Implementation of Nagoya Protocol and its Ethical Dilemma – the Case Study of Indonesia

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 24-34
Author(s):  
Endang Sukara ◽  
Safendrri Komara Ragamustari ◽  
Ernawati Sinaga

Indonesia consists of more than 17,000 islands separated for hundreds of thousands of years making both the biodiversity and culture diverse. Strong connection between people and biodiversity form a vast array of traditional knowledges retaliated to the conservation and use of biological diversity. During the last 3 decades, tremendous advancement on science and technology has been able to uncover the intrinsic value of biodiversity. Many lead chemical compounds have been isolated and identified, and has opened up huge opportunities in developing new business based on biodiversity. International cooperation between Japan and Indonesia successfully isolated more than 1,000 species of actinomycetes from diverse ecosystems and more than 30% are new species. This group of microbe is important for future pharmaceutical industries. The consciousness on intrinsic value of biodiversity is, however, only being understood by countries having high science and technology capacity. The intrinsic value of biodiversity remains abstract to most of the people in the developing and less developed nations. The Convention on Biological Diversity (UN-CBD), Cartagena and Nagoya Protocol are legal documents to ensure conservation, sustainable use and sharing of the benefit from the utilization of biodiversity and its components. There is a high demand for the developed nations on access to biodiversity to uncover its benefit. The mechanism on access, fair and equitable sharing of the benefit from the utilization of biodiversity and its component are certainly full of ethical dilemma. For this, there is a great need for the developing country having rich biodiversity find the most appropriate way to manage biodiversity and traditional knowledge for their prosperity.  Trust between countries rich in biodiversity and countries having high science and technology capacity is a crucial factor. Greater transparency and the recognition on comprehensive rights of people providing biodiversity is a key element in maintaining trust. Ethical standards cannot depend solely on rules or guidelines.    

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 103
Author(s):  
Beatriz Gómez-Castro ◽  
Regina Kipper

The Nagoya Protocol advances one of the three objectives of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), namely ‘the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources'. The Protocol promotes equity in the sharing of benefits from the use of genetic resources and encourages the reinvestment of benefits into the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and ecosystems. Binding obligations established under the Protocol aim at creating greater legal certainty and transparency as well as more equitable partnerships between users and providers of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. The Protocol has the potential to leverage tangible impacts in provider countries and foster sustainable development for present and future generations.


2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 503-528
Author(s):  
Drossos Stamboulakis ◽  
Jay Sanderson

Abstract This article is concerned with the potential for private action to improve sourcing practices to promote biodiversity. More specifically this article examines the Union for Ethical BioTrade (UEBT) and its verification and certification of ‘sourcing with respect’: that is, sourcing ingredients from biodiversity in a way that is respectful to both the local environment and people. While key international biodiversity treaties and instruments—such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and Nagoya Protocol—encourage public actors to work with private actors to develop methods for the sustainable use of biological resources, our examination of UEBT shows that there are concerns over the standards, implementation and enforcement of private initiatives. In conclusion, we suggest two key ways in which transnational or public/private initiatives can be strengthened. First, via more proactively promoting public/private cooperation, including about how certification is used to reduce inconsistency and consumer overload or confusion. Secondly, by placing greater emphasis on mechanisms that place pressure on supply chain actors to source in ways that promote biodiversity.


2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-63
Author(s):  
Mohit Gupta

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.


2012 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 401-422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Krishna Ravi Srinivas

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.


2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-37
Author(s):  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Marlowe Fox

Abstract In Part I of this two-part article, we explained why western assumptions built into intellectual property law make this area of law a problematic tool, as a way of protecting traditional knowledge (tk) and expressions of folklore (EoF) or traditional cultural expressions (tce) of indigenous peoples. Part II of this article aims to: 1) provide a brief review of the Convention on Biological Diversity (cbd) and the Nagoya Protocol, and examine the evolution of the intellectual property rights of indigenous peoples from the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (trips Agreement) to the cbd to the Nagoya Protocol; and 2) examine possible core principles, inducted (rather than deduced) from actual practices already in place in the areas of patents, copyrights, and trademarks in relation to protecting tk and EoF. These explorations could allow for discussions regarding indigenous peoples, human rights and international trade law to become less adversarial.


2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 267-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Doris Schroeder ◽  
Thomas Pogge

Justice and the Convention on Biological DiversityDoris Schroeder and Thomas PoggeBenefit sharing as envisaged by the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is a relatively new idea in international law. Within the context of non-human biological resources, it aims to guarantee the conservation of biodiversity and its sustainable use by ensuring that its custodians are adequately rewarded for its preservation.Prior to the adoption of the CBD, access to biological resources was frequently regarded as a free-for-all. Bioprospectors were able to take resources out of their natural habitat and develop commercial products without sharing benefits with states or local communities. This paper asks how CBD-style benefit-sharing fits into debates of justice. It is argued that the CBD is an example of a set of social rules designed to increase social utility. It is also argued that a common heritage of humankind principle with inbuilt benefit-sharing mechanisms would be preferable to assigning bureaucratic property rights to non-human biological resources. However, as long as the international economic order is characterized by serious distributive injustices, as reflected in the enormous poverty-related death toll in developing countries, any morally acceptable means toward redressing the balance in favor of the disadvantaged has to be welcomed. By legislating for a system of justice-in-exchange covering nonhuman biological resources in preference to a free-for-all situation, the CBD provides a small step forward in redressing the distributive justice balance. It therefore presents just legislation sensitive to the international relations context in the 21st century.


Social Change ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 33 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 173-191

In an era of a rapidly shrinking biological resources, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is a historic landmark, being the first global agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity. The CBD is one of the few international agreements in the area of natural resource conservation in which sustainability and equitable benefit-sharing are central concerns. The CBD links traditional conservation efforts to the economic goal of using biological resources sustainably and sets forth principles for the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources, notably those destined for commercial use. Importantly, the CBD also gives traditional knowledge its due place in the sustainable use of genetic resources. The CBD also covers the rapidly expanding field of biotechnology, addressing technology development and transfer, benefit-sharing and biosafety, in an equitable framework. In the coming years, the CBD is likely to have major repercussions on the way biodiversity is conserved and benefits thereof, shared between the developing and developed worlds. The following commentary on the CBD has drawn heavily from a document produced by Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, at the United Nations Environment Programme. Articles 1 to 21 of the CBD have also been reproduced here in order to disseminate knowledge regarding the principles of the CBD-Editor.


2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 38-45
Author(s):  
STELLINA JOLLY

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. 


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex D. Rogers ◽  
Amy Baco ◽  
Elva Escobar-Briones ◽  
Kristina Gjerde ◽  
Judith Gobin ◽  
...  

Growing human activity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) is driving increasing impacts on the biodiversity of this vast area of the ocean. As a result, the United Nations General Assembly committed to convening a series of intergovernmental conferences (IGCs) to develop an international legally-binding instrument (ILBI) for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of ABNJ [the biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) agreement] under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The BBNJ agreement includes consideration of marine genetic resources (MGR) in ABNJ, including how to share benefits and promote marine scientific research whilst building capacity of developing states in science and technology. Three IGCs have been completed to date with the fourth delayed by the Covid pandemic. This delay has allowed a series of informal dialogues to take place between state parties, which have highlighted a number of areas related to MGR and benefit sharing that require technical guidance from ocean experts. These include: guiding principles on the access and use of MGR from ABNJ; the sharing of knowledge arising from research on MGR in ABNJ; and capacity building and technology transfer for developing states. In this paper, we explain what MGR are, the methods required to collect, study and archive them, including data arising from scientific investigation. We also explore the practical requirements of access by developing countries to scientific cruises, including the sharing of data, as well as participation in research and development on shore whilst promoting rather than hindering marine scientific research. We outline existing infrastructure and shared resources that facilitate access, research, development, and benefit sharing of MGR from ABNJ; and discuss existing gaps. We examine international capacity development and technology transfer schemes that might facilitate or complement non-monetary benefit sharing activities. We end the paper by highlighting what the ILBI can achieve in terms of access, utilization, and benefit sharing of MGR and how we might future-proof the BBNJ Agreement with respect to developments in science and technology.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document