The Inadequacies of the French System Regarding Access and Benefit-sharing and Its Evolution through the Recognition of the Notion of Local Community in the Nagoya Protocol

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-90
Author(s):  
Pierre-Alain Collot
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Community Or ◽  
Constitutional Jurisprudence

The French law for the reconquest of biodiversity aims to transpose the Nagoya Protocol into national law. Rather than supporting the notion of an autochthonous and local community or even taking into account the autochthonous character of the concept of a local community, the legislature has chosen to use the notion of a community of inhabitants. The notion of local community, which is specific to environmental law, nevertheless satisfies the requirements of constitutional jurisprudence, as it does not consist of a community of origin, culture, language or belief. Beyond the logic inherent in the Law of 8 August 2016, the recognition of local communities, which is at the heart of the mechanism for sharing access and benefits, could make it possible to correct the multiple shortcomings, in terms of access to both genetic resources and traditional knowledge, associated with the sharing of the benefits that result from their use.

scholarly journals The Nagoya Protocol and Indigenous Peoples

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Yolanda Teran
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Equitable Sharing ◽  
Mother Earth

This article is about Indigenous peoples’ involvement in the Nagoya Protocol negotiations from 2006 to 2010, as well as in its implementation to stop biopiracy in order to protect Pachamama, Mother Earth, and to ensure our survival and the survival of coming generations. The Nagoya Protocol is an international instrument that was adopted in Nagoya, Japan in October 2010 by the Conference of Parties (COP 10) and ratified by 51 countries in Pyeongchang, South Korea in October 2014 at COP 12. This protocol governs access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their utilization (access and benefit sharing [ABS]). It has several articles related to Indigenous peoples and traditional knowledge, as well as: The interrelation and inseparable nature between genetic resources and traditional knowledge; The diversity of circumstances surrounding traditional knowledge ownership, including by country; The identification of traditional knowledge owners; The declaration of Indigenous peoples' human rights; and The role of women in the biodiversity process. In addition, this protocol lays out obligations on access, specifically participation in equitable benefit sharing, the accomplishment of prior and informed consent, and the mutually agreed terms and elaboration of a national legal ABS framework with the participation of Indigenous peoples and local communities in order to have well-defined roles, responsibilities, and times of negotiations.

scholarly journals Assessment of Domestic Policies Guiding the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits From Utilization of Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 55
Author(s):  
Hasrat Arjjumend ◽  
Konstantia Koutouki
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Indigenous People ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Indigenous Rights ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Civil Society Organizations ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol

The objective of the Nagoya Protocol guides Parties to regulate illegitimate access and utilization of biological resources or associated traditional knowledge, and also directs Parties to share with fairness, equity and justice the monetary or non-monetary benefits arising out of utilization of genetic resources. In a nod to the United Nations Declaration on Rights of Indigenous People, the Nagoya Protocol binds the Parties to create access and benefit sharing (ABS) laws, policies or administrative measures as envisaged in Articles 5.2 and 5.5 of the Protocol, and obliges the States to allow for benefits to flow to Indigenous peoples and local communities (ILCs). Present paper is based on an opinion survey of academic/research institutions, civil society organizations and concerned individuals apart from competent national authorities of Asian countries. Review of secondary information, especially domestic ABS laws of relevant countries, and participant observation were other means of legal and policy analysis. The findings of this paper illustrate that the accrued benefits from the utilization of genetic resources or traditional knowledge are not adequately realized by Indigenous people or local communities. State sovereignty occupies dominance when justice and equity principles are considered in benefit sharing mechanism. It leads to the infringement of Indigenous rights and conservation objectives. Discrepancies in domestic ABS laws and in the frameworks for their implementation could be addressed by ensuring the participation of ILCs in domestic ABS rulemaking, decision-making processes, and the participatory execution of ABS mechanisms at all levels. The resulting gains in efficiency in the ABS process could then better achieve the goal of conserving and sustainably using biodiversity, while also ensuring respect for the rights of Indigenous people.

scholarly journals ACCESS AND BENEFIT SHARING UNDER NAGOYA PROTOCOL AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 38-45
Author(s):  
STELLINA JOLLY
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Developing Nations ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Equitable Sharing

The debate over control and ownership of natural and bio genetic resources has a chequered history in International environmental law. Historically genetic resources were considered and acknowledged as part of common heritage of mankind. But with the development of technologies and the heightened north south divide over the issue of sovereign right over natural resources the developing nations became extremely concerned with the exploitation of biological and Genetic resources. Access to benefit sharing (ABS) was considered as an answer to balance the interests of developed and developing nations and to conserve and protect bio diversity. Adopted on October 2010 in Nagoya, Japan by the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) of 1992, the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization (NP) has come into force after its 50th ratification on 2013. Nagoya protocol details on procedure for access and benefit sharing, disclosure mechanism, principles of transparency and democracy. The paper analyses the protection of access and benefit sharing envisaged under Nagoya protocol and its possible role in promoting sustainable development in the develoing nations. 

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.

Protecting Traditional Knowledge Associated with Genetic Resources by Corporate Social Responsibility

2015 ◽  
pp. 131-150
Author(s):  
Noriko Yajima
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Social Responsibility ◽  
Social Responsibility ◽  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Corporate Social ◽  
National Governments

The problems to establish equitable benefit sharing of Traditional Knowledge (TK) associated with Genetic Resources (GRs) have been one of the main discussions in international negotiations. This chapter analyses how Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) could contribute to international organizations, national governments, and the private sector protecting TK associated with GRs in indigenous and local communities. This research uses the concept of the United Nations Triple Bottom Line Approach, which promotes balance among economic, environmental, and social imperatives towards sustainable development. This chapter illustrates the responsibility of international organizations by providing legally binding instruments. It also compares different national governments' responses to protect TK associated with GRs. Then, the chapter proposes that Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) could be the key to improving contradictions between legal and voluntary instruments in local communities and national and international governments. The analysis suggests that CSR is coherent with PPPs and might generate environmental, economic, and socio-economic challenges in the private and public sectors.

scholarly journals An open-source GIS-enabled lookup service for Nagoya Protocol party information

Database ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hendrikje Seifert ◽  
Marc Weber ◽  
Frank Oliver Glöckner ◽  
Ivaylo Kostadinov
Keyword(s):  
Data Management ◽  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Open Source ◽  
Scientific Data ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Cloud Infrastructure ◽  
Clearing House ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol

Abstract The Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing is a transparent legal framework, which governs the access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their utilization. Complying with the Nagoya regulations ensures legal use and re-use of data from genetic resources. Providing detailed provenance information and clear re-usage conditions plays a key role in ensuring the re-usability of research data according to the FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable and re-usable) Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Even with the framework provided by the ABS (access and benefit sharing) Clearing House and the support of the National Focal Points, establishing a direct link between the research data from genetic resources and the relevant Nagoya information remains a challenge. This is particularly true for re-using publicly available data. The Nagoya Lookup Service was developed for stakeholders in biological sciences with the aim at facilitating the legal and FAIR data management, specifically for data publication and re-use. The service provides up-to-date information on the Nagoya party status for a geolocation provided by GPS coordinates, directing the user to the relevant local authorities for further information. It integrates open data from the ABS Clearing House, Marine Regions, GeoNames and Wikidata. The service is accessible through a REST API and a user-friendly web form. Stakeholders include data librarians, data brokers, scientists and data archivists who may use this service before, during and after data acquisition or publication to check whether legal documents need to be prepared, considered or verified. The service allows researchers to estimate whether genetic data they plan to produce or re-use might fall under Nagoya regulations or not, within the limits of the technology and without constituting legal advice. It is implemented using portable Docker containers and can easily be deployed locally or on a cloud infrastructure. The source code for building the service is available under an open-source license on GitHub, with a functional image on Docker Hub and can be used by anyone free of charge.

scholarly journals ‘Poisoned Chalice’: Law on Access to Biological and Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge in Namibia

Resources ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 83
Author(s):  
Wana W. Chinsembu ◽  
Kazhila C. Chinsembu
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Green Economy ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Commercial Research

Many countries in Africa provide ethnobiological resources (more especially ethnomedicinal plants), which are converted by companies and users from developed countries into biopharmaceutical products without any monetary benefits to the countries of origin. To mitigate the lack of benefits, African countries are beginning to enact access and benefit-sharing (ABS) legislation, though their wheels turn very slowly. Since many African ABS laws have not been appraised for their feasibility, this paper presents a contextual analysis of Namibia’s new ABS law: The Access to Biological and Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge Act No. 2 of 27 June 2017. Even if several international conventions on ABS and local institutional structures guided the evolution of the 2017 Act, the main drivers for the enactment of the ABS legislation in Namibia are: Inequitable sharing of monetary benefits from the green economy, putative, but unproven cases of biopiracy, and political power contestations over ethnobiological resources. A critical analysis of important challenges faced by Namibia’s new ABS law include: Lack of adequate participatory consultations and technical capacity at the local level, discount of the non-commodity cultural value of TK, ambiguous and narrow definition of the term ‘community’, lack of a clause on confidentiality, and assertions that the new ABS law negatively impacts research in Namibian universities and botanic gardens. In contrast to South Africa’s ABS law, Namibia’s law is more onerous because it does not differentiate between commercial and non-commercial research.

scholarly journals Implementing ABS Regime in Nepal through Community Based Biodiversity Management Framework

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 148-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bikash Poudel ◽  
Pitamber Shrestha ◽  
Bir Bahadur Tamang ◽  
Abiskar Subedi
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
In Situ Conservation ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Biodiversity Management ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Management Framework ◽  
Good Practices ◽  
Agriculture And Environment ◽  
Set Up

It is very evident that there is lack of well accepted and verified mechanisms as well as institutional set up for the realization of farmers' rights, including the effective implementation of International Regime on Access to and Benefit Sharing (IRABS). Community Biodiversity Management (CBM) embed good practices, proven to be effective in in-situ conservation of biodiversity through conservation through use, they also provide a base for a range of practices which serve the basis for IRABS to be affable and affordable to local communities. CBM encompasses the good practices serving documentation, conservation, facilitating exchange, providing access to genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. Moreover, CBM also provide institutional structure and mechanism to share the benefits accruing from commercial use of the genetic resources, directly and indirectly.Key words: Genetic resources; Associated traditional knowledge; Access and benefit sharing; farmers’ rights; Community biodiversity managementThe Journal of AGRICULTURE AND ENVIRONMENT Vol. 11, 2010Page: 148-157Uploaded date: 16 September, 2010

scholarly journals Awareness of the Convention on Biological Diversity and provisions regarding access and benefit sharing among multiple stakeholder groups in Bhutan

Oryx ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (5) ◽  
pp. 735-742
Author(s):  
Sonam Wangyel Wang ◽  
Woo Kyun Lee ◽  
Jeremy Brooks ◽  
Chencho Dorji
Keyword(s):  
Rural Communities ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
National Level ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Stakeholder Groups

AbstractAs part of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing calls for ‘fair and equitable sharing of benefits’ derived from the use of genetic resources and traditional knowledge. However, implementation of the Convention and the Nagoya Protocol has been challenged by the inadequacies of existing policies, lack of national-level frameworks, and inadequate knowledge among stakeholders. We used focus group meetings and structured interviews with rural communities, government representatives, researchers and Members of Parliament in Bhutan to collect data on awareness, knowledge and perceptions of components of the CBD related to access and benefit sharing. Our study indicated generally low levels of awareness about most components of the Convention, particularly among rural residents. Although local people in rural communities feel that benefits derived from local biological resources and traditional knowledge should be shared, there is uncertainty about who owns these resources. These results indicate that there is an urgent need to develop educational and awareness programmes, using a variety of media, to target particular stakeholder groups, with emphasis on residents in rural communities. This could empower local communities to participate meaningfully in decision-making processes to develop Bhutan's national access and benefit sharing framework, and to allow them to benefit from the conservation and sustainable use of local resources.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document