scholarly journals A Regional Review of Genetic Resource Access and Benefit Sharing – Key Issues and Research Gaps

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
Clare Morrison ◽  
Fran Humphries ◽  
Charles Lawson
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
National Level ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Legal Mechanism

Countries are increasingly using access and benefit sharing (ABS) as a legal mechanism to support the conservation and sustainable use of the world’s biological diversity. ABS regulates collection and/or use of genetic resources/traditional knowledge and sharing benefits from their use with the provider. The purpose of this review is to assess the trends, biases and gaps of ABS literature using a regional comparative approach about the key topics of concern between each region. It analyses four key topic groupings: (1) implementation of international, regional and national ABS policy and law; (2) intellectual property and ABS; (3) traditional knowledge; and (4) research, development and commercialisation. Findings included gaps in: (1) analysing effectiveness of national level implementation; (2) addressing apparent conflicts between support for intellectual property promoting exclusivity for traditional knowledge and challenges to intellectual property exclusivity for patents; (3) examining traditional knowledge of local communities (in contrast to Indigenous Peoples); and (4) lack of practical examples that quantify benefit sharing from research and commercialisation outcomes. We conclude that future research addressing the identified gaps and biases can promote more informed understanding among stakeholders about the ABS concept and whether it is capable of delivering concrete biological conservation, sustainable use and equity outcomes.

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.

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.

scholarly journals Positive Protection: Protecting Genetic Resources Related to Traditional Knowledge in Indonesia

FIAT JUSTISIA ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 122
Author(s):  
Rohaini Rohaini ◽  
Nenny Dwi Ariani
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Patent Law ◽  
Intellectual Property Right ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
International Pressure

Genetic Resources is a foundation of human life, as a source of food, industrial raw materials, pharmaceuticals, and medicines. From its utilization may provide a financial benefit to the provider and the user of it. Unfortunately, most of it obtained from developing countries through biopiracy, including Indonesia. Furthermore, in the early 1980s, access and benefit sharing (ABS) to genetic resources became an international issue. It leads to the adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in 1992. However, since it was approved, the whole ideas of excellence of it could not be implemented, a problem on it still arises. Intellectual property right laws, in certain aspects, are possible for using to protect traditional knowledge from their utilization. However, at the same time, intellectual property regime also becomes “a tool” to legitimate of biopiracy practices. Due to massive international pressure, mostly in developing countries, it proposes two kinds of protections, which are positive protection and defensive protection. This paper will examine one of it, which is positive protection. By using the normative method and qualitative approach, this paper identified at least two kinds of positive protections that we can develop to protect genetic resources related to traditional knowledge, which are optimizing the patent law and developing the sui generis law. Furthermore, it can be done by some revision by adding new substances, an improvement on the articles, or even by doing the deletion on certain articles. Moreover, in order to develop the sui generis law, it identified several minimum elements that shall be contained on it, inter alia: the purposes of protection; scope of protection; criteria of protection; the beneficiaries of protection: the holder of traditional knowledge; the kind of rights to be granted; how the rights acquired; how to enforce it; how the rights lost or expired; and dispute resolution.  Keywords: Positive Protection, Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge.

The Nagoya Protocol and Access and Benefit Sharing regulations of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its impacts on botanic gardens' collections and research.

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (034) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Kiehn
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
National Level ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Botanic Gardens ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
The Many ◽  
Commercial Research

Abstract At its 10th meeting in 2010, the Conference of the Parties of the CBD adopted the 'Nagoya Protocol (NP) on access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their utilisation' which entered into force on 12 October 2014. Currently, the NP has been adopted by 129 parties, including the EU. This article reviews information retrieved from a variety of different sources dealing with the implications of Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) regulations, including the NP, for biological collections, especially regarding material accession, conservation and research in botanic gardens. Problems encountered with adhering to ABS regulations and the NP include the following: increasing bureaucratic and administrative burdens arising from the many different ABS-related regulations at the national level; difficulties in identifying and engaging with national authorities designated as competent signatories for the NP in user and provider countries; and problems arising from ambivalent and inconsistent use of terms in the NP and in national ABS legislation. The authors encourage parties to fulfil the CBD requirement for 'simplified measures on access for non-commercial research purposes' and point out that NP-related impediments to conservation (and fundamental research) will have negative impacts on human development and biodiversity.

Tackling biopiracy in Southeast Asia: the need for a legally binding regional instrument

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-98
Author(s):  
Jinyup Kim
Keyword(s):  
Southeast Asia ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Biological Resources ◽  
Knowledge Based ◽  
Consistent Manner

Biopiracy, largely defined as misappropriation of biological resources and associated traditional knowledge, has occurred all around the world. Southeast Asia, one of the world's biodiversity hotspots, has been a victim of biopiracy in a number of cases across the region. Despite the high occurrence of the exploitation of resources, the region has not responded to the problem of biopiracy adequately. One of the most important reasons for this lack of response to biopiracy is the absence of a legally binding regional instrument(s). However, considering that (i) biopiracy does not respect national borders, (ii) most of the Southeast Asian states have ratified the Nagoya Protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity, and (iii) soft law instruments adopted so far have failed to tackle biopiracy, this article argues that a legally binding regional regime should be established to tackle biopiracy in a consistent manner. Following an analysis of a number of biopiracy cases in the region, this article discusses why a legally binding instrument(s) is necessary. It suggests how to improve the current regional instruments pertaining to access and benefit sharing in relation to biological resources and associated traditional knowledge, based on the analysis of instruments adopted to tackle biopiracy in other regions.

Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of the Benefits Resulting from their Use – The Challenges of a New Concept

elni Review ◽  
2008 ◽  
pp. 12-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susette Biber-Klemm
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Natural Resources ◽  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Prior Informed Consent ◽  
Equitable Sharing ◽  
Insight Into

The system of access and benefit sharing (ABS) – or more technically worded “Access to Genetic Resources and Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits resulting from their utilisation” – is one of the most debated topics in the field of conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. Explained in a nutshell, the system institutionalises, on the basis of the national sovereignty over natural resources, conditions for access to and utilisation of genetic resources and – indirectly – also to traditional knowledge related to these genetic resources. It prescribes the well-known triad of Prior Informed Consent (PIC), Mutually Agreed Terms (MAT) and the benefit sharing. This article presents some of the current debates in more detail. In order to facilitate insight into the challenges of the system, the background and context of its evolution are described and analysed.

Redefining environmental stewardship to deliver governance frameworks for marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction

2017 ◽  
Vol 75 (1) ◽  
pp. 435-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penelope Ridings
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Environmental Stewardship ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Marine Biodiversity ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
National Jurisdiction

Abstract In 2015 the United Nations General Assembly decided to develop an international legally binding instrument (ILBI) under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction. To that end, it established a Preparatory Committee (PrepCom), to make substantive recommendations to the General Assembly on the elements of a draft text of an ILBI. The PrepCom has identified the tension between the principle of the common heritage of mankind and high seas freedoms embodied in UNCLOS as one of the issues which must be addressed in such an international agreement. Some participants in the process have proposed a sui generis regime as a way of resolving any apparent clash of these international legal principles, particularly as it relates to marine genetic resources and their access and benefit sharing. This article argues that environmental stewardship may provide the framework for such a sui generis regime. For it to do so, however, it must be grounded in international legal principles and act as a balance between competing values, perspectives and interests in the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction. If appropriately redefined in this way, environmental stewardship can deliver a governance framework which addresses some of the central issues with which the PrepCom will have to deal. These include the practical problems of access and benefit sharing of the marine genetic resources of areas beyond national jurisdiction, and reconciling the conflicting pressure for international decision-making for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity on the one hand, and the maintenance of existing regional and sectoral frameworks on the other. Environmental stewardship, redefined, can provide an intellectual framework for an ILBI under UNCLOS on marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document