Wednesday, 20th June 2007
8:30 - 8:45
Catch of the Day
- Need for a proactive legislation that is modeled on best practice examples but is flexible enough to respond to worst case scenarios.
- The MRC and the Namibian interim bioprospecting committee are workable interim measures while legislation is being put in place
- Collaborative approaches like in the Vernonia case between Vernique Ltd. and IBC Ethiopia are worthwhile.
- Need to observe impact on national legislation on ABS by different international agreements.
- Need to look at risk sharing, not just at benefit-sharing in the context of ABS
8:45 - 10:00
Demystifying ABS requirements (cont.): Reporting back
After two days of rigorous information sharing, open and group discussions, participants came together to report on the outcomes of their separate group discussions.
| |
 |  |
10:00 - 10:30
Coffee Break
10:30 - 12:00
Open discussion: Shedding light into grey areas
The purpose of the open discussion was to develop clarity on a variety of grey areas that were highlighted over the last two days through the different examples and case studies. Participants discussed about the distinction between biological resources vs. genetic resources and its implications on ABS legislation. They further discussed the complications that arise in the transition of scientific research to commercial research and the role of the certificate of origin to address these complications. The participants also spent some time analyzing the ways in which national ABS legislation can respond to the transboundary nature of resources and traditional knowledge. Participants concluded by identifying the grey areas between ABS and biotrade using the examples of legislation and cases presented in the previous day.
Participants then split up into three groups with each group discussing one of the following three issues identifying the gaps or lacunae that need to be addressed both at an international and a national level. The three issues were:
- ABS international Regime,
- Biotrade,
- National Implementation.
12:00 - 13:30
Lunch Break
13:30 - 15:00
Engaging in ABS: Interaction between those engaging in commercial research and finished products manufacturers
Open discussion
| |
 |  |
15:00 - 15:30
Coffee Break
15:30 - 16:15
Summarizing recommendations and wrapping-up:
The last part of the workshop was focussed on thinking up of creative solutions to the gaps pointed out in the morning session. The workshop had been slowly but surely moving towards bringing all the different stakeholder participants on par with the variety of issues that around ABS, biotrade and national implementation. The workshop had also been successful in highlighting concerns that were specific to particular stakeholders that the other stakeholders weren’t familiar with. This exercise was particularly useful since it foregrounded the knowledge gaps that needed to be transcended by harmonising the interests of the different players in the ABS process. These gaps were responded to with solutions that were agreeable to all stakeholders thereby constituting a clear set of widely representative recommendations both for African governments at a national level and African negotiators at an international level.
Recommendations
- ABS International Regime
- Biotrade
- National Implemetation
|
 |
16:15 - 16:45
Workshop evaluation
The evaluation revealed that the participants were satisfied with the overall group dynamic and all workshop elements such as preparation, moderation, organisation, methodology and the fieldtrip. The majority of participants improved their knowledge on ABS and biotrade and the distinctions and grey areas therein. They concluded that the workshop was extremely useful for their work. Stakeholders from the different sectors such as government, NGOs, indigenous communities and business were able to listen to and comprehend each others concerns thereby paving a way for a more collaborative and inclusive approach to ABS which in many ways was the ultimate objective of the workshop.
Below is a scale that was used by the organisers to help the participants to rate the workshop. The two smiley faces indicates ‘excellent’, the one smiley face indicates ‘good’, the impassive face indicates ‘average’ and the sad face indicates ‘poor’.
| ☺ ☺ | ☺ | :| | ☹ |
Improved my knowledge on ABS and biotrade distinctions and grey areas | 15 | 11 | 3 | / |
The WS was useful for my work | 13 | 13 | 2 | 2 |
Methodology of the WS | 4 | 24 | / | / |
Moderation of the WS | 14 | 11 | 3 | / |
Organisation of the WS, incl. preparation | 18 | 9 | 2 | / |
|
 |
