Divergences on ABS through different looking glasses- A theory-guided case study of the Access and Benefit-Sharing negotiations in the Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture

Abstract

This thesis uses a theory-guided case study to investigate different explanations for why parties in the Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (CGRFA) are disagreeing on the issue of access and benefit-sharing (ABS). Theoretical assumptions are derived from negotiation theories and the perspective of institutional complexity and then applied to the data as different theoretical goggles. After the analyses of the data, the thesis reflect upon whether the institutional complexity perspective gives any additional value to the explanations derived from the negotiations theories. This thesis argues that the institutional complexity perspective adds value by encouraging the researcher to look at the wider institutional and historical context of the negotiation under investigation and thus gain a deeper and more grounded understanding of why the parties are disagreeing.