THEMES

Rapid advances in science and technology are changing the ways resources are used and accessed, and the nature of benefits. This theme aims to provide simple guidance and direction to those working to understand these dramatic changes, helping them to participate more effectively in policy-making.

All laws and policies operate as part of an ecosystem of measures that interact with and impact each other. Many laws and policies are developed, however, as though they exist in isolation, often to the detriment of local groups who must deal with the realities of implementation. This theme examines how the wide range of laws that converge on biological and genetic resources interact with each other, how they are implemented, and how they impact local communities, producers, and traders.

Traditional knowledge, innovations, and practices contribute in direct and indirect ways to research and commercial product development. This varies significantly by industry and case. This theme focuses on: 1. How traditional knowledge is used, and how this has changed in recent decades; and 2. Who benefits from the use of traditional knowledge, including companies, governments, researchers, communities, and individuals. Through case studies and the experiences of local groups, we explore: who benefits when knowledge is spread across communities or borders; how social, cultural, and power relations impact benefit sharing with communities, and within communities; the different kinds of knowledge found along the value chain, and how they are recognized; conflicts between government and community claims to traditional knowledge; and how the dynamic and changing nature of knowledge impacts benefit sharing.

Conservation is often offered as a central argument for the commercial use of biodiversity and genetic resources, with the idea that it creates incentives for sustainable local stewardship. But the evidence is equivocal. Questions need to be asked about whether samples supplied to biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, or forest products sold as bulk commodities, are in fact supporting conservation, and why ABS agreements do not generally support conservation directly.

Samples for drug development, a bulk plant ingredient used in a cosmetic product, herbal teas, or microorganisms that contribute to biotechnological processes? A lot of confusion surrounds the activities and products covered by natural resource and conservation laws. The Convention on Biological Diversity addresses “genetic resources” and “biological resources”, but what does that mean in practice to local groups, researchers, and even governments? This theme illustrates through very specific local examples how diverse these activities and products are, and how even a well-intentioned ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach can create unforeseen problems.

At the policy level, there is a tendency to lump commercial use of resources together in a single policy framework. But commercial use can mean wildly different things, including: trade of forest spices for local use; export of medicinal barks for herbal remedies sold on another continent; or soil samples that will be screened for the genetic material of microorganisms useful to industrial biotechnology companies. Regulations do not work well if the activities and subjects of regulation are unclear, or extremely different from each other. We draw upon the experiences and stories of local communities, producers, traders, companies, researchers and others to illustrate through video the wide variety of commercial uses of genetic and biological resources. Accompanying webinars and policy briefs explore ways to group similar activities, and differentiate between forms of commercial use, as a first step towards developing effective laws and policies. They examine differences between sectors including R&D, financial revenues, and benefits, as well as potential tensions between subsistence and local use, and international trade; the threat of boom-bust cycles in some sectors; and the importance of adding value at a local level and the many forms this takes.

Fair and equitable benefit-sharing is central to the Convention on Biological Diversity and to sustainable development and biodiversity conservation strategies linked to the commercial use of resources. But what forms of benefit-sharing have local groups, researchers and others received to date, and who has received them? This theme takes a critical look at benefit sharing 25 years after the CBD with a focus on the types of benefits that have resulted; who receives them; who negotiated, and represented local groups; and what lessons have been learned and might be shared.

The informed permission and agreement of local groups for research and commercialization of their knowledge or resources, before work takes place, is increasingly considered a requirement. Numerous national and international laws refer to “prior informed consent” (PIC for short) – but what has this meant in practice? What is “informed” and what constitutes “consent” (we are generally clear on “prior”)? What approaches have been tried to realize these concepts in practice? Is a one-off agreement sufficient, or is this necessarily a process that unfolds over time? Can PIC actually be a disempowering experience? Drawing on experiences from communities around the world, as well as researchers and others who have examined these concepts, or sought PIC themselves, we explore different approaches to PIC, the importance of cultural context and power relations, and different forms of PIC (e.g. from local communities, research institutions, and governments).

Policies are only as effective as the social and legal systems from which they emerge. Governance challenges have plagued many well-intentioned efforts to promote sustainable and equitable use of natural resources and biodiversity, and it is important to acknowledge and understand these problems. Through video, policy briefs and webinars we tell stories from local groups exploring the unintended consequences of well-intentioned measures ungrounded in real world experiences. From facilitating opportunities for corruption, bribery and bureaucracy that overwhelm local communities, creating complexity and implementation costs governments cannot handle, or re-enforcing inequities, laws intended to promote sustainability and equity can paradoxically work against local groups’ interest. We share the uncannily similar experiences of people around the world when a poorly conceived and complex new regulation arrives on their doorstep.

Intellectual property rights (IPRs) offer both challenges and opportunities for sharing benefits from the use of biological and genetic resources, and traditional knowledge. Through video and other tools we explore different kinds of intellectual property rights including patents, trademarks, geographical indications, and copyright, including cases of groups innovating to make IPR work for equitable benefit sharing and biodiversity conservation.