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.

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.

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.

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.

Case study on medicinal plant research in guinea: Prior informed consent, focused benefit sharing, and compliance with the convention on biological diversity

2001 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 478-491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Carlson ◽  
Barry Mamadou Foula ◽  
Julie A. Chinnock ◽  
Steven R. King ◽  
Gandeka Abdourahmaue ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Medicinal Plant ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Prior Informed Consent ◽  
Plant Research

scholarly journals Legal Protection on Indigenous Herbs of Madura through Geographical Indications

2018 ◽  
Vol 54 ◽  
pp. 06013
Author(s):  
Habib Adjie ◽  
Tanudjaja ◽  
Woro Winandi ◽  
Moh. Saleh
Keyword(s):  
Informed Consent ◽  
Local Community ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Geographical Indication ◽  
Prior Informed Consent ◽  
Local Business ◽  
The Government ◽  
Foreign Entrepreneur

Indigenous Herbs of Madura is the productt of intellectual creativity of local community in Madura which spread over four regions, namely Bangkalan, Sampang, Pamekasan, and Sumenep. Indigenous Herbs of Madura is part of traditional medicine which produced heredity by Madurese society. To prevent misappropriation from developed countries, the Indigenous Herbs of Madura must be legally protected. The model of legal protection of the Indigenous Herbs of Madura can be done using Geographical Indication Certificate of the Government of East Java Province or by an institution or association of the entrepreneurs of Indegenous Herbs of Madura with its membership covering four regions in Madura. The Geographical Indication Certificate becomes the basis for granting permission to utilize the original ingredients of Madurese by either local entrepreneur or other local business in Madura, or by foreign entrepreneur. In the event that such utilization permits are granted against a local business entrepreneur in Madura or to a foreign entrepreneur, a prior informed consent of Madurese (prior informed consent) and benefit sharing is required for the local community in Madura.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document