INDIA’s UPPER CHAMBER PASSES BIODIVERSITY BILL
After two years since its introduction, the Indian Biological Diversity Bill 2000 was finally passed by the Upper Chamber of the Indian Parliament. The Bill, which constitutes the first such legislation in any of the 12 megadiverse countries, aims to prevent biopiracy and protect biodiversity and local farmers by regulating access to plant and animal genetic resources and the sharing of benefits derived from their use. The legislation sets up a National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) whose approval will be required when applying for intellectual property rights outside the country on an invention based on a biological resource from India or on its traditional knowledge. When granting its approval, the NBA can impose benefit sharing conditions. These could include fees or royalties, joint ownership, transfer of technology or a venture capital fund for benefit claimers, or the payment of monetary or other compensation. The Bill still has to be passed by the Lower Chamber.
Several environmental groups have voiced their discontent with the legislation. Suman Sahai of Gene Campaign described it as a "confused effort to put in elements which have been part of the debate. There are many elements, which are at odds with each other and with existing legislation". Vandana Shiva of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology noted that the Bill meant that "the Indian governments is legalising biopiracy", referring to a clause which would waive the rules restricting access for collaborative research projects provided the Federal government approved the projects.
The legalisation is available at http://envfor.nic.in/.
"Rajya Sabha okays biodiversity bill," TIMES NEWS NETWORK, 12 December 2002; "Indian greens flay bill for plant protection," ONE WORLD SOUTH ASIA, 9 December 2002.
ALIEN SPECIES THREATEN SOUTHERN AFRICAN BIODIVERSITY
The indigenous biodiversity of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) is increasingly under threat from alien invasive species, a recent report by the Southern Africa Biodiversity Support Program (SABSP) concluded. The report points out that thousands of hectares of the region’s land and water have already been contaminated by thousands of alien plant species. The report furthermore notes that while Southern Africa represents and important region of the "remaining mega-fauna of the world," it has yet to create a biodiversity protocol. While sectoral protocols include biodiversity, the report believes there is a need for a single cross-sectoral biodiversity protocol. As Zambia’s Minister of Tourism, Environment and Natural Resources Marina Nsingo noted, "if the (international Convention on Biological Diversity) is to have any practical impact, it needs to be implemented by members states." To do so, Nsingo has pushed for the creation of national, enforceable laws based on the Convention. Dr. Marian Fuller, a biodiversity expert, believes that following 10 years of action by the SADC to battle alien species, Southern Africa must now connect regional biodiversity to the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD).
"Invaders Move on Africa’s Biodiversity Gems," ENS, 17 December 2002.
BRAZILIAN AG MINISTER SPEAKS OUT IN FAVOUR OF GMOS
The new Brazilian Agriculture Minister Roberto Rodrigues, who heads the Brazilian Association of Agribusiness, spoke out in favour of legalising genetically modified (GM) crops. "We need to give Brazilian farmers the chance to use GM crops, as long as there is absolute control, labelling and scientific assurances that there is no impact on public health and the environment," he said in an interview on Monday. His statement contrasts with the opposition of many members in Brazil’s ruling party to GM crops. Rodrigues acknowledged, however, that this was a controversial issue and that reforms would only be adopted gradually and with scientific foundation. He also stated that Brazil would need to import corn next year from transgenic growers, such as the US and Argentina, to feed its livestock, stressing that any such import would only occur under "strict scientific controls". Brazil is the only major agricultural exporting country that does not use GM technology (see BRIDGE Trade BioRes, 21 February 2002; /biores/02-02-21/story3.htm). Government approval on the commercial release of GMOs has been put on hold following a number of injunctions issued by Brazil’s Federal Court. Illegal planting of GM crops, however, is thought to be widespread, in particular in the South of the country.
"Brazil’s farms chief backs GM crops," REUTERS, 16 December 2002.
NEW ZEALAND RELEASES NEW ANTI-PEST BIOSECURITY PLAN
Following two years of consultation and study, New Zealand’s Biosecurity Council released its draft Biosecurity Strategy, which will now receive public comments and go through a final round of consultations to be closed on 28 February 2003. The government plans to finalise the Strategy by June 2003. The director of the MAF Biosecurity Authority, Barry O’Neill stressed the urgency of addressing potential threats from diseases and pests introduced through sources such as travel and trade. "The serious animal diseases that have swept through other countries have so far been kept out of New Zealand. This is largely due to our geographical isolation and our well developed biosecurity systems for helping to ensure people and freight entering our country are not carrying exotic pests or diseases." The draft Strategy acknowledges the need for a precautionary approach, stating, "Wherever there is uncertainty, with a risk of damaging impacts, conservative decisions based on mainstream scientific views should be made. A precautionary approach also needs to recognize most negative decisions also carry risks and consequences." While The Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society, New Zealand’s largest national conservation organisation, welcomed the release of the draft, critics charged that the plan was too simple in its approach to protecting New Zealand’s increasingly threatened biological systems.
The draft is available at http://www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/.
"New Zealand Drafts Biosecurity Plan Against Pests," ENS, 16 December 2002.
FREE TRADE CAN BE GOOD FOR ENVIRONMENT, CEC REPORT CONCLUDES
On average, free trade has been both good and bad for the environment in Mexico, Canada and the US under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), concludes a report by the Commission on Environmental Cooperation (CEC), the environmental watchdog established under NAFTA. The report entitled " Free Trade and the Environment: The Picture becomes clearer" highlights a strong link between free trade and environmental improvements by pointing out advances in technology and management practices, which have led to positive environmental changes. Furthermore, the report states that there has been no evidence for a "race to the bottom" as business has not relocated to areas with the least environmentally friendly regulation. However, on the negative side the report points out that air pollution has increased with the implementation of NAFTA, especially around border communities, due to the increased volume of goods transportation by road. In addition, a fourfold increase of hazardous waste from the US has been observed in Canada due to Canada’s less strict environmental regulations. The report concludes that trade liberalisation can advance and support sustainable development, but only if supported by solid environmental policies. Some observers have speculated that the report tries to put pressure on the US and Mexico to ratify the Kyoto Protocol by paying particular attention to air pollution and calling for immediate action to tackle harmful greenhouse gases.
"Free Trade Good and Bad For Environment," TerraViva, 20 December 2002.