Elsa Tsioumani

Prospects for mainstreaming ecosystem goods and services in international policies

Abstract Although most management decisions affecting ecosystem goods and services (EGS) are made at a local level, these local decisions are conditioned by national and international policies. International policy domains provide clear opportunities to mainstream (integrate) EGS in ways that can support poverty reduction. However, positive poverty reduction and EGS outcomes cannot be taken for granted. Mainstreaming EGS needs careful consideration because many of the opportunities identified can reduce poverty, but may have the opposite effect if poorly managed or implemented. A major challenge is to ensure consistent policies across scales and policy domains based on analysis of the local situation. In order to support poverty reduction it matters how the mainstreaming is done and who benefits locally. Based on an analysis of EGS delivery and poverty reduction in drylands, tropical forests and coastal areas in the tropics, this paper analyses the prospects of mainstreaming EGS in a number of relevant international policy domains including: i) development assistance; ii) trade; iii) climate change and; iv) international financial institutions. For these policy domains it is analyzed how mainstreaming EGS can contribute to reaching poverty reduction and development goals, what relevant policy tracks for mainstreaming EGS exist, and what priority issues should mainstreaming focus on. The paper next provides an overview of possible tools and mechanisms for mainstreaming and ends with conclusions on what the role of the CBD can be in mainstreaming.

The 2010 Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-Sharing in Perspective: Implications for International Law and National Implementation

The 2010 Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing in Perspective analyses the implications of this innovative environmental treaty for different areas of international law, and its implementation challenges in various regions and from the perspectives of various stakeholders.

Article 13. National Focal Points and Competent National Authorities

This chapter outlines the necessary institutional arrangements to be taken at the domestic level to implement the Protocol. It follows the model adopted in the Bonn Guidelines and in the Biosafety Protocol of relying on a combination of a national focal point and one or more competent national authorities. The focal point has a dual external function. On the one hand, it ensures direct communication with the Secretariat of the Protocol. On the other hand, the focal point is mandated to familiarize prospective users with the domestic ABS framework, by providing information on procedures for obtaining PIC and establishing MAT, including with indigenous and local communities. The national authorities must be authorized by a Party to act on its behalf in relation to two implementation functions: first, granting access or issuing written evidence that access requirements have been met; and second, advising on procedures and requirements for PIC and MAT.Keywords: biosafety protocol; Bonn guidelines; competent national authorities; domestic ABS framework; MAT; national focal point; PIC

Article 1. Objective

This chapter introduces the relation between benefit-sharing and access to genetic resources, and highlights key tensions between Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Parties underlying the whole text of the Nagoya Protocol. The objective replicates verbatim the third objective of the CBD, which refers prominently to fair and equitable benefit-sharing in its Article 1 (Objectives) and points to three means of sharing benefits, each underpinned by specific provisions of the Convention. The preamble confirms that the Protocol aims to implement the third objective of the CBD. The chapter addresses missing reference to traditional knowledge and discusses the relevance of the connection between the Protocols objective and the first and second objectives of the CBD. Finally, it illustrates the practical and legal functions of Article 1 to equip the reader to understand references to the objective in other provisions of the Protocol.Keywords: benefit-sharing; Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); genetic resources; Nagoya Protocol; traditional knowledge

Article 14. The Access and Benefit-sharing Clearing-House and Information Sharing

This chapter establishes an international ABS Clearinghouse to share information on ABS, that is linked to the pre-existing CBD Clearinghouse Mechanism. It discusses the link between the ABS Clearinghouse and the CBD Clearinghouse Mechanism. The chapter focuses on the functions of the ABS Clearinghouse, the type of information to be included in it, and outstanding legal issues. The ABS Clearinghouse contributes to peer learning and bottomup development of the international ABS regime. Significantly, it also points to the need to include information on relevant competent authorities of indigenous and local communities and information on genetic resources held by them and traditional knowledge as so decided, in light of the Protocol provisions related to these communities. Parties are expected to involve these communities in making available through the ABS Clearinghouse measures related to ABS for the utilization of traditional knowledge.Keywords: CBD Clearinghouse mechanism; genetic resources; international ABS Clearinghouse; outstanding legal issues; traditional knowledge

Article 25. Financial Mechanism and Resources

This chapter discusses the role of the financial mechanism under the Protocol, and the role of other forms of financial solidarity, in turn. The international governance of the financial mechanism under the Nagoya Protocol includes a key role not only for the Protocols governing body, but also for the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Conference of the Parties (COP). In voluntarily providing financial resources through other channels, developed countries are to take into account the needs of developing countries, as identified in their capacity need self-assessments, and may choose between bilateral, regional and multilateral channels. Intergovernmental discussions preparing for the entry into force of the Protocol have already identified the need to take a strategic approach to maximize opportunities for financial support as a complement to the Global Environment Facility (GEF). Governments, organizations, private sector and financial institutions are encouraged to provide financial resources for the implementation of the Protocol.Keywords: Conference of the Parties (COP); Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); financial mechanism; financial resources; Global Environment Facility (GEF); Nagoya Protocol

Appendix: Text of the Preamble of the Nagoya Protocol

This appendix of the book Unraveling the Nagoya Protocol: A Commentary on the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing to the Convention on Biological Diversity contains text of the Preamble of the Nagoya Protocol. The Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) is an international agreement that concerns environmental sustainability, other sustainable development issues and justice. It aims at sharing the benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources and of the traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources held by indigenous and local communities in a fair and equitable way.Keywords: Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS); genetic resources; Nagoya Protocol; traditional knowledge

Article 11. Transboundary Cooperation

This Nagoya Protocols article 11 identifies two instances in which transboundary cooperation is required, at least as a best-endeavor effort: when the same genetic resources are found in the territory of more than one country; and when the same traditional knowledge is shared by indigenous and local communities located in several Parties. This is an acknowledgment of the complexities that are faced in implementing the mainly bilateral ABS approach embodied in the Nagoya Protocol, in particular in consideration of the fact that several genetic resources and traditional knowledge are shared among different Parties. Both obligations aim to address the concern about a possible competition for benefits in the development and implementation of national ABS frameworks to attract potential users interested in obtaining access to the same genetic resource or the same traditional knowledge that are present in different Parties.Keywords: bilateral ABS approach; genetic resources; Nagoya protocol; traditional knowledge; transboundary cooperation

Article 26. Conference of the Parties Serving as the Meeting of the Parties to this Protocol

This Article 26 of the Nagoya Protocol discusses the basic rules for the functioning of the Conference of the Parties (COP)/Meeting of the Parties (MOP), and its relationship with the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) COP. The Protocols governing body comprises representatives of all States that are Party to the Nagoya Protocol. It meets on a periodic basis. Article 26 thus details, in a self-explanatory manner, who is entitled to participate in the COP/MOP meetings, its bureau, the COP/MOP functions, the rules of procedure, and meetings arrangements. Article 26, similarly to the Biosafety Protocol, clarifies the relationship between the Protocols governing body and the CBD COP. Since the Nagoya Protocol is a separate legal instrument, the functions of the COP/MOP differ to some extent from those of the CBD COP, and the membership of the two bodies is not necessarily the same.Keywords: Conference of the Parties (COP); Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); Meeting of the Parties (MOP); Nagoya Protocol; Protocols governing body

Article 21. Awareness-Raising

This Article 21 of the Nagoya Protocol includes a clear and unconditional obligation for Parties to raise awareness about the Protocol and ABS issues, providing an indicative list of activities that can be undertaken to fulfil this obligation. Article 21 builds upon the obligations found in the CBD on communication, education and public awareness and exchange of information. In the light of the importance of awareness-raising activities for the effective implementation of the Protocol, the Intergovernmental Committee preparing the ground for the Protocols entry into force has already discussed the need to develop an awareness-raising strategy. As Article 21 does no raise particular interpretative difficulties, this chapter discusses the specific relevance of this provision for the implementation of the Protocol provisions related to indigenous and local communities, and then offers final observations on the linkages between Article 21 and other provisions of the Protocol.Keywords: ABS issues; awareness-raising strategy; CBD; Intergovernmental Committee; Nagoya Protocol