 10 in LAC (% world total, 2011-2020)
Note: LAC: Latin America and the Caribbean. More than 100 countries worldwide are covered. IP5 patent families, including the following intellectual property offices: the European Patent Office (EPO), the Japan Patent Office (JPO), the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the People's Republic of China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA). For biotechnology, patents identified with the following International Patent Classification codes: A01H1/00, A01H4/00, A61K38/00, A61K39/00, A61K48/00, C02F3/34, C07G(11/00, 13/00, 15/00), C07K(4/00, 14/00, 16/00,17/00,19/00), C12M, C12N, C12P, C12Q, C12S, G01N27/327, G01N33/(53*, 54*, 55*, 57*, 68, 74, 76, 78, 88, 92).
Source: Authors’ elaboration based on OECD Patents Statistics (OECD, 2026[28]).
Start-ups in bioeconomy-related activities are growing globally. Bioeconomy start-ups1 account for approximately 2.5% of start-ups globally, with about two-thirds engaged in biotechnology, including bioenergy, and the rest in agriculture (a small share of start-ups, about 4%, self-identify as active in both areas) [authors’ elaboration based on (Crunchbase, 2025[29])]. Venture capital investments in agriculture and biotechnology start-ups account now for around 14% of all venture capital investments globally and have grown by nearly 5 times between 2012-14 and 2022-24, a pace slightly slower than the total growth for all sectors (6 times). In LAC, Brazil is the top country by number of start-ups in agriculture and biotechnology, accounting for 35% of all start-ups in the region in this field (Figure 3.3). However, only 4.5% of Brazilian start-ups in this field are located in the Amazon. They receive only 8% of total venture capital flows in the field in the country. Most start-ups active in agriculture and biotechnology are located in the city of São Paulo (hosting 14% of start-ups and absorbing 58% of venture capital investments), followed by Belo Horizonte, Florianopolis and Rio de Janeiro. The lack of start-ups in the Amazon reflects the challenges to mobilise marketable innovations in the region and illustrates the underutilised innovation potential of the Amazon region for Brazil and for the world economy.
Start-up hubs in agriculture and biotechnology in LAC. The figure includes all cities with over ten bioeconomy start‑ups
Note: Start-ups include all firms founded between January 2015 and December 2024. This figure considers as start-ups in the bioeconomy all start-ups active in agriculture and biotechnology industries (including applications in energy). LAC: Latin America and the Caribbean.
Source: Authors’ elaboration based on Crunchbase (2025[29]), database, https://www.crunchbase.com.
Innovating in bioeconomy in the Amazon requires multi-stakeholder partnerships at all levels:
Local: with Indigenous peoples, riverine communities and co-operatives who hold and manage biodiversity-based and traditional knowledge. Collaboration with IPLCs is the linchpin of equitable innovation in the bioeconomy. Yet, historically, benefit sharing has often been absent. The Kampô frog case in Brazil is an example: its medicinal secretion inspired at least ten patents filed in the United States, European Union, Australia and Canada without local partners or benefits for Amazonian communities (Feres, 2022[30]). Barriers include: (i) the requirement of written, codified knowledge for patenting, which excludes tacit knowledge; and (ii) lack of resources for clinical and safety trials, which prevents communities from valorising their products. Some countries are putting forward interesting solutions to these challenges. For example, in Australia, the NICM Health Research Institute has partnered with Aboriginal communities to provide laboratory access and technical support to bring plant-based remedies into formal R&D pipelines (Packer et al., 2019[31]). In Brazil, the CNPEM works with communities, firms, and the Fiocruz to clinically validate traditional medicines (e.g Espinheira Santa), helping them move from informal use to marketable and regulated products.
National: across ministries, firms, universities and research institutions to align policies and resources. For example, Brazil, as presented in Chapter 1, launched the GIB under the G20 Brazilian Presidency in 2024, the same year as the publication of the country’s first national bioeconomy strategy. Both initiatives relied on a domestic and international co-operation effort, including the engagement of at least 12 line ministries in Brazil.
Regional and international: among Amazonian countries to build shared knowledge platforms, harmonise regulations, and strengthen collective bargaining power. The Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization (ACTO) plays a key role in this respect and can leverage its existing mechanisms to build a concrete portfolio of policy initiatives and investment projects to guide its members, the private sector and development banks towards common goals. One mechanism to be used is the commission created in 2023 under resolution RES/XIV MRE-OTCA/23, which is composed of all Amazonian countries and has the mandate to co-ordinate joint R&D investments and regional networks for developing new solutions and technologies based on traditional knowledge, as well as to support co-operation for the certification and valorisation of Amazonian products and ecosystem services (ACTO, 2025[32]). Another instrument is the ACTO Programmatic Fund, approved in 2025 under resolution RES/EXT-III MRE-OTCA/11, to be established to support initiatives across all member States aimed at sustainable development, the conservation and sustainable use of resources, and efforts to combat deforestation, among other priorities (ACTO, 2024[33]).
In addition, collaborations are needed with development banks, global firms, and world-leading science research centres to mobilise finance, technology and markets. Increasing scientific partnerships in LAC can promote effective value creation with better linkages to the Amazonian biodiversity and traditional knowledge. An example is the “Network of Research Institutes in the Amazon”, under the Amazonia Forever Program, launched by the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) in 2024. It is a regional platform to connect bioeconomy research institutes in the Amazon, preserve biodiversity, and strengthen their capacity for scientific development and technological innovation, counting with financial support and partnerships with IPLCs, governments, and the private sector (Box 3.2). The “Partnership Facility Amazonia”, a joint project between EMBRAPA and the CIRAD (France), is another example of cross-border co-operation for scientific research on the Amazon, now involving France, Brazil and French Guiana (OECD, 2023[34]). It focuses on research for sustainable forestry and agriculture practices.
The private sector plays a pivotal role in the bioeconomy. Business-to-business and business-to-community partnerships are key to enabling innovation. Lead firms can open markets, provide finance, and professionalise value chains by partnering with co-operatives, local communities, small landholders and producers (Box 3.3).
The Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) launched in 2024 the Network of Research Institutes in the Amazon under its flagship programme Amazonia Forever. This initiative seeks to promote sustainable development in the Amazon by mobilising finance, technical assistance and regional collaboration.
The network brings together seven leading research and innovation institutions from four Amazon countries:
Brazil: Mamirauá Institute for Sustainable Development, National Institute for Amazonian Research (INPA) and the Emilio Goeldi Museum.
Colombia: Alexander von Humboldt Institute and the Amazonian Institute of Scientific Research (SINCHI).
Ecuador: National Institute of Biodiversity (INABIO).
Peru: Peruvian Amazon Research Institute (IIAP).
With USD 2 million of initial support from the IADB, the network aims to strengthen the scientific and technological capacity of these institutions and foster collaborative innovation for the Amazon bioeconomy. Its specific objectives are to:
Promote dialogue and knowledge exchange among member institutes.
Build institutional capacity through collective learning and joint training initiatives.
Advance the Amazon bioeconomy by supporting cross-border science, technology, and innovation projects.
By connecting research centres across the region, the network provides a shared platform for knowledge governance, ensuring that scientific advances are better aligned with biodiversity conservation and local development priorities. Importantly, the initiative also emphasises partnerships with IPLCs, positioning them as co-creators of knowledge rather than passive beneficiaries.
If effectively scaled, the network could serve as a regional bridge between science, policy and markets, linking Amazon-based research with global innovation ecosystems while helping communities capture greater value from biodiversity-based knowledge. It also opens opportunities for co-operation with the private sector and financial institutions to promote traditional knowledge-based innovation under fair and equitable benefit-sharing arrangements.
Source: (Government of Brazil, 2024[35]), (IADB, 2024[36]) and (IADB, 2024[37]).
Natura’s Amazonia Programme
In Brazil, Natura is Brazil’s largest cosmetic multinational, with a recognised track record of utilisation of inputs from the Amazon. Natura’s Amazonia Programme sources 39 bio-inputs from 34 communities under nearly 100 direct benefit-sharing contracts, including monetary and non‑monetary benefits. In 2022, it distributed USD 6 million in benefit-sharing payments, with plans to double this by 2030. One example of agreement is the one with the “Cooperativa Mista de Produtores e Extrativistas do Rio Iratapuru”, an Amazonia co-operative that extracts Brazil nuts from the forest. This benefit-sharing contract was signed in 2003, after the authorisation of the CGen, the generic resources national council. The contract regulates how Natura channels financial resources to the community, setting rules for the purchase of oil from the nuts, the payment for other services provided by the community, and the transfer of royalties to a benefit-sharing fund. As part of the agreement, investment in training, new production equipment, forest conservation and R&D were also undertaken.
The Licuri Project at the Brazilian Centre for Research on Energy and Materials (CNPEM)
Innovative intellectual property arrangements are also emerging. For example, the Licuri project in Brazil explores potential pharmaceutical and cosmetic applications of the licuri, a fruit found in the country’s Northeast region and known for its nutrition and anti-inflammatory properties. The project enabled a university (the Federal University of Pernambuco) and a women’s co-operative (the “Cooperativa da Região do Piemonte da Diamantina”) to co-file, to the Brazilian Patent Office, two patents on Licuri-based oral hygiene products that carry antibacterial properties against gingivitis. The patents protect this specific use of the fruit and ensure communities’ share in future royalties, once the product commercialisation is viable. In addition to the university and the co-operative, the Brazilian Centre for Research on Energy and Materials (CNPEM) played a pivotal role in the initiative by providing technical assistance, mapping the fruit’s active ingredients and chemical composition, as well as conducting tests to verify the Licuri’s medical effectiveness.
Bioeconomy offers an opportunity to unlock the development potential of the Amazon. To do so, enabling innovation is crucial and requires developing strategies that work for the local reality and that are inclusive, community-driven and globally connected. Policymakers in Brazil and globally, firms and communities have roles to play in shaping innovation in the bioeconomy in the Amazon. This will be essential both to support Brazil’s development and to advance sustainable development on a global scale. Based on the analysis carried out in this chapter and discussions on the occasion of the international Peer Learning Group (PLG) Meeting on “Bioeconomy for Sustainable Development” held in the Azores (Portugal) in July 2025, the following paragraphs identify seven game changers to enable bioeconomy innovation in the Amazon:
Strengthening knowledge governance. Pro-innovation legal frameworks matched with effective enforcement capacities are key. In fact, legal frameworks are essential, but not a sufficient condition to ensure innovation and equitable benefit sharing. Increasing enforcement capacities, simplifying access to technical assistance, providing services and funding for communities and leveraging harmonisation across Amazon countries are necessary to enable innovation in bioeconomy for sustainable development in the Amazon, including initiatives to:
Leverage the collective nature of traditional knowledge. Effective co-ordination mechanisms and regulatory frameworks for benefit sharing enable co-operation when knowledge is shared across communities. Agreements and legal instruments have to acknowledge collective ownership and ensure fair benefit sharing. Clear cross-community co-ordination mechanisms are also needed to facilitate co-operation.
Strengthen co-ordination between different ministries and other countries. Bioeconomy frameworks are cross-sectoral and involve all government levels. Improving knowledge governance requires inter-ministerial co-ordination mechanisms. The recent implementation of Brazil’s National Bioeconomy Commission, established to implement its National Bioeconomy Strategy, is an opportunity to undertake collective policy diagnosis and improve knowledge sharing. The Commission can benefit from further co-operation with local and foreign governments, taking advantage of other established bodies, such as the Brazilian CGen, the ACTO and the GIB.
Enabling access to information. Comprehensive, evolving and accessible knowledge registration systems for traditional knowledge and biodiversity and biological assets are essential to ensure equitable access and benefit sharing for innovations derived from traditional knowledge. Digital platforms are transforming how knowledge is recorded, protected and shared. In the Amazon, where oral traditions remain prevalent, the lack of accessible registries increases the risk of misappropriation. A regional digital knowledge platform, inspired by India’s Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL) and the Brazilian SisGen experience, could:
Record traditional uses of biodiversity in a secure, multilingual and community-controlled format.
Provide legal evidence in cases of patent claims involving biopiracy.
Facilitate fair partnerships by making PIC processes more transparent and agile.
Connect communities with research institutes and firms seeking collaboration, under strict benefit-sharing conditions.
Such platforms would require investments in connectivity, training and legal frameworks to ensure that communities maintain ownership over their knowledge. Expanding initiatives as the SisGen is pivotal in this respect, including making it work cross-border for all Amazon countries.
Ensuring fair benefit sharing. The country should consider increasing the royalty and revenue-sharing percentages (beyond the current 1%) and strengthening community-led funds to reinvest in local development, also by leveraging its National Development Bank (BNDES) expertise.
Embed equity in innovation policy. Fund local R&D, clinical trials, and certification for traditional medicine and biodiversity products to ensure they meet health and market standards with equity.
Foster science-community partnerships. An effective knowledge governance should also have provisions to foster science-community partnerships. It should enable the scaling up of initiatives as those from Natura and CNPEM, with communities for benefit sharing, including filing joint patents, implementing co-operative-led research, and delivering capacity-building for communities.
Fostering innovation through partnerships. Innovation within and for the Amazon requires linking world frontier science with traditional knowledge and community-based know-how. Strengthening organisations such as EMBRAPA and FIOCRUZ is of interest to the bioeconomy in the Amazon and contributes to changing Brazil’s positioning in the world innovation market. Partnerships between science institutions, Indigenous communities and private firms should be expanded and rewarded when they ensure equitable benefit sharing.
Scaling up regional and South-South collaboration. The Amazon forest spans nine countries, but regional co-operation in bioeconomy is still limited. Strengthening South-South collaboration enhances the scale and impact of research and development and innovation, increases collective bargaining power in the partnerships with multinational companies, enables knowledge sharing, and expands market opportunities. International partners, including multilateral development banks, can provide critical know-how and funding and have a major impact, if aligned with local priorities. Brazil should leverage platforms like the ACTO and the IADB’s Network of Research Institutes to connect research and innovation efforts in Amazonian countries and reduce fragmentation.
Mobilising international support. International support through partnerships and funding will be key to unlocking innovation in the bioeconomy in Brazil, including by investing in closing infrastructure gaps in the Amazon. The COP30, that took place in November 2025, which Brazil hosted in the city of Belém, in the Amazon, was a major occasion to put the Amazon’s economic development prospects under the global spotlight and attract climate and innovation finance in alignment with community development priorities and biodiversity preservation.
Promoting private sector engagement. The knowledge governance framework should have provisions to encourage lead firms to build inclusive supply chains, open new markets, and co-develop products with communities, also by clarifying ABS practices in alignment with other Amazonian countries, including incentives to:
Engage strategic lead firms in bioeconomy value chains. Companies in sectors such as cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and chemicals are constantly seeking innovative bio-inputs, as in the case of the cosmetic firm Natura, which works with IPLCs to bring new cosmetics to the market. A programme to support national and multinational bioeconomy large firms able to sustainably leverage bioeconomy value chains in the Amazon (anchor firms) can help match this demand with local needs and could offer taxes or finance incentives for companies that operate in the region to innovate through state-of-the-art ABS practices, building on existing incentives for the FTZ and CBA.
Strengthen private firms' co-operation for the Amazon. Promoting dialogue can help increase private sector participation in bioeconomy value chains. International platforms, in which companies from Amazon countries can share best practices (in topics such as ABS, engagement with IPLCs and R&D), produce guidance manuals and policy recommendations for action and promote joint-innovation initiatives are key. This platform can build on previous experiences of the ACTO and the IADB in implementing innovation-led regional networks.
Mobilising investments that match the innovation ambitions. Building a sustainable bioeconomy in the Amazon requires stable, long-term financing. Current funding is fragmented, dependent on grants, and often project-based, which limits scale and continuity. To be effective, financing frameworks must embed equality requirements (e.g. benefit-sharing clauses, gender inclusion) to avoid reproducing extractive models. Innovative instruments could provide solutions:
Blended finance can combine concessional public funds with private investment to de-risk projects in early stages of product development, sustainable production or infrastructure construction for value chains. Innovative project finance solutions dedicated to bioeconomy value chains are pivotal to enabling it.
Green bonds and sustainability-linked bonds can be tailored to finance biodiversity-based enterprises and community-led projects, with clear performance metrics tied to conservation and social impact.
Amazon-specific funds, such as a regional Bioeconomy Fund co-financed by development banks and national governments, could provide catalytic capital to incubate start-ups and support co-operative ventures. It adds up to initiatives such as the Amazon Fund, managed by the BNDES, which is the largest global REDD+ mechanism for conservation, and the “Tropical Forest Forever Facility”, presented at COP28 to fund forest conservation initiatives in tropical countries, and launched by the Brazilian government at COP30 in November 2025.
Local financing mechanisms, like revolving funds or credit lines for Indigenous co-operatives, can strengthen financial autonomy and resilience.
Closing data gaps. Promoting a global and consistent agenda on defining and measuring bioeconomy will be crucial to ensure the effectiveness of public policies and private-led strategies in the field. At present, not only is there no shared measurement framework for bioeconomy activities, but most countries, including Brazil, lack consistent reporting on the monetary and non-monetary community-level impacts of ABS agreements, including statistics on these agreements and effective use of traditional knowledge. International partners and development banks can play a crucial role in this respect, in partnership with national statistical offices. The success of the Amazon bioeconomy will depend not only on investments but on measurable outcomes. Current data and monitoring processes are weak, often focusing narrowly on deforestation rates or income flows. A more comprehensive approach could include:
Equity indicators: proportion of royalties reaching communities, number of joint patents with Indigenous or local groups, and the share of women and youth beneficiaries.
Innovation indicators: number of Amazon-based start-ups supported, products brought to market, or joint R&D initiatives created.
Sustainability indicators: hectares of forest conserved or restored through bioeconomy value chains.
Governance indicators: representation of local communities in decision-making boards, transparency of benefit-sharing funds.
These indicators should be collected regularly and linked to open-access dashboards to ensure accountability and allow adaptive management.
Innovating in the Amazon, through a bioeconomy paradigm, requires integrating traditional and scientific knowledge, protecting intellectual property fairly, and designing benefit-sharing mechanisms that reward not only individuals but also communities, which are vital in the Amazon socioeconomic landscape. To advance, seven game changers to enable bioeconomy innovation in the Amazon are identified: strengthening knowledge governance; enabling access to information; ensuring fair benefit sharing; fostering innovation through partnership; promoting private sector engagement; mobilising investments that match innovation ambitions; and closing data gaps.
Brazil has advanced with instruments such as the SisGen and its “National Fund for Benefit- sharing”, but gaps remain: revenues reaching communities are limited, enforcement is uneven, and knowledge holders often lack legal or technical capacity to negotiate. This calls for strengthening governance frameworks that align with international standards (including the CBD, the Nagoya Protocol and the WIPO treaty) while adapting them to the uniqueness of the Amazon ecosystem.
Ensuring that innovation delivers to markets and to people and that it is not extractive but equitable requires tailored knowledge governance arrangements and accountability mechanisms that empower communities as co-creators and incentivise new forms of partnerships to foster innovation with local impact. Recent initiatives such as the IADB-supported Network of Research Institutes in the Amazon and the CNPEM collaborations with the private sector demonstrate the potential of science-to-community partnerships.
The Amazon region has the potential to lead bioeconomy innovation globally, but faces institutional, legal, infrastructure and financial gaps that limit its sustainable development potential and fair value creation and equitable benefit sharing.
Effective knowledge governance mechanisms and innovation partnerships are needed to minimise the risks of biopiracy, inequitable benefit distribution and the perpetuation of extractive models with a view to unlocking the transformative potential of the bioeconomy in this vital region for Brazil and for the world.
References
[32] ACTO (2025), “RES/EXT-III MRE-OTCA/01”, The III Extraordinary meeting of Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the member countries of the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization.
[33] ACTO (2024), “Belem declaration / Brasilia Declaration and resolutions”, Permanent Secretariat of the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization.
[8] Carrizosa, S. (2004), “Accessing Biodiversity and Sharing the Benefits: Lessons from Implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity”, IUCN Environmental Policy and Law Paper, Vol. 54.
[7] CBD (2023), “Decision 15/9: Digital Sequence Information”, https://www.cbd.int/gbf/related/dsi (accessed on 1 November 2025).
[29] Crunchbase (2025), Crunchbase database, https://www.crunchbase.com/.
[22] CSIR (2023), Traditional Knowledge Digital Library, https://www.tkdl.res.in/tkdl/langdefault/common/Abouttkdl.asp?GL=Eng.
[25] Elsevier (2024), Scopus Data, https://www.elsevier.com/products/scopus/data (accessed on 1 July 2024).
[11] FAO (2016), Free Prior and Informed Consent: an indigenous peoples’ right and a good practice for local communities, Food and Agriculture Organization, https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/8a4bc655-3cf6-44b5-b6bb-ad2aeede5863/content.
[30] Feres, M. (2022), “Biodiversity, Traditional Knowledge and Patent Rights: The Case Study of Phyllomedusa bicolor”, Revista Direito GV, Vol. 18/1, https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-6172202205.
[15] Government of Brazil (2025), “Demonstrativo de Movimentação Financeira do FNRB (até 31/10/2025)”, Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, https://www.gov.br/mma/pt-br/assuntos/bioeconomia/patrimonio-genetico/reparticao-de-beneficios/fundo-nacional-para-a-reparticao-de-beneficios/RelatorioMensalFNRBBB10_2025.pdf.
[18] Government of Brazil (2025), “Dispêndio nacional em pesquisa e desenvolvimento (P&D) em relação ao total de P&D e ao produto interno bruto (PIB), por setor institucional, 2000-2023”, Ministry of Science and Technology.
[20] Government of Brazil (2024), “Brasil: Dispêndios dos governos estaduais em pesquisa e desenvolvimento (P&D), por execução, segundo regiões e unidades da federação, 2000-2023”, https://www.gov.br/mcti/pt-br/acompanhe-o-mcti/indicadores/paginas/recursos-aplicados/governos-estaduais/2-3-5-brasil-dispendios-dos-governos-estaduais-em-pesquisa-e-desenvolvimento-por-execucao-segundo-regioes-e-unidades-da-federacao.
[35] Government of Brazil (2024), “INPA is part of the Amazon Network of scientific institutions to develop bioeconomy, with a contribution of US$ 2 million from the IDB”, Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, https://www.gov.br/inpa/pt-br/assuntos/noticias/2024/inpa-compoe-rede-amazonica-de-instituicoes-cientificas-para-desenvolver-bioeconomia-com-investimento-de-us-2-milhoes-do-bid.
[14] Government of Brazil (2022), “Lei Brasileira de Biodiversidade para acesso e repartição de benefício é destaque na COP15”, https://www.gov.br/mma/pt-br/noticias/lei-brasileira-de-biodiversidade-para-acesso-e-reparticao-de-beneficio-e-destaque-na-cop15 (accessed on 1 September 2025).
[40] Government of Brazil (2022), “Studies with licuri oil show promising potential for pharmacological and cosmetic use”, Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.
[13] Government of Brazil (2020), “Convenção sobre Diversidade Biológica”, https://www.gov.br/mma/pt-br/assuntos/biodiversidade-e-biomas/biodiversidade1/convencao-sobre-diversidade-biologica.
[9] Government of India (2025), “Convention on Biological Diversity”, https://www.moef.gov.in/convention-on-biological-diversity-cbd (accessed on 1 September 2025).
[24] Government of India (2022), Bio-piracy of Traditional Knowledge, https://www.tkdl.res.in/tkdl/LangGerman/common/BioPiracy.asp?GL=#Intro. (accessed on 1 June 2025).
[23] Gupta, V. (2011), Protecting India’s traditional knowledge, https://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2011/03/article_0002.html.
[37] IADB (2024), Amazonia Forever, https://www.iadb.org/en/who-we-are/topics/amazonia.
[36] IADB (2024), Presentation of a network of research and innovation institutions for the protection and use of biodiversity in the Amazon, https://www.iadb.org/pt-br/noticias/apresentacao-de-rede-de-instituicoes-de-pesquisa-e-inovacao-para-protecao-e-aproveitamento.
[27] IBGE (2024), SCN - System of Regional Accounts (website), https://www.ibge.gov.br/en/statistics/economic/national-accounts/17173-system-of-national-accounts-brazil.html?edicao=38474.
[1] IBGE (2022), Censo Demográfico, https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/sociais/trabalho/22827-censo-demografico-2022.html.
[6] Karger, E., P. Plessis and H. Meyer (2019), Digital Sequence Information on Genetic Resources (DSI), The ABS Capacity Development Initiative, GIZ.
[5] Laird, S. and R. Wynberg (2008), Access and Benefit-Sharing in Practice: Trends in Partnerships Across Sectors, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
[16] Lopes, C., A. Corleto and J. Chiavari (2025), Biodiversity-Based Biotechnology in Brazil: Regulatory and Institutional Challenges, Amazônia 2030, Climate Policy Initiative, https://www.climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Biodiversity-Based-Biotechnology-in-Brazil.pdf.
[4] Meyer, C. and K. Naicker (2023), “Collective intellectual property of Indigenous peoples and local communities: Exploring power asymmetries in the rooibos geographical indication and industry-wide benefit-sharing agreement”, Research Policy, Vol. 52/9, p. 104851, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104851.
[26] Moody’s (2025), Orbis database, https://login.bvdinfo.com/R1/Orbis.
[38] Natura (2023), Natura - Compromisso com a vida, https://ri.naturaeco.com/esg/compromisso-com-a-vida-1-ano/.
[28] OECD (2026), Patents in OECD selected technologies.
[19] OECD (2025), Main Science and Technology Indicators, https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/main-science-and-technology-indicators.html (accessed on 1 September 2025).
[34] OECD (2023), “Innovative Agro-food Industries in the EU Outermost Regions”, OECD Development Policy Papers, No. 49, https://doi.org/10.1787/0d615c8d-en.
[12] OECD (2023), OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Costa Rica 2023, OECD Environmental Performance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/ec94fd4e-en.
[31] Packer, J. et al. (2019), “Building partnerships for linking biomedical science with traditional knowledge of customary medicines: a case study with two Australian Indigenous communities”, Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine, Vol. 15/1, p. 69, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-019-0348-6.
[17] RICYT (2025), “Expenditure on R&D as a percentage of GDP”, Rede Iberoamericana de Indicadores de Ciencia y Tecnologia - Reportes Dinamicos.
[10] Schroeder, D. et al. (2020), “The Rooibos Benefit Sharing Agreement–Breaking New Ground with Respect, Honesty, Fairness, and Care”, Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, Vol. 29/2, pp. 285-301, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963180119001075.
[39] Teixeira, P. and L. Silva (2021), “Repartição de benefícios à luz da Lei nº 13.123/2015: casos de empresas com acesso ao patrimônio genético e ao conhecimento tradicional associado”, Revista Fitos, Vol. 15/2, pp. 204-216, https://doi.org/10.32712/2446-4775.2021.1050.
[3] WHO (2023), “Traditional medicine has a long history of contributing to conventional medicine and continues to hold promise”, https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/traditional-medicine-has-a-long-history-of-contributing-to-conventional-medicine-and-continues-to-hold-promise.
[21] WIPO (2024), “WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge”, World Intellectual Property Organization, https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/treaties/textdetails/19849.
[2] WIPO (2023), Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property, World Intellectual Property Organization, https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo-pub-rn2023-5-1-en-traditional-knowledge-and-intellectual-property.pdf.
← 1. Measuring start-up development is not without difficulties. Despite increased interest in start-ups by policymakers, experts and the media, there is no single definition of what a start-up is. Investors’ platforms, such as Crunchbase, Pitchfork and Dealroom combine self-reporting with smart algorithms that collect public information from the web. These databases, even if coverage is not uniform across countries, provide realistic estimates of start-up dynamics. This report uses data from Crunchbase, a commercial database on technology-related companies and financing that is widely used by investors, entrepreneurs and researchers.