A Glimpse into My EPIP 2025 Journey: Patents, Gene Editing and Food Security

Author: in

From 10–12 September, I joined the 20th Annual Conference of the European Policy for Intellectual Property Association (EPIP) in Antwerp, a lively gathering of scholars exploring the intersections of intellectual property (IP), innovation and policy. For me, it was a chance to present my paper and to join the PhD Workshop, sharing my research and exchanging ideas with fellow doctoral students and senior professors. My research project looks at a cutting-edge and pressing question: how can IP law help or hinder the use of New Genomic Techniques (NGTs) to secure our food future?

Why New Genomic Techniques matter

NGTs are new gene-editing tools, like ultra-precise genetic scissors. Unlike older genetic modification, they don’t insert foreign DNA; they make tiny, targeted edits to a plant’s own genes. This allows breeders to develop crops that can cope with extreme weather or carry better nutrition, faster and with fewer unintended changes. Because of these benefits, many countries are beginning to treat NGT plants differently from traditional GMOs, which could speed their path from lab to field. But technology is only part of the story.

The IP puzzle

Behind every breakthrough is a legal framework that decides who can use, share, and build on these innovations. My research examines how patents and plant-variety rights influence the development and spread of NGTs and derived crops, and how these rules affect farmers and breeders who need affordable access. At EPIP, I presented part of this work in Parallel Session D.2 – Pharma & Biotechnology (I), in a presentation titled “Patentability of NGT-Related Plant Innovations in the EU and China.” It compares how the two regions draw the line between what can and cannot be patented, and how those choices ripple through agricultural innovation.

Insights from My Paper

In both jurisdictions, most NGT inventions can enter the patent system, but there are important limits. An invention is excluded if it is a pure discovery, a plant variety, or, under Chinese law, if the genetic resources are illegally sourced. The most significant divergence lies in the plant-variety stage of NGT innovation: Europe leaves room for trait-defined plants, while China channels protection mainly to methods and breeding materials.

China is now moving toward broader patent protection for NGT innovations, aiming to stimulate research and commercial breeding. The EU remains divided: some stakeholders support patents to encourage investment, while others worry about excessive control and barriers for small breeders.

My current takeaway is that the real issue isn’t a simple choice between strong and weak patentability, but how to design appropriate IP mechanisms, such as licensing platforms, breeders’ exemptions, and effective coordination between patent law and plant-variety rights, that promote innovation while keeping new breeding tools and stacked traits widely accessible.

This conference offered constructive feedback and fresh ideas and, just as important, highlighted why this topic matters. Through NGTs, ensuring climate-resilient and nutritious crops is not only about meeting ever-rising population numbers but also about adapting to climate change and shifting diets. Understanding how IP law can foster innovation and openness in NGTs and their derived crops is therefore crucial for a sustainable and inclusive food future.

Tags:

K. Jiang

Hello, I'm Kaili Jiang. In the fall of 2023, I embarked on a doctoral research journey at Maastricht University.