Towards a world conservation ethics - Brief Article

M. S. Swaminathan [*]

The Rio convention marked the first major international step towards the sharing of biodiversity based on the principle of social fairness

It has become commonplace to say that the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted during the Rio Summit in June 1992 is an important landmark in integrating the principles of ethics and equity in the use of biodiversity. To stem the increasingly rapid decline of biodiversity, it was necessary to take action, and quickly, without waiting for the scientific community to gather further knowledge. First and foremost, the CBD was an acknowledgment of this urgent need.

It entered into force in December 1993 and so far has been ratified by 177 States--but not by the United States. This agreement, the only one of its kind, sets up a framework for worldwide action aimed at ensuring the conservation, the sustainable use and--a noteworthy development--the fair sharing of biodiversity's benefits. More specifically, the CBD focuses on the definition and the financing of conservation policies, access to genetic resources, North-South technology transfers stemming from the use of those resources, and trade in genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In particular, it acknowledges that poor countries cannot meet their commitments to preserve biodiversity unless the developed nations provide them with access to biotechnologies and the related financing. Biodiversity will unavoidably be depleted through overuse if the current co-existence of unsustainable lifestyles and unacceptable poverty continues, and if the means of subsistence of families putting strains on resources are not stren gthened.

The CBD has first and foremost been an effective awareness-raising tool. Political leaders, the media and the general public now know that taking from nature without restraint jeopardizes humanity's security. Many states have changed their national laws to create or strengthen mechanisms to manage biodiversity. The convention has also lent support to the idea that preserving species with their natural habitats and enlisting the local people's support in managing them are vital priorities.

The convention has also prompted over 130 States to adopt a protocol last January 29, 2000 in Montreal (Canada) on biosafety in order to regulate international trade in GMOs. The negotiations led to a stand-off between the European Union and the "Miami Group", consisting of the leading GMO producing countries led by the United States, Argentina and Canada. According to the text eventually adopted, countries may oppose GMO imports deemed hazardous for the environment or health by invoking the principle of precaution--in other words, without necessarily having irrefutable scientific proof that they are dangerous. However, the issue of whether the protocol overrides the rules of the World Trade Organization (the WTO, which so far has not recognized the principle of precaution) remains to be settled. Only a specific dispute brought before the WTO will show whether the protocol has any teeth.

The CBD has certainly enabled progress, but the funding of conservation projects is far from guaranteed. Development aid has been steadily declining since 1992. The Global Environment Facility in charge of, among other things, managing international financing for biodiversity, has received and distributed about $2 billion in 10 years.

Protecting traditional knowledge

Lastly and, most importantly, scant political effort has been focused on guaranteeing a fair share of biodiversity's benefits. Many developing countries continue to denounce what they call "biopiracy" by the governments and companies of the North, which collect their biological resources for commercial purposes. There is an urgent need to take steps that would acknowledge and compensate the inestimable contribution of indigenous rural families to the conservation and improvement of the planet's genetic resources.

That task requires changing intellectual property rules. They are currently being revised in the framework of the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) agreement, which regulates biotechnology patents and new varieties of crops. The system in force, based on individually-owned private property, is unsuitable for protecting indigenous people's collective traditional knowledge. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), which has launched a study on the need to recognize their rights, is likely to help identify alternative solutions. Next, the international community must carry out a crucial task: drafting and adopting a protocol on agrobiodiversity that would protect traditional knowledge and farmers' rights over plant genomes.

(*.) Holder of the UNESCO-Cousteau chair in Ecotechnology, chairman of the M. S. Swaminathan Research Foundation (Chennai, India), author of I Predict: A Century of Hope-Harmony with Nature and Freedom from Hunger, East West Books Pvt. Ltd, Chennai, 1999.

COPYRIGHT 2000 UNESCO
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group