This section explores an ABS regime in accordance with the mandated provisions of the relevant international legal instruments and the major policy options that States and the international community can follow.

While in other fields of IP law, one can avail oneself of comparable experiences, I do not know of any analogy in establishing an access regime. For instance, when shaping new types of protection like the neighboring rights of phonogram producers, of software, or of the sui generis protection of databases, one would resort to copyright and other sui generis regimes as paradigms to follow or to depart from according to the circumstances. In contrast, some of the possible suggestions aiming at protecting TK and GRs originally stem from IP law, e.g. the CBD and the ITPGFRA legal regimes. Here resides the difficulty in spelling out an IP system inspired by non-IP standard concepts and non-IP parallel implementation regimes.

In this endeavor, the concept of mutual supportiveness plays a pivotal role as do all the other rules of interpretation of applicable treaties and the rules for solving conflicting provisions.

The bilateral correspondence of the efforts on the part of biodiversity recipient and provider countries is absolutely indispensable for ensuring that the system is functional. These efforts consist of adopting and enforcing rules aimed at guaranteeing compliance with biodiversity provider rules regarding access in connection with the grant of IP protected innovations incorporating GRs originating from provider countries.