Abstract
Access and benefit-sharing (ABS) is a market-based approach aimed at preserving biodiversity. Its effectiveness has been questioned in international discussions for many years. It is evident that the approach’s success has fallen far short of what was expected: degradation of biodiversity continues, and only few benefits arising from the commercial use of biodiversity have been shared with the providers of biodiversity. The reason for this failure is a lack of incentives. However, an analytical assessment of the effectiveness of the concept is lacking so far. The present paper raises the question how ABS must be designed in order to be effective while also helping to protect biodiversity and promote a fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from its commercialization. This paper identifies six critical factors that determine the effectiveness of ABS governance and discusses under what circumstances a critical factor increases or decreases in effectiveness. Furthermore, the paper analyses so-called countermeasures that impact on these circumstances. In specifying the critical factors and their interplay with the countermeasures, the paper gives guidance on how to develop more effective ABS regimes.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alchian AA (2007) Property rights (online). Liberty Fund, Inc. http://www.econlib.org/LIBRARY/Enc/PropertyRights.html. Accessed 21 April 2007
Anuradha RV (2001) IPRs: implications for biodiversity and local and indigenous communities. Rev Eur Commun Int Environ Law 10:27–36
Artuso A (2002) Bioprospecting, benefit sharing, and biotechnological capacity building. World Dev 30:1355–1368
Barber CV, Johnston S, Tobin B (2003) User measures options for developing measures in user countries to implement the access and benefit-sharing provisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity. United Nations University, Tokyo
Barrett CB, Lybbert TL (2000) Is bioprospecting a viable strategy for conserving tropical ecosystems? Ecol Econ 34:293–300
Barzel Y (1997) Economic analysis of property rights. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Baumol WJ, Blinder AS (1994) Economics: principles and policy. Dryden Press, Orlando
Boisvert V, Caron A (2002) The Convention on Biological Diversity: an institutionalist perspective of the debates. J Econ Issues 36:151–166
Boisvert V, Vivien F-D (2005) The Convention on Biological Diversity: a conventionalist approach. Ecol Econ 53:461–472
Braga CAP (1996) Trade-related intellectual property issues: the Uruguay-round agreement and its economic implications. In: Martin W, Winter LA (eds) The Uruguay round and developing countries. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Brunnengraeber A, Dietz K, Hirschl B, Walk H (2006) Interdisciplinarity in governance research. GARNET Working Paper 08/2006
CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity) (1992) The Convention on Biological Diversity
CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity) (2011a) Competent national authorities on access and benefit sharing (ABS CNA) (online). http://www.cbd.int/doc/lists/nfp-abs-cna.pdf. Accessed 11 May 2011
CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity) (2011b) Database on ABS measures (online). http://www.cbd.int/programmes/socio-eco/benefit/measures.aspx. Accessed 26 April 2011
Chen Y, Puttitanun T (2005) Intellectual property rights and innovation in developing countries. J Dev Econ 78:474–493
Coase RH (1960) The problem of social cost. J Law Econ 3:1–44
Columbia University (1999) Access to genetic resources. An evaluation of the development and implementation of recent regulation and access agreements. Columbia University, School of International and Public Affairs, New York
Dahlmann CJ (1979) The problem of externality. J Law Econ 21(2):141–162
Dávalos LM, Sears RR, Raygorodetsky G, Simmons BL, Cross H, Grant T, Barnes T, Putzel L, Porzecanski AL (2003) Regulating access to genetic resources under the Convention on Biological Diversity: an analysis of selected case studies. Biodivers Conserv 12:1511–1524
Day-Rubenstein K, Frisvold GB (2001) Genetic prospecting and biodiversity development agreements. Land Use Policy 18:205–219
Dedeurwaerdere T (2005) From bioprospecting to reflexive governance. Ecol Econ 53:473–491
Dedeurwaerdere T (2010) Global microbial commons: institutional challenges for the global exchange and distribution of microorganisms in the life sciences. Res Microbiol 161:414–421
Dedeurwaerdere T, Louaf S, Richerzhagen C, Tobin B (2005) Roundtable on practicality, feasibility and cost of certificates of origin. 2nd Paris roundtable on ABS governance. IDDRI-UNU/IAS-CPDR, Paris
EU Commission (2003) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, the implementation by the EC of the “bonn guidelines” on access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing under the Convention on Biological Diversity, COM (2003) 821 final, Brussels, 23.12.2003
Fritsch M, Wein T, Ewers H-J (2003) Marktversagen und Wirtschaftspolitik. Franz Vahlen, München
Gehl Sampath P (2005) Regulating bioprospecting: institutions for drug research, access and benefit-sharing. United Nations University Press, Tokyo
Gould DM, Gruben WC (1996) The role of intellectual property rights in economic growth. J Dev Econ 48(2):323–350
Holm-Mueller K, Richerzhagen C, Taeuber S (2005) Users of genetic resources in Germany awareness, participation and positions regarding the Convention on Biological Diversity. Bundesamt fuer Naturschutz, Bonn
Kanowski P, Sinclair D, Freeman B (1999) International approaches to forest management certification and labelling of forest products: a review. Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry-Australia, Canberra, ACT, October 1999
Kaufmann D, Kraay A, Mastruzzi M (2006) Governance matters V: governance indicators for 1996–2005. The World Bank
Laird SA, Wynberg R (2002) Institutional policies for biodiversity research. In: Laird SA (ed) Biodiversity and traditional knowledge. Equitable partnerships in practice. Earthscan, London
Lerch A (1998) Property rights and biodiversity. Eur J Law Econ 6:285–304
MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being—biodiversity synthesis. MEA, Washington, DC
Moran K (2000) Bioprospecting: lessons from benefit-sharing experiences. Int J Biotechnol 2:132–144
Mulholland DM, Wilman EA (2003) Bioprospecting and biodiversity contracts. Environ Dev Econ 8:417–435
Nagoya Protocol on access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity (2010)
Nijar GS (2011) The Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit sharing of genetic resources – an analysis. Ceblaw brief. Kuala Lumpur
North DC (1990) Institutions, institutional change and economic performance (political economy of institutions and decisions). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2003a) Economic issues in access and benefit sharing of genetic resources: a framework for analysis. OECD, Paris
OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2003b) Harnessing markets for biodiversity. Towards conservation and sustainable use. OECD Publishing, Paris
Rausser GC, Small AA (2000) Valuing research leads: bioprospecting and the conservation of genetic resources. J Political Econ 108:173–206
Reid WV, Laird AS, Gámez R, Sittenfeld A, Janzen DH, Gollin MA, Juma C (1993) A new lease on life. In: Reid WV, Laird AS, Gámez R, Sittenfeld A, Janzen DH, Gollin MA, Juma C (eds) Biodiversity prospecting: using genetic resources for sustainable development. World Resource Institute, Washington, DC
Reji KJ (2010) International regime on access and benefit sharing: where are we now? Asian Biotechnol Dev Rev 12:77–94
Richerzhagen C (2010) Protecting biological diversity—the effectiveness of access and benefit-sharing regimes. Routledge, New York
Richter R, Furubotn E (1996) Neue Institutionenökonomik. Mohr, Tübingen
Rosenthal JP (1996) The International Cooperative Biodiversity Groups (ICBG) program. A benefit-sharing case study for the conference of the parties to Convention on Biological Diversity
SCBD (Secretariat of the Convention on Biodiversity) (2008) Access and benefit-sharing in practice: trends in partnerships across sectors. CBD, Montreal
Sedjo RA (1992) Property rights, genetic resources, and biotechnological change. J Law Econ 35:199–213
Simpson RD, Craft AB (1996) The social value of using biodiversity in new pharmaceutical product research. Resources for the Future, Washington, DC
Simpson RD, Sedjo RA, Reid JW (1996) Valuing biodiversity for use in pharmaceutical research. J Political Econ 104:163–185
Swanson TM (1995) Why does biodiversity decline? The analysis of forces for global change. In: Swanson TM (ed) Economics and ecology of biodiversity decline: the forces driving global change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Swanson TM, Goeschl T (2000) Property rights issues involving plant genetic resources: implications of ownership for economic efficiency. Ecol Econ 32:75–92
TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity for National and International Policy Makers) (2009a) Chapter 5 Rewarding benefits through payments and markets
TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity for National and International Policy Makers) (2009b) Summary: responding to the value of nature
ten Kate K, Laird SA (1999) The commercial use of biodiversity—access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing. Earthscan, London
Vogel JH (2000) The biodiversity cartel: transforming traditional knowledge into trade secrets. CARE, Quito
Williamson OE (1983) Credible commitments: using hostages to support exchange. Am Econ Rev 73:519–540
Williamson OE (1985) The economic institutions of capitalism: firms, markets, relational contracting. Free Press, New York
Williamson OE (1991) Comparative economic organization: the analysis of discrete structural alternatives. Adm Sci Q 36:269–296
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Richerzhagen, C. Effective governance of access and benefit-sharing under the Convention on Biological Diversity. Biodivers Conserv 20, 2243–2261 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-011-0086-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-011-0086-0