IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v6y2017i1p11-d90804.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Access and Benefit Sharing under the Convention on Biological Diversity and Its Protocol: What Can Some Numbers Tell Us about the Effectiveness of the Regulatory Regime?

Author

Listed:
  • Nicolas Pauchard

    (Swiss Graduate School of Public Administration, University of Lausanne, Lausanne CH-1015, Switzerland)

Abstract

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), adopted in 1992 and entered into force at the end of 1993, established a global regime on access to genetic resources (GR) and sharing of benefits arising from their utilization (Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) regime). Its protocol—the Nagoya Protocol (NP)—which entered into force 21 years later in 2014, clears up some terminological ambiguities of the Convention, clarifies and develops several procedural and instrumental elements of the regime, and obliges States Parties to implement some of its provisions, including the core instrument of the regime: the bilateral ABS agreement between users and providers of GR, that became a condition for obtaining access to the resource. However, scholars who analyzed the ABS regime as well as its official bodies find, and sometimes deplore, the small number of ABS agreements concluded so far, under the CBD as under the NP. This paper has two objectives: First, to assess the effectiveness of the ABS regime implemented by the CBD and the NP on the basis of its central instrument: the ABS agreements concluded between users and providers of GR. The aim is to accurately document the number of ABS agreements concluded since the entry into force of the regime. To our knowledge, such a counting that is neither piecemeal nor has an estimate yet been produced. To do so, I combine several sources, including first hand data collected from the official information agencies—the National Focal Points (NFP)—of each of the States Parties to the NP. Second, I provide a critical summary of the existing explanations of the low number of ABS agreements concluded and I evaluate the corresponding causal mechanisms, relying on the results I obtained regarding the number of permits and agreements.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicolas Pauchard, 2017. "Access and Benefit Sharing under the Convention on Biological Diversity and Its Protocol: What Can Some Numbers Tell Us about the Effectiveness of the Regulatory Regime?," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-15, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:6:y:2017:i:1:p:11-:d:90804
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/6/1/11/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/6/1/11/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Barrett, Christopher B. & Lybbert, Travis J., 2000. "Is bioprospecting a viable strategy for conserving tropical ecosystems?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 293-300, September.
    2. Frédéric Thomas, 2006. "Biodiversité, biotechnologies et savoirs traditionnels. du patrimoine commun de l'humanité aux ABS (access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing)," Revue Tiers-Monde, Armand Colin, vol. 0(4), pages 825-842.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brush, Stephen B., 2007. "Farmers' Rights and Protection of Traditional Agricultural Knowledge," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1499-1514, September.
    2. Amandine Bled, 2009. "Business to the rescue: private sector actors and global environmental regimes’ legitimacy," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 153-171, May.
    3. Robert Innes & George Frisvold, 2009. "The Economics of Endangered Species," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 485-512, September.
    4. Pushpakumara, D.K.N.G & Kotagama, H.B, 2002. "Prospects of Pharmaceutical Prospecting to Finance Biodiversity Conservation in Sri Lanka," Sri Lankan Journal of Agricultural Economics, Sri Lanka Agricultural Economics Association (SAEA), vol. 4, pages 1-34.
    5. Brush, Stephen B., 2005. "Farmers' rights and protection of traditional agricultural knowledge:," CAPRi working papers 36, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    6. Winands, Sarah & Holm-Müller, Karin, 2014. "Eco-regional Cartels on the Genetic Resource Market and the case of the Andean Community's legislation," Discussion Papers 163046, University of Bonn, Institute for Food and Resource Economics.
    7. Pascual, Unai & Dedeurwaerdere, Tom & Krishna, Vijesh V., 2006. "Bioprospection Beyond Intellectual Property Rights: The Kani Model of Access and Benefit Sharing," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25377, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    8. Polasky, Stephen & Costello, Christopher & Solow, Andrew, 2005. "The Economics of Biodiversity," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 29, pages 1517-1560, Elsevier.
    9. Lebdioui, Amir, 2022. "Nature-inspired innovation policy: Biomimicry as a pathway to leverage biodiversity for economic development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    10. Bertacchini, Enrico E., 2008. "Coase, Pigou and the potato: Whither farmers' rights?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 183-193, December.
    11. Lybbert, Travis J. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Narjisse, Hamid, 2002. "Market-based conservation and local benefits: the case of argan oil in Morocco," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 125-144, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:6:y:2017:i:1:p:11-:d:90804. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.