When it comes to macadamia research, we often expect the science to be the complicated part. What is becoming increasingly clear, however, is that macadamia research – similar to a number of other crops – suffers from a variety of challenges which tend to surface before anyone steps into a lab or gets near an orchard. This is because macadamia, much like other Indigenous and heritage crops, sits at the intersection of law, culture, and history in ways that are still being defined. Macadamia’s domestication may be relatively recent, but its history on Country is not, creating a legal landscape where past practices, current obligations and future uncertainties collide.
Last month the Law and Intellectual Property team held a workshop at The University of Queensland to bring together different perspectives on macadamia research, predominantly to better understand how science is tied to the legal and ethical side of things. The workshop was a chance to explore how the law is impacting and intersecting with the plant science and agricultural research taking place in relation to macadamia. For many in the room, the focus was not on genes, rootstocks or traits (though those remain important), but rather on the legal and ethical conditions surrounding how plant material is collected, transferred, stored and used in research. It became very clear that the bottleneck is not necessarily scientific capability, it is navigating the steps before the science. To ensure that science begins with the legal side cleared and under control.
Across the discussion, a pattern emerged. It became clear that there were multiple examples where uncertainty about how to ethically and legally obtain plant genetic resources had slowed down research. In some cases, projects have been delayed while researchers try to work out whether collecting material requires permission, and from whom. In other cases, international collaboration has stalled due to uncertainty around sharing samples across borders under access and benefit sharing (ABS) rules. And in the most complex situations, research has not gone ahead at all. Not because the science wasn’t ready, but because the legal pathway was not clear.
These challenges are compounded by the fragmented nature of existing practices. Different research centres and breeding programs have developed their own ways of storing material and recording provenance, some rigorous and well documented. Others less so, especially where older collections are involved. In some cases, historical plant material has unclear origins, incomplete records, or was collected before current laws came into existence. At the same time, macadamia sits in a global context. Different countries apply different legal frameworks around plant material, patents, plant breeder’s rights, licensing and use contracts, and benefit-sharing obligations. This raises numerous questions including who has rights or interests in the material? Who should be consulted? What counts as utilisation of plant genetic material and therefore triggers benefit sharing provisions? And what does responsible stewardship look like for the future when we do not have a definite historical account?
Commercial considerations add another layer of complexity. Although intellectual property is not the primary concern for macadamia researchers (at this stage) it nonetheless demands attention. The starting point for assessing the law and science interaction when it comes to macadamia has been to look at its patent landscape. Although our patent analysis is in its early stages, macadamia patent numbers have been constantly increasing in China. This patenting trend is aligned with not only the expectation that China will become the largest supplier of macadamia in the next five years but also that there are increasing numbers of requests for macadamia material coming from China. As we further develop this landscape analysis, and expand it to other types of intellectual property, including trademarks and plant breeder’s rights, there is no doubt other narratives and points of conflict will emerge between the law and the science.
What emerged from this interdisciplinary exchange – and what we aim to contribute through this legal work in the Centre – is clarity and certainty when it comes to the legal and regulatory frameworks that macadamia researchers are required to navigate. Clarity around who needs to be consulted and when, what permissions are required, how and when material can move across borders, and how these decisions align with access and benefit sharing obligations. The workshop displayed a need for shared approaches to provenance, permissions and benefit-sharing, protocols or best-practice guides that are useful beyond a single program which can support macadamia research more broadly rather than in isolated endeavours.
The story of macadamia that we have explored so far shows how science and law are not separate worlds, they are able to shape each other. Legal frameworks not only determine how data or plant material can be used, but also whether the work can begin at all. macadamia may be relatively young as a domesticated crop, but its future depends on how we honour its long past and navigate its increasingly interconnected present.
Sruthi Balaji
Postdoctoral Researcher, The University of Queensland
