The Ninth Meeting of the Ad Hoc Open-ended Working Group on Access and Benefit-sharing of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD ABS 9) has just drawn to a close in Cali, Colombia. It’s important stuff. So what was the result? Well, it’s a little hard to say. This is from the official press release:
Participants to a United Nations meeting on genetic resources agreed to a draft protocol on access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from their use as basis for further negotiation, setting the stage for its adoption at the Nagoya Biodiversity Summit to be held in October 2010, in Japan.
But this is from the more … ahem … disinterested IISD Reporting Services:
On Sunday morning, Working Group Co-Chair Casas noted that the revised draft protocol (UNEP/CBD/WG-ABS/9/L.2) would constitute the basis for further work, but as indicated by a footnote, was not negotiated and is without prejudice to the rights of parties to make further amendments and additions to the text. The Working Group adopted the draft protocol as Annex I to the meeting report. Delegates then presented outstanding issues and text proposals, for inclusion in the report. In the afternoon, plenary discussed proposals for an intersessional process from Cali to COP 10 in Nagoya. Delegates finally agreed to suspend ABS 9 and resume it in June/July for a 7-day session which Japan committed to funding. Later, delegates made minor revisions to the report (UNEP/CBD/WG-ABS/9/L.1) and adopted it as amended. Following closing statements, Co-Chair Hodges gavelled the meeting to a close at 7:57 p.m.
Sounds like it’s all to do between now and Nagoya, not just a case of adopting the existing draft. Or do I have it wrong? This kind of thing is why I’m happy I don’t have to go to many such meetings…
Delegates visited an actual genebank that actually offers access to genetic resources; no news on their confusion levels there.
It’s worse than you report, Luigi. The Friday report from IISD notes : “the ‘historic debt’ related to lack of benefit-sharing for pre- and post-CBD accessions. Later in the evening the storm broke and discussions collapsed over accusations of bad faith, leaving many wondering whether this protocol will ever see the light of day.”
The CBD process seems to have forgotten they once asked FAO to deal with existing ex-situ collections of genetic resources. Which the FAO did, after another monumental series of meetings, and nearly everything with green leaves (I exaggerate, but not much) is now in the International Treaty.
As soon as you mention ‘historical debt’ you are into anti-colonialism and a lock-down on the movement of genetic resources. The people who first mentioned biopiracy have a lot to answer for.