scholarly journals Implementation of the Nagoya Protocol in Livestock Sector: What Have We Learnt So Far?

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 2354
Author(s):  
Elzbieta Martyniuk ◽  
Aleksandra Haska
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Competent Authority ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Sources Of Information ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Biological Resources ◽  
Livestock Breeding ◽  
Livestock Sector ◽  
Other Information ◽  
The Subject

The aim of the paper was to analyze impacts of seven years of implementation of the Nagoya Protocol on the livestock sector based on available sources of information and literature. Interim National Reports on implementation of the Nagoya Protocol provided by countries and other information available at the ABS Clearing House managed by the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, especially Internationally Recognized Certificates of Compliance (IRCC), were analyzed. Moreover, trends in geneflow of breeding products in selected countries, based on the national reports provided to the UN COMATRADE database, have been compared. Analysis from these sources showed limited impact of the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol for livestock breeding and conservation, as out of 2370 IRCC issued by 31 May 2021, only 573 were granted for animal genetic/biological resources including 90 with livestock as the subject matter. Only one IRCC was granted to a foreign user; all other IRCC were issued for domestic users. The intent was to use livestock genetic/biological resources as bioresources for innovation, which should lead to establishment of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) with benefits to be shared through the National Competent Authority or for research purposes.

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.

Certifying Biodiversity: The Union for Ethical BioTrade and the Search for Ethical Sourcing

2020 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 503-528
Author(s):  
Drossos Stamboulakis ◽  
Jay Sanderson
Keyword(s):  
Supply Chain ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
Local Environment ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Biological Resources ◽  
Private Action ◽  
Ethical Sourcing ◽  
Private Actors

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.

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 Country Representatives’ Perceptions of the Biodiversity Science-Policy Interface

Conservation ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-81
Author(s):  
André Derek Mader ◽  
Brian Alan Johnson ◽  
Yuki Ohashi ◽  
Isabella Fenstermaker
Keyword(s):  
Science Policy ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Science And Policy ◽  
Biodiversity Knowledge ◽  
Biodiversity Science ◽  
Science Policy Interface ◽  
Adequate Quality ◽  
The Subject

Biodiversity knowledge is communicated by scientists to policymakers at the biodiversity “science-policy interface” (SPI). Although the biodiversity SPI is the subject of a growing body of literature, gaps in our understanding include the efficacy of mechanisms to bridge the interface, the quality of information exchanged between science and policy, and the inclusivity of stakeholders involved. To improve this understanding, we surveyed an important but under-studied group—biodiversity policymakers and scientific advisors representing their respective countries in negotiations of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). We found that a wide variety of SPI mechanisms were being used. Overall, they were considered to be sufficiently effective, improving over time, and supplied with information of adequate quality. Most respondents, however, agreed that key actors were still missing from the biodiversity SPI.

Beyond Unbridled Optimism and Fear: Indigenous Peoples, Intellectual Property, Human Rights and the Globalisation of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Folklore: Part II

2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-37
Author(s):  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Marlowe Fox
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Trade Law ◽  
International Trade Law ◽  
Traditional Cultural Expressions

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.

scholarly journals Toward a More Expansive Discourse in a Changing World: An Analysis of Political Leaders’ Speeches on Biodiversity

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 2899
Author(s):  
Sang Hun Lee ◽  
Yi Hyun Kang ◽  
Rong Dai
Keyword(s):  
Biodiversity Conservation ◽  
Policy Process ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Political Leaders ◽  
Host Countries ◽  
Global Pandemic ◽  
The Subject ◽  
High Level

Speeches delivered in the Conference of the Parties (COPs) to the Convention on Biological Diversity represent leading discourses about biodiversity conservation. The discourse shared by high-level politicians is especially influential in the financing and decision-making process of global biodiversity governance. However, the speeches given in the COPs have not been the subject of systematic analyses until now. This study analyzes the host countries’ speeches given at the six most recent COPs and investigates which discourses have been expressed in the speeches. The regulatory discourse that views nature as a resource was found to be the dominant discourse, while other discourses that view nature as a scientific object or a spiritual entity were represented only marginally. As the need for a transformational policy for biodiversity conservation is growing amid a global pandemic, it is essential to deepen our understanding of the dynamics and complexity of nature and reflect it in the policy process. This study suggests that more balanced discourse on biodiversity may earn broader audiences’ consensus on biodiversity conservation.

Justice and the Convention on Biological Diversity

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 267-280 ◽  
Author(s):  
Doris Schroeder ◽  
Thomas Pogge
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Natural Habitat ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
International Economic Order ◽  
Social Utility ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Social Rules ◽  
Biological Resources ◽  
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.

Convention on Biological Diversity: Towards a sustainable future

Social Change ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 33 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 173-191
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Technology Development ◽  
Sustainable Use ◽  
United Nations Environment Programme ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Biological Resources ◽  
Transfer Benefit ◽  
Global Agreement

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.

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. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document