BACK TO MAIN  |  ONLINE BOOKSTORE  |  HOW TO ORDER

TWN Info Service on Intellectual Property Issues (Oct10/08)
25 October 2010
Third World Network
 

South-North Development Monitor (SUNS) #7025 Monday 25 October 2010

New Treaty on Access and Benefit-Sharing Remains Elusive

Nagoya, 23 Oct (Chee Yoke Ling) -- At a stock-taking on Friday (21 October) of the ongoing biennial meeting of Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), all eyes were on the state of negotiations of a new international treaty on access and benefit-sharing.

Tim Hodges of Canada, the co-chair of the Informal Consultative Group set up by the Conference of Parties last Monday (18 October) to continue negotiations that began in 2005, reported that "we have made considerable and significant progress but we have not finished the work" of finalizing the draft protocol.

The other co-chair, Fernando Casas of Colombia, provided a list of the articles in the draft protocol text that have been agreed on, noting the United Nations rule that "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed". He also provided a list of the outstanding issues that form the core of the protocol that have not reached consensus.

The 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties (COP) to the CBD is taking place in Aichi-Nagoya, Japan from 18 to 29 October. Pressure is growing on delegates, with ministers arriving next week to adopt major decisions that are crucial for the effective implementation of the CBD.

This COP meeting is particularly historic because on the table are the "Revised Strategic Plan, biodiversity target and indicator" and the "Strategy for Resource Mobilization in Support of the Achievement of the Convention's Three Objectives", in addition to the protocol on access and benefit-sharing (ABS).

At a press conference on Thursday evening (21 October), the chief negotiator for Brazil, Paulhino Carvalho Neto, categorically said that there must be a package from the Nagoya COP meeting with the three components.

Without an ABS Protocol, there will not be a strategic plan, and without a financial plan, there is no strategic plan.

He also said that without this package, there will be another "Copenhagen" next week (referring to the meeting of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference of Parties in Copenhagen in 2009 that was ridden with controversy and frustration).

Brazil is also the chair of the Like-Minded Group of Megadiverse Countries that negotiate with a common position in the ABS process (its members are Bolivia, Brazil, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, Peru, Philippines, South Africa and Venezuela).

Developing countries have repeatedly stressed that the three outcomes are part of a package and this was made clear by several ministers at the 22 September High Level Meeting on Biodiversity at the UN General Assembly session (see SUNS #7004 dated 24 September 2010).

This is in line with the CBD objectives of conservation, sustainable use, and fair and equitable sharing of benefits from the utilization of genetic resources.

At the opening of the COP meeting on 18 October, Japan's Environment Minister Ryu Matsumoto said that it is important to agree on an international regime on access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing and to connect these benefits to conservation of biodiversity.

The goal "to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on Earth" set by CBD Parties almost 10 years ago has failed to materialize.

Effective implementation of the CBD has thus become a central challenge with the ABS protocol assuming centre stage, as developing countries are increasingly frustrated at the lack of implementation of the CBD's benefit-sharing objective.

An Inter-regional Negotiating Group (ING) was set up by the CBD's Ad Hoc Open-ended Working Group on ABS in July 2010 to negotiate the protocol text. The ING concluded its second meeting on 21 September, with remaining deep divisions over key parts of the draft protocol text. Another ING session took place on 13-16 October in Nagoya with little progress.

With the end of the ING and the conclusion of the ABS Working Group's ninth meeting on 16 October, the COP decided to set up the Informal Consultative Group (ICG) that worked day and night, again with no final conclusion by its deadline of 22 October.

At the request of the ABS Working Group co-chairs Casas and Hodges, the COP, at the stock-taking session, agreed to extend the work of the ICG, which will now continue to negotiate over the weekend, and report to the COP plenary again next Monday.

Hodges emphasized that, "there is an urgency to our task. It is critical that when negotiators return to the table tomorrow at 3 o'clock, you return better prepared to move to the centre."

He called for a continuation of the goodwill in the ICG but also urged delegates "to return with revised instructions to resolve the remaining key issues."

The divergence over the main outstanding issues remains because some developed countries continue to be inflexible. These issues are divided along the line of developing-developed countries and include:

* Compliance, that is the "core of the core" of the protocol (e.g. there is no agreement on mandatory checkpoints and mandatory disclosure requirements in monitoring, tracking and reporting the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge);

* A provision that would oblige Parties to take measures so that users of traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources obtained from sources other than directly from an indigenous or local community will share the benefits;

(Developing countries seek to rectify the situation where traditional knowledge that is publicly available, e.g, in oral or documented forms, is used with no benefit-sharing with the holders of such knowledge.)

* Expedited access to genetic resources in situations of emergency related to human, plant or animal health;

(This has emerged as a highly contentious issue with no room for progress unless the EU and Australia, in particular, returns to the negotiation table with more flexibility. They want expedited access at a stage before an emergency occurs with concepts such as "pre-emergency" and "avoidance" of an emergency.

(Developing countries are concerned that this would be too broad and result in an increased obligation to provide access without a corresponding assurance of fair and equitable benefit-sharing. This is based on the experience of some developing countries freely sharing avian influenza viruses with the World Health Organisation system, only to find out later that developed country institutions that are part of that system had patented gene sequences of those viruses. In addition, the patented diagnostic kits and vaccines derived from such viruses are unaffordable and so the virus-providing countries have no access to the benefits.)

* Scope of the protocol - among the unresolved issues are: the proposed exclusion of human pathogens that may be addressed by the provision on expedited access for emergency purposes; benefit-sharing from the utilization of genetic resources acquired before the entry into force of the protocol (temporal scope).

In supporting the extension of time for the ICG work over the weekend, Korea, at the stock-taking plenary, said that, "this week we have taken great steps on the ABS protocol by increasing our understanding of key issues but we are still a long way away".

It said that if we redouble our efforts from tomorrow building on the momentum of the past week, the protocol "will be in our hands."

Malawi, on behalf of the Africa Group, noted the slow progress of the ABS protocol negotiations, but that key issues are being resolved. It stressed that "we cannot afford more time here in Nagoya - we wasted time in Cali though the opportunity was there; we wasted time in Montreal."

It urged developed countries to work towards a result that was acceptable to all, adding that, "ABS is the jewel in the crown for our Convention".

The EU said that, "it has been a difficult journey since Cali but we feel we are making progress - there is still a lot of work to be done so we support extension of [the] mandate of ICG."

Mexico, on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries (GRULAC), said there are reasons to be carefully optimistic about the progress of the (ICG) work. But we make use of the (extra) time, it added, supporting the deadline for the conclusion of the negotiations to be extended.+

 


BACK TO MAIN  |  ONLINE BOOKSTORE  |  HOW TO ORDER