Analysis of Status of Access and Benefit Sharing of Biological Resources and Associated Knowledge in India: The Path of Common Heritage of Mankind to Sovereign Right of a Nation

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Poonam Jayant Singh ◽  
Atul Tiwari
Keyword(s):  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Biological Resources ◽  
Common Heritage ◽  
Common Heritage Of Mankind ◽  
Associated Knowledge

Greenland's new legislation on commercial and research-related use of biological resources: implications for the International Polar Year and later

Polar Record ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Leary
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Home Rule ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
International Polar Year ◽  
Biological Resources ◽  
Potential Benefits ◽  
International Polar

ABSTRACTNew possibilities for economic development have been identified by the Greenland Home Rule Government in recent years. One of these is the potential for development of biotechnology based on Greenland's biodiversity. To ensure that Greenland shares in benefits derived from the exploitation of these resources the Home Rule Parliament recently enacted legislation on commercial and research-related use of biological resources that is premised on rights recognised by the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity. This legislation represents the first law in an Arctic jurisdiction specifically to create a mechanism for access and benefit sharing in relation to Arctic genetic resources. The main area of research and commercial interest so far relates to potential developments in biotechnology from the microbial diversity of ikaite tufa columns located in the Ikka Fjord in southwest Greenland. The legislation seeks to provide a mechanism for regulating access to such biological resources and a means for Greenland to share in the potential benefits that may come from scientific research on them and subsequent commercialisation. Much research in Greenland now falls within the scope of this legislation. The purpose of this article is to explain the provisions of the legislation to the polar research community as well as to review its implications for research in the International Polar Year and later. The legislation imposes many new obligations on researchers in Greenland including obligations to obtain survey licences, obligations on reporting and the regulation of publication of scientific research. Commercially focussed research is also tightly regulated with a particular emphasis on patent rights. However, many aspects of the legislation are uncertain and it is unclear how much of the legislation will be implemented in practice.

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.

International Law and Corporate Actors in Deep Seabed Mining

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Dingwall
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Commercial Activity ◽  
Investment Protection ◽  
Common Heritage ◽  
Common Heritage Of Mankind ◽  
The Common ◽  
Deep Seabed Mining ◽  
Seabed Mining

Corporate participation within deep seabed mining raises unique challenges for international law. Commercial investment by private corporate actors in deep seabed mining is increasing. The deep seabed beyond national jurisdiction (the Area) comprises almost three-quarters of the entire surface area of the oceans, and it is home to an array of prized commodities including valuable metals and rare earth elements. These resources constitute the common heritage of mankind. Acting under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the International Seabed Authority (ISA) is responsible for regulating the Area for the benefit of humanity and granting mining contracts. Although mining activities in the Area remain at the exploration stage, in recent years, there has been a marked growth in investment by private corporate actors, and an increasing impetus towards exploitation. This increasing corporate activity presents challenges, including in relation to matters of common management, benefit sharing, marine environmental protection and investment protection. In part, these challenges stem from the often-contentious role of non-state actors, such as corporations, within the international legal system. A product of its history, the UNCLOS deep seabed regime is an unlikely hybrid of capitalist and communist values, embracing the role of private actors while enshrining principles of resource distribution. As technological advances begin to outstrip legal developments, this study advances the discourse by addressing the extent of any tension between corporate commercial activity in the Area and the achievement of the common heritage of mankind.

scholarly journals Convention on Biological Diversity and access to genetic resources: International regime and our experiences

1970 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 48-52
Author(s):  
O. Joshi
Keyword(s):  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Knowledge Community ◽  
Biological Resources ◽  
Community Rights ◽  
Equitable Sharing ◽  
Emerging Issues

Traditional Knowledge, community rights and access to benefit sharing of biological resources are emerging Issues after Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) entered into force. This paper highlights legal system of access to benefit sharing in CBD and our efforts made so far to protect traditional knowledge by the legal documentation of biological resources and traditional knowledge associated with it. The paper advocates bioprospecting as a forward looking opportunity to convert natural resources into biological capital and highlights role and responsibility of local people to make equitable sharing of the benefits from the resource they conserve and knowledge they hold. Key words: Access and benefit Sharing, Traditional Knowledge, Bio-prospecting. Banko Janakari Vol.15(2) 2005 pp48-52

scholarly journals Debate on Genetic Resources Accessed Ex Situ in the context of the Nagoya Protocol

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-12
Author(s):  
Hasrat Arjjumend
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Resources ◽  
Plant Genetic Resources ◽  
Ex Situ ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Access And Benefit Sharing ◽  
Nagoya Protocol ◽  
Biological Resources ◽  
Food And Agriculture ◽  
Ex Situ Collections ◽  
Developed Nations

Recently enacted two international laws – Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit sharing (ABS) and International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA) – deal with the access/utilization of and benefit sharing arising out from genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge (TK). Both the instruments lack relevant appropriate provisions guiding the countries to take administrative or legislative measures for covering and addressing the benefit sharing from the ex situ collections of genetic resources that were accessed well before the Nagoya Protocol came into existence. Developed nations show no willingness to share the benefits arising from the biological resources which they accessed from developing countries and retain ex situ. As a result, most affected entity would be the indigenous people and local communities (ILCs) – the custodians of most of the local biological resources – who would receive no benefits. The implications on this crucial issue will be critically reviewed in this article to identify appropriate solutions to this bottleneck using a few case studies.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document