scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Topic

Convention on Biological Diversity

About: Convention on Biological Diversity is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 2232 publications have been published within this topic receiving 65599 citations. The topic is also known as: CBD & United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
12 Jul 2002-Science
TL;DR: To date, 53 countries have signed the treaty; 7 countries have officially ratified it and 40 countries are required to do so before it will enter into force.
Abstract: L ast November, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization adopted the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. To date, 53 countries have signed the treaty; 7 countries have officially ratified it. Forty are required to do so before it will enter into force. The treaty has the potential to become the principal international legal instrument governing transfers of crop genetic materials. As such, it would both underpin and shape crop-improvement efforts and, one might argue, agriculture itself. No trivial matter. The acquisition, control, and exploitation of economically valuable plants has fueled international conflict ever since Queen Hatshepsut, the first Pharaoh, sent her army on a plant-collecting expedition to East Africa in 1482 B.C. Today's disputes are resolved through more diplomatic displays of power. This new treaty caps 20 years of acrimonious UN debate over the rules of access and benefit-sharing for one of the most important resources on Earth—the genetic materials used by plant breeders of wheat, maize, rice, and other crops. Genetic resources of specified crops are to be made available automatically to all contracting parties under the terms of a yet-to-be-finalized Material Transfer Agreement, which will mandate royalty payments into an International Fund under certain circumstances. The money—no one expects it to be much—will go toward conservation and breeding programs, primarily in developing countries where so much of the genetic diversity upon which agriculture is based originated. In the closing session, weary negotiators bequeathed a number of difficult issues to the treaty's future governing body, including the level and form of payments to be made to the fund. They also confined the number of crops covered by the treaty to the 35 they decreed to be important to world food security. Their politically motivated cautiousness resulted in the nutritionally indefensible inclusion of asparagus and strawberry and the exclusion of certain globally important crops such as soybean and peanut. Most vegetables, fruits, and tropical forages, as well as all industrial crops, were excluded and are thus outside the scope of the agreement. Mistrust between developed and developing countries also prompted negotiators to saddle the governing body with a cumbersome one-country, one-veto decision-making process, a decision that will constrain the “evolutionary” potential of the treaty itself, reducing the possibility that future deliberations might correct past mistakes. Despite these shortcomings, the treaty is better than the alternative. Currently, access to genetic resources is by “prior informed consent” and on the basis of “mutually agreed terms” with “countries of origin” under the framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity. With the convention, the notion that plant genetic resources are the “common heritage” of humankind yielded to assertions of national sovereignty, visions of financial rewards, and restrictions on access. Countries saw themselves as sellers of genetic resources. The problem? Nobody's a buyer. Countries still routinely deny access, even to plant-collecting missions organized to rescue unique populations from the threat of extinction. Recent efforts to collect and conserve wild relatives of peanuts in Bolivia and papaya in Colombia have been turned back, perhaps because these countries, like others, equate potential usefulness with current (and substantial) monetary value. Controversies over intellectual property rights and charges of “biopiracy” have fueled passions and convinced many countries that they are sitting on genetic gold mines. The value of a single sample in a long-term breeding program involving hundreds or thousands of crosses would be difficult to determine, however, and almost impossible before it is even collected. But the value, in dollars, is certainly small and well below the expectations of those who vigilantly guard against the threat of exploitation. Transfers of genetic materials for research and breeding have thus slowed to a trickle, arguably damaging future crop-improvement efforts as the planet races toward a population of 8 billion. Plant genetic resources are more valuable, economically and practically, as a public good than as a commodity. As a commodity, they're a flop. Exchanged and used, they bring enormous benefits. Witness the contributions to productivity and food security for the poor made through deployment of these resources in the breeding programs of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), as recognized by the Nobel and World Food Prize juries. The new treaty will not end the millennia-long struggle over biological diversity, but it could bring some order and regularity to the transfer of crop genetic resources for most major crops. As every country's agricultural system is highly dependent on nonindigenous crops and their genetic resources, all countries could consider ratification to be in the national interest. The alternative most countries have is to engage in a historically unprecedented experiment: development without diversity. Or, enlist the Queen's army.

16 citations

Book ChapterDOI
01 Jan 2013
TL;DR: It is recommended that African countries continue to strengthen legislation related to medicinal plants; strengthen their capacity for safety, efficacy, and quality evaluation; and embark on commercial cultivation of medicinal plants to benefit from the expanding global market of herbal medicines.
Abstract: Africa is endowed with rich and high endemicity of plant biological diversity, and a number of species are used as traditional medicines. Many African countries, working within the guidelines of the Convention for Biological Diversity and the Global Strategy for Plants Conservation, have developed legislation for the management of plant biodiversity, covering forestry, environment, food, agriculture, access and benefit sharing, intellectual property rights, registration of herbal medicines, and other areas. Many countries have signed the Convention on Biological Diversity, though some have not. However, enforcement of these laws in almost all countries is very weak; there is a lack of harmonization at the national level, coupled with high border porosity, which leaves openings for biopiracy. The Kyoto Protocol 2010 provides a good opportunity for African countries to harmonize legislation governing the exploitation of medicinal plant biodiversity in a manner that is beneficial to their countries. This chapter reviews the status of some of the legislation in African countries, highlighting some specific country plant biodiversity situations; for each of the countries mentioned an attempt has been made to give information on the available capabilities for the evaluation of the safety, efficacy, and quality of herbal medicines and regulations on registration of herbal and traditional medicines. It is recommended that African countries continue to strengthen legislation related to medicinal plants; strengthen their capacity for safety, efficacy, and quality evaluation; and embark on commercial cultivation of medicinal plants to benefit from the expanding global market of herbal medicines.

16 citations

01 Aug 2010
TL;DR: In this paper, the Global Environment Facility (GEF) Secretariat and United Nations Development Program (UNDP) led to the creation of the Capacity Development Initiative (CDI), which was a central part of the process to formulate and promote a conceptual framework for the assessment and development of countries' environmental capacities.
Abstract: A strategic partnership in the late 1990s between the Global Environment Facility (GEF) Secretariat and United Nations Development Program (UNDP) led to the creation of the Capacity Development Initiative (CDI). This was a central part of the process to formulate and promote a conceptual framework for the assessment and development of countries’ environmental capacities. Based on an assessment of capacity development in the GEF portfolio, the CDI’s recommendations formed the basis of the GEF’s strategic programming on capacity development. This led to the creation of the National Capacity Self-Assessments (NCSA). The primary objective of the NCSAs was to determine the challenges of countries’ underlying capacities to meet their global environmental commitments, commitments that are framed by the Convention on Biological Diversity, Convention to Combat Desertification and Drought, and the Framework Convention on Climate Change. Since 2002, a total of 153 out of 166 eligible countries received GEF funding to implement an NCSA. Of the 119 countries that completed their NCSA, 23 countries are at various stages in the implementation the priority recommendations identified in their NCSA Final Report and Action Plan.The NCSAs called for countries to identify their priority environmental issues such as combating deforestation, promoting sustainable land management, or minimizing their vulnerabilities to the impact of climate change. This analysis revealed that the top five capacity development needs expressed by countries to achieve and sustain global environmental outcomes are: 1) public awareness and environmental education; 2) information management and exchange; 3) development and enforcement of policy and regulatory frameworks; 4) strengthening organizational mandates and structures; and 5) economic instruments and sustainable financing mechanisms. The analysis of the 119 NCSA Final Reports and Action Plans yielded insights and lessons from countries’ quest to meet global environmental commitments.

16 citations

01 Jan 2007
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors developed a global economic-biophysical framework by combining the extended GTAP model (Van Meijl et al., 2005) with the IMAGE model (Alcamo et al. 1998; IMAGE Team, 2001).
Abstract: A scenario study from 2000 to 2050 has been performed (by Natuur en Milieuplanbureau, UNEP and WCMC) to explore the effects of future economic, demographic and technical developments on environmental pressures and global biodiversity. Policy options that affect global biodiversity were analysed on their contribution to the 2010 biodiversity targets agreed upon under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The mean species abundance of natural occurring species was used as indicator for biodiversity. To analyse the economic and environmental consequences of changes in global drivers and policies, we developed a global economic-biophysical framework by combining the extended GTAP model (Van Meijl et al., 2005) with the IMAGE model (Alcamo et al., 1998; IMAGE Team, 2001).

16 citations

01 Jan 2013
TL;DR: In this paper, a brief look is offered on the relationship between the two relevant IPRs in the plant sector, the patent system and plant breeders' rights relate to the common pool of genetic resources in the multilateral system.
Abstract: After countries agreeing to the Nagoya Protocol in 2010, the implementation process has started in parallel with the ratification process. Before Nagoya, two other treaties regulated access were already in place: the Convention on Biological Diversity and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. As a contribution to clarify overlaps and possible areas of different rules, this study identifies the core articles in the NP relevance to the implementation of the ITPGRFA. This study also analysis the relevant concepts in the ITPGRFA to identify possible loopholes and grey zones between these three ABS regulations. There is a body of literature discussing the interpretation and implementation of the ITPGRFA, but there is still some disagreement on some of the core legal concepts under the treaty. This report explores the criteria for a plant genetic resources being mandatory included into the multilateral system for ABS. What is meant by ‘public domain’? How can countries decide on the matter of managing and controlling plant genetic resources? What is the relationship between the multilateral system and local and indigenous groups to plant genetic resources? All ABS systems and the attempt to make access happen and benefit sharing flow needs to hold an eye on how it will interact with IPRs. In this study a brief look is offered on the relationship between the two relevant IPRs in the plant sector, the patent system and plant breeders’ rights relate to the common pool of genetic resources in the multilateral system.

16 citations


Network Information
Related Topics (5)
Biodiversity
44.8K papers, 1.9M citations
85% related
Ecosystem services
28K papers, 997.1K citations
83% related
Climate change
99.2K papers, 3.5M citations
79% related
Ecosystem
25.4K papers, 1.2M citations
77% related
Land use
57K papers, 1.1M citations
75% related
Performance
Metrics
No. of papers in the topic in previous years
YearPapers
2023112
2022219
2021107
2020116
201995
2018104