Nature in Common. Beyond the Nagoya Protocol

10.5852/hc45 ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Aubertin ◽  
Anne Nivart
Keyword(s):  
Identity Politics ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
International Agreement ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Interdisciplinary Dialogue ◽  
Natural Parks ◽  
Global Biodiversity ◽  
Biodiversity Governance

The Nagoya Protocol is a major international agreement for global biodiversity governance and was meant to put an end to the uncompensated exploitation of natural resources and knowledge in the Global South. Its objectives were to ensure greater justice and equity between providers and users of genetic resources, raise the profile of the contributions and knowledge of indigenous and local communities, and decolonise research, while promoting the conservation of biodiversity. Thirty years after the Convention on Biological Diversity from which it originated, the authors examine the legal and practical manifestations of this virtuous framework, which entered into force in 2014. While it has fostered recognition of the plural nature of knowledge and helped to establish traceability of resources, it has also contributed to imposing a commercial vision of nature and knowledge, exacerbating identity politics, and making access to biodiversity more complex in an era of globalised research. This book presents an interdisciplinary dialogue based on feedback from researchers and conservation stakeholders (local communities, managers of collections and natural parks). Looking beyond the Nagoya Protocol, it invites us to question the relationships between societies and nature in light of the ecological emergency. It is intended for anyone with an interest in the economics of biodiversity and environmental justice.

scholarly journals Understanding international non-state and subnational actors for biodiversity and their possible contributions to the post-2020 CBD global biodiversity framework: insights from six international cooperative initiatives

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcel T. J. Kok ◽  
Kathrin Ludwig
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
State Action ◽  
Learning Capacity ◽  
Study Approach ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Global Biodiversity ◽  
State Actors ◽  
Biodiversity Governance

AbstractWhile multilateral approaches and national policies have been unable to halt the unprecedented loss of biodiversity, responses from non-state and subnational initiatives are increasing. The successful implementation of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework (GBF), to be agreed upon under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), ultimately depends on commitments and action by state and non-state actors, including subnational actors. However, non-state and subnational actors have so far received little attention in academic analysis of global biodiversity governance. In order to better understand and harness the potential of non-state and subnational involvement, this paper addresses the ways in which non-state initiatives contribute to global biodiversity governance and how productive linkages can be built between state and non-state actors in the post-2020 GBF. This paper applies an explorative case study approach and analyses six international cooperative initiatives (ICIs) that highlight novel approaches in international biodiversity governance. We analyse the qualities of ICIs for biodiversity governance in terms of strengths and potential, the governance functions that they fulfil, and how they are engaging with the CBD and the post-2020 GBF. Based on this analysis, we discuss challenges and opportunities related to non-state and subnational actors involvement in global biodiversity governance and identify possible steps forward. We emphasise the importance of a collaborative framework for non-state action within the CBD that builds on existing and emerging activities of non-state actors, organises monitoring and review as part of an accountability framework of state and non-state actors, and provides for learning, capacity building and follow-up action.

Negotiating the Nagoya Protocol: Indigenous Demands for Justice

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 102-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly R. Marion Suiseeya
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Shared Meanings ◽  
Global Demand ◽  
Equitable Sharing ◽  
Resources Exploitation

In October 2010, parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity adopted the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization. One impetus behind the Nagoya Protocol was the mandate to address the unjust impacts—such as the loss of access to resources, exploitation of traditional knowledge, and expropriation of rights to resources—of the global demand for genetic resources on indigenous peoples and local communities (ILCs). Using collaborative event ethnography, this article demonstrates the limited nature, scope, and engagement of the ILC justice discourse in the negotiations, despite the supposedly inclusive nature of the CBD. I attribute the constrained discourse in part to the existence of a justice metanorm as evidenced through the emergence of shared meanings and prescriptive status of justice instruments.

scholarly journals Recognizing Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ rights and agency in the post-2020 Biodiversity Agenda

AMBIO ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria Reyes-García ◽  
Álvaro Fernández-Llamazares ◽  
Yildiz Aumeeruddy-Thomas ◽  
Petra Benyei ◽  
Rainer W. Bussmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Local Communities ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Transformative Change ◽  
Local Livelihoods ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Biodiversity Policy ◽  
Global Biodiversity ◽  
Biodiversity Decline

AbstractThe Convention on Biological Diversity is defining the goals that will frame future global biodiversity policy in a context of rapid biodiversity decline and under pressure to make transformative change. Drawing on the work of Indigenous and non-Indigenous scholars, we argue that transformative change requires the foregrounding of Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ rights and agency in biodiversity policy. We support this argument with four key points. First, Indigenous peoples and local communities hold knowledge essential for setting realistic and effective biodiversity targets that simultaneously improve local livelihoods. Second, Indigenous peoples’ conceptualizations of nature sustain and manifest CBD’s 2050 vision of “Living in harmony with nature.” Third, Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’ participation in biodiversity policy contributes to the recognition of human and Indigenous peoples’ rights. And fourth, engagement in biodiversity policy is essential for Indigenous peoples and local communities to be able to exercise their recognized rights to territories and resources.

scholarly journals Kunming Summit on the Convention on Biological Diversity and China’s Environmental Diplomacy

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Yu Hongyuan ◽  
Zhu Yunjie
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Strategic Action ◽  
Global Response ◽  
Environmental Diplomacy ◽  
Slow Moving ◽  
Global Biodiversity ◽  
Economic Landscape ◽  
Biodiversity Governance

Beijing’s environmental diplomacy has gained growing momentum in recent years, reflecting China’s activism in a shifting global political and economic landscape. The upcoming 15th Conference of Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in Kunming in southwestern China will be the first biodiversity-themed event Beijing will host since it signed up for global biodiversity governance in the early 1990s, offering another opportunity for Beijing to contribute its proposals and perspective to the global response to another slow-moving but deepening crisis. Despite the raised international expectations about the conference and the strategic action plan it is expected to produce, the focus of global biodiversity governance should be on delivering real results on existing pledges by addressing the major institutional shortcomings and building up national capabilities.

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.

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.

The Convention on Biological Diversity: From Realism to Cosmopolitanism

2005 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 335-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Virginie Maris
Keyword(s):  
Deleterious Effect ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Environmental Crisis ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
International Agreement ◽  
Local Populations ◽  
Conservation Measures ◽  
Global Environmental

The decline of biodiversity is without a doubt one of the most important symptoms of what could be called a “global environmental crisis.” Our ability to stop this decline depends on the capacity to implement an effective, collective system of preservation on a global scale. In this paper, I will analyze the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the international agreement that aims at creating this type of global cooperation.While I consider that cosmopolitan governance is desirable, given the legitimacy of the preservation of global biological diversity, I will not attempt to directly argue for it here. Still, it is worth mentioning some of the reasons that might lead us to adopt this position. First, certain past conservation measures have been harshly criticized as imperialistic. For example, Project Tiger in India, which Western environmentalists often cited as a success, have had a deleterious effect on local populations.

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