scholarly journals Politics, Culture, and Governance in the Development of Prior Informed Consent in Indigenous Communities

2006 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua P. Rosenthal
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Prior Informed Consent

Protecting Traditional Knowledge Holders' Interests and Preventing Misappropriation—Traditional Knowledge Commons and Biocultural Protocols: Necessary but Not Sufficient?

2012 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 401-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishna Ravi Srinivas
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Prior Informed Consent ◽  
Knowledge Commons

AbstractThe experience of the indigenous communities regarding access and benefit sharing under the national regimes based on provisions of Convention on Biological Diversity and Bonn Guidelines has not been satisfactory. The communities expect that noncommercial values should be respected and misappropriation should be prevented. Some academics and civil society groups have suggested that traditional knowledge commons and biocultural protocols will be useful in ensuring that while noncommercial values are respected, access and benefit sharing takes place on conditions that are acceptable to the communities. This proposal is examined in this context in the larger context of access and benefit sharing under the Convention on Biological Diversity and implementing prior informed consent principles in access and benefit sharing. This article examines knowledge commons, provides examples from constructed commons in different sectors and situates traditional knowledge commons in the context of debates on commons and public domain. The major shortcomings of traditional commons and bicultural protocol are pointed out, and it is suggested that these are significant initiatives that can be combined with the Nagoya Protocol to fulfill the expectations of indigenous communities.

Regulation of Natural Resources Located in Indigenous Communities Territory under the Principles of Consultation and Free, Prior-Informed Consent: Perspectives in Selected Countries

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 499-520
Author(s):  
John S. Ombella
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Multinational Companies ◽  
Contractual Arrangements ◽  
Prior Informed Consent ◽  
Use Of Resources ◽  
Ecological Resources ◽  
Contractual Agreements

Natural resources have long been said to be under the sovereign ownership of the states in whose borders they are found. Sovereignty grants such a state not only the ownership but also the power to regulate their access and use. States’ inability to convert the resources into tangible socio-economic development has witnessed massive contractual agreements with multinational companies to harness the same. Multinational companies and state contractual arrangements seem to have ignored other potential stakeholders like communities dependent on natural resources for their survival. Consequently, communities such as those of indigenous peoples who depend on available natural resources like rivers, lakes, forests and other ecological resources are victimised in the state-multinational contractual arrangements and implementation. Internationally, principles such as consultation and free and prior-informed consent seem to regulate access and use of resources located in indigenous communities. This article shows how such principles guarantee the indigenous communities their existence in cases of large-scale development in their territory.

Challenges Related to Protection of Indigenous Resources Against Biopiracy

2020 ◽  
pp. 124-139
Author(s):  
Zubair Ahmed Khan
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Conflict Of Interest ◽  
Environmental Sustainability ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Natural Rights ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Prior Informed Consent ◽  
Tribal Societies

The protection of indigenous/aboriginal resources is one of the important aspects of biodiversity justice. Many international treaties and conventions legitimised natural rights and privileges of tribal societies and indigenous communities. But some interventionist practices like a conflict of interest in bioprospecting agreement and biopiracy have become major concerns for prospering third-world countries. Strategic application of prior-informed consent and benefit-sharing procedures will definitely meet socio-environmental sustainability in the country. The responsibility and liability of state biodiversity authority and local biodiversity committee at village level need to be fixed to maintain transparency and accountability. Conservation of ethnobiological resources is also important in the view of increasing patent infringement. That's why issues of patentability must include complete disclosure of specification claims even in the case foreign natural resources.

Right of Indigenous Communities to Prior Informed Consent under Article 7 of the Nagoya Protocol and a Comparative Analysis of Its Implementation by India and Bhutan

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-63
Author(s):  
Mohit Gupta
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
The Third ◽  
Prior Informed Consent

The Convention on Biological Diversity (cbd) was adopted in 1992. This Convention had three major objectives: conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of its component, and access and benefit sharing of biological resources arising out of their utilisation. The Nagoya Protocol to the cbd was adopted in 2010 for the fulfilment of the third objective of the cbd, access and benefit sharing. Article 7 of the Nagoya Protocol imposes an obligation on states parties to ensure that “prior and informed consent or approval or involvement” of the indigenous and local communities is taken before their knowledge is accessed. The present study first analyses the contents of Article 7 of the Nagoya Protocol. It will throw light on the meaning of the phrase “prior and informed consent or approval and involvement” as used in Article 7. It then highlights the implementation of Article 7 by two states parties, namely, India and Bhutan.

scholarly journals RECOGNITION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN ACCESS AND BENEFIT SHARING (ABS) LEGISLATION AND POLICIES OF THE PARTIES TO THE NAGOYA PROTOCOL

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 86-113
Author(s):  
H. Arjjumend
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Free Access ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Prior Informed Consent

The Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) provides for the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities (ILCs) in accordance with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). States Parties are obliged to take legislative, administrative and technical measures to recognize, respect and support/ensure the prior informed consent of indigenous communities and their effective involvement in preparing mutually agreed terms before accessing genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge or utilizing them. Within the ambit of contemporary debates encompassing indigenous peoples’ right to self-determination, this paper examines the effectiveness of the percolation of the legal intent of international law into existing or evolving domestic laws, policies or administrative measures of the Parties on access and benefit sharing. Through an opinion survey of indigenous organizations and the competent national authorities of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the findings indicate that the space, recognition and respect created in existing or evolving domestic ABS measures for the rights of indigenous communities are too inadequate to effectively implement the statutory provisions related to prior informed consent, mutually agreed terms and indigenous peoples’ free access to biological resources as envisaged in the Nagoya Protocol. As these bio-cultural rights of indigenous peoples are key to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, the domestic ABS laws need reorientation to be sufficiently effective in translating the spirit of international ABS law and policies.

IMPLEMENTASIROTTERDAM CONVENTION ON THE PRIOR INFORMED CONSENT PROCEDURE FOR CERTAIN HAZARDOUS CHEMICALS AND PESTICIDES IN INTERNATIONAL TRADEBAGI PERKEMBANGAN HUKUM LINGKUNGAN DI INDONESIA

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 90
Author(s):  
Elly Kristiani Purwendah ◽  
Elisabet Pudyastiwi
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Hazardous Chemicals ◽  
Informed Consent Procedure ◽  
Prior Informed Consent ◽  
Consent Procedure

Konvensi ini memang tidak langsung memberikan efek yang signifikan namun dengan meratifikasi konvensi ini akan memberikan pengaruh terhadap kelangsungan ekspor bahan mentah terlebih sumber daya alam seperti bahan obat-obatan, bahan pangan dan bahan lainnya yang terkontaminasi oleh bahan kimia dan pestisida berbahaya. Ratifikasi konvensi ini akan mempersempit kemungkinan menurunnya kualitas keanekaragaman hayati yang sering dimanfaatkan untuk kebutuhan hidup. Selain itu adanya konvensi ini akan mencegah munculnya masalah terhadap lapangan pekerjaan bagi pihak-pihak yang terkontaminasi limbah maupun bahan kimia dan pestisida yang berbahaya seperti para petani, nelayan dan masyarakat pada umumnya. Jika ditelaah secara mendalam jumlah ekpor pada sektor pertanian setiap tahun terus mengalami penurunan, hal ini disebabkan oleh menurunya kualitas ekosistem persawahan akibat pemakaian pestisida yang berlebihan. Kata kunci : Konvensi Rotterdam, ratifikasi, hukum lingkungan. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document