Advertisement

The implementation of the Nagoya ABS Protocol for the research sector: experience and challenges

  • Gurdial Singh NijarEmail author
  • Sélim Louafi
  • Eric W. Welch
Original Paper

Abstract

Over the years, researchers in public institutions and universities have accessed genetic materials from a variety of sources, freely exchanged them with fellow researchers and institutions and shared their research results with foreign and local collaborators. The 2010 Nagoya Protocol regulating access to genetic resources is set to change this scenario. This treaty requires country parties to put in place enhanced ABS measures regulating access to their genetic resources and to provide for the sharing of benefits arising from their utilization. These measures include minimum access standards, mandatory prior informed consent of indigenous and local communities, compliance with the domestic laws or requirements of the provider country and monitoring the utilization of genetic resources. This is aimed at commercial research. Non-commercial public research which contributes to the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity is encouraged, particularly in developing countries, through simplified measures. There are undoubtedly practical challenges in operationalizing this provision without impeding research in the sector most potentially affected by ABS measures. This article presents the results of a survey of the practices of such researchers in one developing country, namely Malaysia. It examines the potential implications for the national implementation of the Protocol. Given country specificities, this study highlights and shows the importance of increasing knowledge about existing practices for an efficient design and implementation by developing countries of a complex legislation such as the Nagoya ABS Protocol.

Keywords

Nagoya Protocol Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) Convention on biological diversity (CBD) Genetic resources Malaysia Researchers 

Abbreviations

ABS

Access and Benefit Sharing

ASEAN

Association of Southeast Asian Nations

BR

Biological resources

CBD

Convention on biological diversity

COP

Conference of the Parties

FRIM

Forest Research Institute Malaysia

GR

Genetic resources

IPRs

Intellectual Property Rights

MARDI

Malaysian Agricultural Research Institution

MTA

Material Transfer Agreement

NP

Nagoya Protocol on access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their utilization

PIC

Prior informed consent

SBC

Sarawak Biodiversity Centre

References

  1. Ad Hoc Open-Ended Working Group on Access and Benefit Sharing. (2009). Report of a workshop on access and benefit-sharing in non-commercial biodiversity research (UNEP/CBD/WG-ABS/7/INF/6). Bonn: CBD.Google Scholar
  2. Dedeurwaerdere, T., Broggiato, A., Louafi, S., Welch, E. W., & Batur, F. (2013). Governing global scientific research commons under the Nagoya Protocol. In E. Morgera, M. Buck, & E. Tsioumani (Eds.), 2010 Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit-sharing in perspective: Implications for international law and implementation challenges (pp. 389–421). Leiden: Brill Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  3. Dedeurwaerdere, T., Melindi-Ghidi, P., & Broggiato, A. (2016). Global scientific research commons under the Nagoya Protocol: Towards a collaborative economy model for the sharing of basic research assets. Environmental Science & Policy, 55, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Enserink, M. (2000). Malaysian researchers trace Nipah virus outbreak to bats. Science,. doi: 10.1126/science.289.5479.518.Google Scholar
  5. Jinnah, S., & Jungcurt, S. (2009). Global biological resources. Could access requirements stifle your research? Science, 323(5913), 464–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kamau, E. C., Winter, G., & Stoll, P. (Eds.). (2015). Research and development on genetic resources. Public domain approaches in implementing the Nagoya Protocol. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Laird, S. (Ed.). (2002). Biodiversity and traditional knowledge, equitable partnership in practice (People and plants conservation series). Virgina: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  8. Morgera, E., Buck, M., & Tsioumani, E. (Eds.). (2012). The 2010 Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit-sharing in perspective: Implications for international law and implementation challenges (legal studies on access and benefit-sharing). Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  9. Nijar, G. S. (2011). The Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit sharing of genetic resources: Analysis and implementation options for developing countries. Kuala Lumpur: The South Centre and CEBLAW.Google Scholar
  10. Nijar, G., & Gan, P. F. (2012). The Nagoya Protocol: A record of the negotiations. Kuala Lumpur: The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Universiti Malaya and CEBLAW.Google Scholar
  11. Nijar, G. S., Gan, P. F., Lee, Y. H., & Chan, H. Y. (2011). Food security and access and benefit-sharing of genetic resources for food and agriculture. Kuala Lumpur: CEBLAW, South Centre, Unviersiti Malaya.Google Scholar
  12. Ramirez-Villegas, J., Jarvis, A., Fujisaka, S., Hanson, J., & Leibing, C. (2013). Crop and forage genetic resources: International interdependence in the face of climate change. In M. Halewood, I. L. Noriega, & S. Louafi (Eds.), Crop genetic resources as a global commons: Challenges in international law and governance (pp. 78–98). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Scholz, A. (2004). Merchants of biodiversity: Scientists as Traffickers of plants and institutions. In S. Jasanof & M. L. Matello (Eds.), Earthly politics: Local and global in environmental governance (pp. 217–238). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. (2010) The Nagoya Protocol on access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their utilisation to the convention on biological diversity. https://www.cbd.int/doc/press/2014/pr-2014-10-12-nagoya-protocol-en.pdf. Accessed 29 Sept 2015.
  15. Tvedt, M. W. (2014). Beyond Nagoya. Towards a legally functional system of access and benefit sharing. In S. Oberthür & G. K. Rosendal (Eds.), Global governance of genetic resources: Access and benefit sharing after the Nagoya Protocol (pp. 158–177). London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Von Braun, J., & Virchow, D. (1996). Economic evaluation of biotechnology and biodiversity in developing countries. Agriculture and Rural Development, 3(1), 7–11.Google Scholar
  17. Welch, E. W., Shin, E. J., & Long, J. V. (2013). Potential effects of the Nagoya Protocol on the exchange of non-plant genetic resources for scientific research: Actors, paths, and consequences. Ecological Economics, 86, 136–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre of Excellence for Biodiversity Law (CEBLAW), Law FacultyUniversity of MalayaKuala LumpurMalaysia
  2. 2.Centre International de Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement (CIRAD)Montpellier Cedex 5France
  3. 3.Centre for Science, Technology and Environmental Policy Studies (CSTEPS)PhoenixUSA

Personalised recommendations