Biodiversity, Climate Change, Environment, Europe, Global, Global Geopolitics, Headlines | Analysis

Cataloguing Biodiversity Presents a Challenge

Analysis by Julio Godoy* IPS/IFEJ

BERLIN, Nov 11 2010 (IPS) - An international agreement reached in the Japanese city of Nagoya constitutes a great step forward towards protecting biodiversity from decimation, but also represents an enormous legislative and administrative task, environment experts say.

The Nagoya protocol, signed in late October by the 193 member states of the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity, includes more than 40 measures aimed at fighting bio-piracy and preventing misappropriation of genetic resources.

The agreement outlines a strategic plan for implementation of the measures to halt the loss of biodiversity within the next 10 years, and foresees benefits for developing countries from sustainable industrial and commercial use of biogenetic resources.

But to fulfil these tasks, most developing countries must carry out an enormous amount of legislative and administrative work in identifying and cataloguing biogenetic resources to prove their origin and claim international property rights, the experts warned.

“The agreement of Nagoya is a big step forward, after 20 years of international bickering and some resounding failures,” Beate Jessel, president of the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation told IPS.

Jessel, a former professor of environmental agricultural planning at several leading German universities, praised the agreement as “an ambitious plan to save biodiversity.” But, Jessel added, the agreement was only possible because “the pressure to finally act to preserve biodiversity was enormous.”

According to U.N. figures, every day some 150 species disappear, due to unsustainable agriculture, urbanisation, and other human activities.

Jessel pointed out that the U.N. target to stop the decimation of biodiversity by this year will not be reached – a goal adopted in 2003. “The European Union won’t be able to fulfil its own commitment to stop the disappearance of its own species by the end of 2010,” Jessel said.

“The job ahead of us to implement the protocol of Nagoya is a heavy task,” Jessel warned. In developing countries in sub-Saharan Africa, rich in biological diversity, the task “will have to start practically from scratch,” he said.

In order to demonstrate that a biogenetic resource is native, and to obtain an equitable sharing of benefits from its industrial and commercial use, the nation in question will have to identify and catalogue its entire species of flora and fauna. Such a task demands huge scientific and administrative capacities, as well as financial resources.

Additionally, new international regulations must guarantee that certificates of origin are truthful and legal, and enable negotiation of compensation in cases of conflict.

Jessel called attention to the differences in environmental legislation and administration among developing countries. While some Latin American nations, such as Brazil, Colombia, Mexico, and Peru have already adopted tough measures to protect their natural resources from bio-piracy, along with corresponding agencies, most African countries do not have such administrative instruments.

“Brazil, for instance, has a very tough regime to control the export and industrial and commercial use of its biological resources,” Jessel said. “You cannot take the tiniest wing of a butterfly or the smallest bag with seeds out of the country without passing numerous controls.”

This is not the case in sub-Saharan Africa, where biodiversity-rich countries are often corroded by inefficient or non-existing civil administrations, corruption, and conflicts.

Industrialised nations will have 10 years to make their present policies in agriculture, fishery and the protection of endangered areas such as wetlands, biodiversity friendly.

Such policies, in the EU in particular, have been subject to heavy criticism for providing substantial state subsidies for farmers and fishing companies, regardless of the environmental and biodiversity damage they might cause.

The protocol of Nagoya calls for ending such subsidies.

Olaf Tschimpke, head of the Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union (NABU), says the Nagoya agreement constitutes “an ambitious plan to save biodiversity.”

“After the failure of the climate change conference of Copenhagen one year ago, we thought that the international community wouldn’t be able to reach such an agreement,” he said.

Founded in 1899, NABU is one of the oldest and largest environment associations in Germany. It encompasses more than 450,000 members and sponsors who commit themselves to the conservation of threatened habitats, and climate protection.

Tschimpke said that the new protocol “broadens the negotiation capacity of developing countries in questions of bio-piracy. Now it is clear that the international private companies benefiting from biological resources from developing countries will have to share these benefits with the countries of origin.”

Tschimpke added that he will be watching out how the EU restructures its agricultural and fishery policies. “If the EU is serious about fulfilling its commitment to the protocol of Nagoya and to stopping the loss of biodiversity, it will have to radically reform such policies – and do it soon.”

In a statement, the World Wide Fund for Nature called the Nagoya protocol “an historic achievement, ensuring that the often immense value of genetic resources is more equitably shared.”

*This story is part of a series of features on biodiversity by Inter Press Service (IPS), CGIAR/Biodiversity International, International Federation of Environmental Journalists (IFEJ), and the United Nations Environment Programme/Convention on Biological Diversity (UNEP/CBD) — all members of the Alliance of Communicators for Sustainable Development (www.complusalliance.org).

 
Republish | | Print |

Related Tags



colleen hoover point of retreat series