| Back |
| The unmaking of a treaty |
A convention whose formulation brought together developing countries as a unified bloc now faces the unfortunate proposition of disjointed Southern representation. by S Faizi
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has been one of the hard negotiated international treaties as the negotiators from the South displayed unusual unity and negotiation skills. Negotiated amidst the global political ambience of the emerging unipolar world order and the unopposed Western war on Iraq; the result was a fairly balanced treaty that accommodates the legitimate interests of both the South and North. Formulated in 1992 at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, this was touted as a comprehensive strategy for ‘sustainable development’. The Convention establishes three main goals: the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from the use of genetic resources.
But perhaps that is all that could be said of the Convention. More than a decade after its entry into force, its achievements remain volumes of repetitive documents, endless surrealistically named committees and fissiparous meetings. While the CBD process indulged in its own virtual world, in the real world biopiracy remained unabated. The proceedings of the recently held seventh meeting of the Conference of Parties (CoP) do not leave room for much hope either. The Kuala Lumpur meeting (February 2004), in fact, marked another retrogressive step in terms of enforcement. The Convention unequivocally recognises national sovereign rights over biodiversity, requires prior, informed consent for access to biodiversity and stresses that such access should be based on naturally agreed terms. CBD also stipulates that any commercial benefit derived out of the use of biodiversity should be equitably shared with the providing country, effectively making biopiracy an international offence, and setting the fundamental legal framework for providing access to biodiversity and benefit sharing.
However, these hard negotiated provisions of the Convention were ingeniously undermined by the North, skilfully sidestepped by the Convention Secretariat, and blissfully ignored by the parties from the South. As a result species after species have been misappropriated from the biorich South, worked on and patented, all of it in violation of the treaty.
The centrepiece of the Kuala Lumpur meet was the decision to develop an ‘international regime’ for access to biodiversity and benefit sharing. Such a decision was the culmination of a lengthy process initiated at the third CoP. While the basis for access and benefit sharing has been clearly laid out in the convention and it unconditionally requires the parties to take ‘legislative, administration or policy measures’ to facilitate benefit sharing with the providing countries (Article 15.7), this new exercise would only help the developed countries to circumvent the legally binding requirements for benefit- sharing as provided in the convention, apart from providing an excuse for continued inaction on this count.
Article 15.7 reads: Each Contracting Party shall take legislative, administrative or policy measures, as appropriate, and in accordance with Articles 16 and 19 and, where necessary, through the financial mechanism established by Articles 20 and 21 with the aim of sharing in a fair and equitable way the results of research and development and the benefits arising from the commercial and other utilization of genetic resources with the Contracting Party providing such resources. Such sharing shall be upon mutually agreed terms.
Developing countries have, in fact, been tricked into asking for an international regime, while they should actually have been asking the CoP to review the implementation (or lack of it) of the relevant articles on access and benefit sharing, especially Article 15.7. By agreeing to negotiate the international regime, developed countries hope to re-open issues that have already been settled in the convention. For instance, they already object to calling the proposed regime a ‘legally binding’ one, while indeed the Convention has provided legally binding provisions for Access and Benefit-sharing (ABS).
United South There has been a drastic weakening of the negotiating position of the developing countries, which is disappointing considering the unusual strength maintained by them in the CBD formulation negotiations. In retrospect, it was this strength that enabled the developing countries to totally reject the IUCN (The World Conservation Union)–drafted articles and underlying notions that states are simply ‘guardians or custodians’ of biodiversity (and not owners); payment of a levy to a proposed international fund for biodiversity use within their territory; placing the principal emphasis on ‘access’ to biodiversity, and so on. In its clamouring for a convention on biodiversity in the late 80s, the key objective of the United States was to legalise free and open access to the biodiversity of the Southern countries before they could institute protective measures. It was indeed a remarkable achievement of the Southern negotiators that they were able to discard the IUCN draft articles and the notions contained therein that formed the broad Western negotiation position. It was the united and resourceful negotiations by the South that gave birth to a balanced CBD, eliminating the prospect of a treaty for subjugating the most important resource of the South. (It is this North-South balance of CBD that prompted the US, the original initiator of the convention proposal, to stay away from the treaty).
But such unity and efficiency have withered since the treaty has come into force. Developing countries have since remained largely reactive and at best defensive. At Kuala Lumpur, the G-77 arrangement was ineffective, due in part to the late decision on its chair. The half-minded partners did not have any significant technical support and the regional group meetings of Asia and Africa were largely composed of monologues.
The conference adopted new programmes of work on protected areas, mountain biodiversity and technology transfer. The protected areas programme is a means to achieve the 2010 target of significantly reducing the loss of biodiversity, set by the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) in Johannesburg, South Africa. Although the role of indigenous and local communities is factored in, there was no departure from the exclusionary doctrine of protected areas. While the pro-gramme on technology transfer seeks to promote ways to enable the transfer of appropriate technologies to developing countries, the debate on the subject did not address the issue of how the parties have complied with the obligation under the convention to ‘take legislative, administrative or policy measures’ to transfer technology including those protected by intellectual property rights, on mutually agreed terms, and to take exactly similar measures to facilitate such technology transfers from the private sector (Article 16.4). This is another instance of compromising on the convention’s legally binding provisions. The conference adopted guidelines for the sustainable use of biodiversity, biodiversity-related tourism and environmental impact assessment of development projects on the territories of indigenous peoples.
The West has never been comfortable with the CBD’s recognition of national sovereign rights over biodiversity. In a panel discussion organised by the United Nations University and CBD Secretariat on the sidelines of the CoP, one was surprised to hear Vincent Sanchez, the former Chilean Ambassador who had fairly effectively chaired the negotiation to formulate the convention, expressing discomfort with the sovereignty provision. Supporting the expected argument of an American delegate on the subject, he observed that the sovereignty issue had ‘suddenly cropped up’ in the negotiations. One wonders as to when was it that the resources, and for that matter anything else, within the territory of a nation were regarded as a global resource, that is, in a post- colonial world.
At least for some, the global resource argument has been the result of confusing biodiversity with the subject of a prolonged debate within the FAO parlance wherein the subject was ‘genetic resources appropriated from the South and held in the seed/gene banks in the North’. Within the FAO fora, the South took the lenient position of regarding these translocated genetic resources as a global resource, while the North opposed access for the South to these resources. And these resources remain untouchable to CBD too by having denied retrospective effect to CBD Article 15.3 which states:
It was indeed a remarkable achievement of the Southern negotiators that they were able to discard the IUCN draft articles and the notions contained therein that formed the broad Western negotiation position.
For the purpose of this Convention, the genetic resources being provided by a Contracting Party, as referred to in this Article and Articles 16 and 19, are only those that are provided by Contracting Parties that are countries of origin of such resources or by the Parties that have acquired the genetic resources in accordance with this Convention.
However, the Nairobi Final Act that adopted the final text of CBD had regarded the issue of access to pre-CBD ex situ collections as an outstanding matter and hence called on the FAO system to address this issue (Resolution 3). But the subject of CBD’s sovereignty provision is the opposite and simple: a country’s own biodiversity within its territory.
The indigenous communities have come a long way in playing a significant role in the CBD process. They have turned out in fairly good numbers and were reasonably well organised. However, one was disappointed to see a small segment of indigenous groups being influenced by fund-wielding Western agencies in shaping their positions. India has the largest population of indigenous people (whom the minority ruling castes refuse to recognise as indigenous) yet there was none to represent them at the CoP. Several affluent Western NGOs are listed as collaborators in implementing the protected areas programme. This is obviously an arbitrary listing and may set an unpleasant precedent. In actual fact, these NGOs, though they operate on the international scale on the strength of their funds, do not have an open membership, democratic election of leadership or adequate representation of citizens from the South in their governance structures. One fervently hopes that such arbitrary recognition of NGOs will not set a precedent.
Emil Salim who chaired the UN preparatory meeting for the Johannesburg Summit asked his colleagues on the podium, in desperation, at the adjournment of an inconclusive session during the critical final meeting of the committee, “What shall we do with the US?” (Salim had forgotten to switch his microphone off and the next day NGO representatives appeared at the meeting venue wearing T-shirts with the quote printed). How could CBD achieve the 2010 target of substantially reducing the loss of biodiversity without bringing the country with the largest number of endangered reptilian, amphibian and fish species in the world into its ambit? Nobody has raised the issue of bringing the United States to accede to the convention, not even the Ministerial Declaration which has called on all countries to accede to the Biosafety Protocol. It may not be entirely true that delegates were happy not having the intimidating voice of the US in the negotiation halls. The United States can be brought into the fold of the treaty only if a forthcoming CoP decides not to provide access to biodiversity for non-parties.
The CBD represents a fair international legal mechanism available for the sustainable
management of biodiversity, but its implementation would depend on the strength
that a unified South could gather in the future negotiations.
| Habitat Debate - A new era of cooperation with local authorities |
This is to inform you that the electronic version of UN-HABITAT's Periodical Habitat Debate about a new era of cooperation with local authorities is now online at:
http://www.unhabitat.org/hd/hdv10n1/default.asp
Published on May 5, 2004
Natural Resources and Environment Ministry secretary-general Plodprasop Suraswadi yesterday threatened to sue a committee of the nation’s intelligence agency and media outlets that reported he had broken the law by approving tiger exports.
The legal action will consist of filing defamation suits against the National Intelligence Agency’s (NIA) subcommittee and all media that reported he had committed an offence by approving the 2002 export of 100 tigers to China for commercial use, Plodprasop said.
Plodprasop said he would also file suits against all media that covered the NIA’s subcommittee ruling. He said the subcommittee did not have the power to rule on his guilt, adding that even if it had made a ruling, the subcommittee had violated his rights by informing the press.
“The subcommittee is only empowered to provide conclusions to its findings and cannot hand down a ruling about any offences,’’ he claimed.
According to Plodprasop, the media reported the news without double checking the documents circulated to ensure their authority or authenticity.
“If my lawyers prove that the documents are false, they will file suit against every media outlet concerned,’’ he said.
NIA chief Pol LtGeneral Jumpol Manmai, who chairs the subcommittee probing the shipments of tigers, said he had received the findings of the subcommittee, but the NIA had yet to reach any conclusions.
He said that the subcommittee had no right to rule on whether the officials involved had committed an offence.
“I will ask the government to extend the time period of the investigation as the subcommittee needs to check into the legal aspects of the shipments,” Jumpol said.
Plodprasop, who was Forestry Department director general in 2002, said the Endangered Species Act (1992), Section 26, stipulated that it was legitimate to export wildlife to public zoos for the purposes of surveying, research, conservation and breeding.
The NIA’s panel’s conclusion stated that Sri Racha Tiger Zoo Co Ltd had failed to prove that the zoo had exported tigers for breeding purposes without commercial gain.
Sirinart Sirisuthorn, Hassaya Chartmontree
The Nation
The Dept. of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India, New Delhi has organized "Vigyan Rail - Science exhibition on Wheels' Vigyan Rail goes around the country and stops at major Railway stations for some days for public viewing. The train has been flagged off by Hon. Prime Minister of India on 15th December 2003, as per the itinerary, the Vigyan Rail will arrive in Bangalore on 10-5-2004.
Karnataka Rajya Vijnana Parishat is coordinating the Bangalore (10-18 May 2004) and Hubli (18-21 May 2004) Visits of Vigyan Rail, Vigyan Rail is halting at Bangalore Cantonment Railway Station for a period of 8 days during 10-18 May 2004 and after it is proceeding to Hubli. The exhibition will be during 08.00 - 20.00 hrs on these days and is open for public.
The Karnataka Rajya Vijnana Parishat invites you to visit the Science exhibition on Wheels.
"Novel Approaches of Integrative Science for the Future"
Ecology and Society invites our 10,000+ subscribers and all other readers to participate in a manuscript competition that exploits novel ways of performing integrative science and policy research. The annual 'Ralf Yorque Memorial Prize' of 5,000 Euro will be awarded to the most novel paper that:
1) integrates different streams of science to assess fundamental questions in the ecological, political, and social foundations for sustainable social-ecological systems, and
2) employs unique advantages of electronic publishing and facilities of the WEB to help communicate complex ideas simply. The contributions of the winner and others that pass the normal peer-review process will be published in E&S. We want to see your novel ideas of scientific endeavors for the future. Simply indicate if the paper submitted is intended for the Ralf Yorque Competition and state in a cover letter why you think the manuscript is eligible for the competition (e.g. what is novel about the submission, and how is the web being used?).
E&S wants help from researchers and practitioners who would like to push the limits of how scholarly research is communicated and is conducted. We have had some successful contributions, but not enough.
However, we also experience that interdisciplinary science is often promoted in words and not in practice. Young scholars derive many incentives to specialize in certain disciplines, and experience few incentives to be creative in combining insights from various scientific disciplines and performing science in nontraditional ways. We ask our readers to be part of an effort to stimulate novelty and creativity of new ways of performing science.
Manuscript submissions, while exploring new ways of science should include a balance of novelty and content. Each submission will be peer-reviewed for content and assessed by a panel of judges for novelty.
In order to participate in this competition you must subscribe to Ecology and Society. Subscriptions can be obtained free of charge at http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/subscribe/ and include bi-annual e-mail notification of the current Issue-in-Progress table of contents and notices of competitions like this one.
| http://www.delhibird.org/ MAY 2004 |
Summer is upon us and April was a good month for birds, with passage migrants like Rosy Pastors, Blyth's Reed Warbler, Sulphur-bellied, Greenish, Syke's and Western Crowned warblers going through the north of India. Summer visitors like Blue-tailed Bee-eaters, Spot-winged Starling, Drongo Cuckoos and Rosy Minivets were also reported.
Our Mystery bird section attracted only 56 attempts while 393 visited the page. Most thought it to be a Black-hooded Oriole. Several people identified it correctly as a Long-tailed Shrike, though only 5 persons got the sub-species tricolor correct. We had to resort to the "draw" again and the winner this time is Arka Sarkar. Congratulations Arka and if you contact me for the prizw. I again invite more of you to attempt identifying the Mystery Bird. It is good fun even if you do not get it right.
More checklists are up and many more will be added in the forthcoming months. delhibird now has the largest number of Indian checklists on the web and this section has become very popular.
Our Bird of the Month on "Owls" (in three parts) was a great hit and delhibird would like to thank all those who wrote in to congratulate us. Part II is now up and we will be delighted to hear from you your reactions. This helps in improving the site.
Have a great May and do not stay indoors. Lots of birds around at the moment and a good time to see some rare visitors.
4th Australian Stream Management Conference, Tasmania.
The 4th Australian Stream Management Conference Committee invites papers for the upcoming Australian Stream Management Conference being held in Launceston, Tasmania, from 19-22 October 2004.
The Committee welcomes papers from a diverse group of participants, including researchers, state agencies, local government bodies, land managers and community members, and is seeking both oral and poster presentations which reflect the conference themes.
The Stream Management Conference, "Linking Rivers to Landscapes", will cover the following themes:
1. Landscape processes that affect rivers.
2. Identifying and managing values associated with river landscapes.
3. Education and change - putting ideas into practice.
4. River management - grass roots level.
The due date for abstracts if Friday 28 May, 2004, and the registration deadline is Friday 27 August.
Further details can be found at www.cdesign.com.au/stream
TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ WEDNESDAY, MAY 01, 2002
12:47:30 AM ]
Ever since clubbing developed from an underground movement to a mainstream activity
influencing preferences, styles and attitudes, trance music has emerged as the
unifier of this culture. Rapping, scatting, looping and even rubbing — trance
musicians do it all. For those of you who're a little confused, that's DJ lingo
and in Mumbai currently is one of the world's top trance acts — Infected Mushroom.
DJs Erez Aizen and Amit Duvdevani make up this musical twosome. They're here
for a few days and performed at Fire 'n' Ice last night.
"This is my second time in India and I adore it," says Amit. Even though his
name may suggest so, he is not Indian, but Israeli. He has been in the music
biz for 7 years and has already released four albums with Erez. "When we started
the group, Erez was 16 and I was 21," says Amit. Erez, surprisingly, has a classical
music background and learned how to play the organ at the age of 4. Says Erez,
"I started toying around with music and computers by the time I was 11. I called
the music I made 'impulse music'; I had no idea it was fast trance."
Both jockeys are not alien to Indian music. "I love listening to the tablas
and to music by Zakir Hussain — it's very soulful and deep," says Amit. One
of the questions that the duo is often asked is why they've chosen the name
'Infected Mushroom'. "It's not an original name — there was another group in
Israel that came up with some good sounds under this name but then they stopped,
so we adopted it. It fitted our kind of psychedelic sounds."
They've both been touring the world, sort of living out of a suitcase for a
whole year now and they still can't decide on a favourite place. "But India's
one place I'll come back to whether I have to play here or not."
The Hindu Thursday, Mar 25, 2004
MILKY MUSHROOM has a fruit body similar to button mushroom.
The sporophores are robust, attractive and milky white in colour. These mushrooms
grow well at a temperature range of 25-35{+o}C.
The production of milky mushroom depends on a top dressing after the mushroom
substrate has been fully colonised with mushroom mycelium. The dressing, popularly
known as casing, is done to provide a reservoir of water for the developing
mushroom, support bacterial growth and to change the rate of gaseous exchange
which is considered important for fruit body initiation.
The main bed for mushroom culture was prepared using vermifertilizer using leaf
litter and other degradable organic wastes. About three parts of wet vermifertilizer
were mixed with one part of sterilized straw. This was used for layering (about
3 cm) in polythene bags. Mushroom seeds were then spread on the peripheral regions
of the bag.
Three such layers were formed in one bag and the bag was tied. The beds were
incubated in the spawn running from 25 to 30{+o}C. Fresh casts of the earthworm
Eudrilus eugeniae reared in leaf litter and cow dung (1:1) medium and clay soil
in the ratio 1:1 w/w was used as casing material after sterilisation with 0.2
per cent formaldehyde solution for eight hours in closed containers and later
opened to remove fumes.
Utilisation of earthworm casts as casing material helps in checking water loss
by evaporation and the water holding capacity of the casts contributes to the
increased number of pin heads per bed thus increasing the yield.
The Hindu Thursday, Feb 05, 2004
QUESTION:Where can we get training in mushroom
cultivation?
ANSWER: You may kindly get in touch with Dr K.Unnikrishnan,
Director, Integrated Rural Technology Centre (IRTC), Mundur, Palakkad 678 592,
Kerala.