30 65 Swiderska with Milligan, Kohli, Shrumm, Jonas, Hiemstra and Oliva Box 4: The Nagoya Protocol The Nagoya Protocol (2010) was developed to implement the Convention on Biodiversity’s third objective on access to genetic resources and benefitsharing. Its objective is: …the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilisation of genetic resources, including by appropriate access to genetic resources… thereby contributing to the conservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use of its components. The Protocol will enter into force after 50 ratifications. See: www.cbd.int/abs The Nagoya Protocol requires parties to: • Take measures to ensure the prior informed consent (PIC) or approval and involvement of indigenous and local communities (ILCs) for access to traditional knowledge, and for access to genetic resources where they have the established right to grant access (Article 6.2). • Set out criteria and/or processes for obtaining PIC or approval and involvement of ILCs for access to genetic resources (Article 6.3f). • Endeavour to support the development by ILCs, including women, of community protocols for access to traditional knowledge and equitable benefit-sharing (Article 12.3a). • Take into consideration ILC’s customary laws, community protocols and procedures in implementing their obligations on traditional knowledge (Article 12.1). protocols for ABS by indigenous and local communities (Box 4). While these are important developments, they also have some limitations. UNDRIPs is non-binding, so although FPIC has been incorporated in a few national laws and institutions (Buxton), many countries still do not require it. However, companies in the mining, oil exploration and forestry sectors are increasingly going above the minimum standards required in national law to obtain a ‘social licence to operate’, i.e. to gain the support of local communities. In the forestry sector, respect for FPIC is seen as corporate best practice, as a means of averting and resolving conflicts with communities. Companies as varied as the US oil exploration company Talisman Oil and the Singapore-based pulp and paper giant APRIL have made public statements endorsing FPIC (Colchester, 2010). Although the Nagoya Protocol introduces new requirements to ensure the PIC of indigenous and local communities, these are significantly weakened by the clauses ‘in accordance with domestic law’ and ‘as appropriate’. In relation to genetic resources these measures are only required, ‘where they have the established right to grant access’. Thus, the impact of these provisions depends to a large extent on existing national legislation, and how the Protocol is implemented and interpreted by national governments. In Latin America and the Caribbean region, most ABS legislation requires PIC of indigenous and local communities for access to genetic resources on land owned or managed by them (Cabrera et al., 2011). But in other countries, such as India, there is no such requirement in national ABS legislation. Community protocols for ABS are also not widely recognised, although they are now included in draft ABS legislation in Malaysia (Sabah) and Namibia; and in Bhutan’s policy on ABS. There are also concerns about the ABS framework within which these rights are recognised. The overall premise of the Protocol rests on obtaining economic benefits from biodiversity and traditional knowledge. Many ILCs have raised ethical arguments as to whether a seed or knowledge that is commonly-held heritage should be accessed by private or individual interests for commercial development and protected by exclusive intellectual property rights (e.g. patents) (Ramdas). Furthermore, the scope of these laws is somewhat limited. The Nagoya Protocol only requires support for community protocols for ABS, whereas community protocols focus on many other issues. UNDRIPs, on the other hand, only applies to indigenous peoples, and does not require FPIC for non-indigenous communities. About this special issue of PLA This special issue reviews the experiences of communities in Asia, Latin America and

Select target paragraph3