Results
Led in open discussions, the dialogue during the five workshop days was substantively goal oriented towards a common understanding of the actual and future bandwidth of what ABS is or should be. In several working groups a broad range of cases of bioprospection and biopiracy were presented by affected stakeholders as first hand information, geographically wide spread highlighting the diversity of ABS issues: from “core” ABS examples such as industrial utilization of locally preserved genetic codes to the limits of today’s cornerstones of the Bonn Guidelines, touching trade aspects of entire living species as exploitable genetic pools and possible common legal fields with other treaties such as the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources (ITPGR), Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES) and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).
The diversity of presented cases revealed and emphasized the different ethical and cultural perspectives to biological and genetic resources and associated property and use rights by different stakeholder groups – especially the differences between European influenced national legislation and traditional perspectives of local communities. Furthermore, drafted and already implemented legislations on ABS in Eastern and Southern Africa have not only been introduced to the participants – it was also discussed and assessed how far these very first examples match the needs and requirements of the different stakeholder groups.
In the course of the presentations and discussions it became obvious that many ministries, and other key stakeholders, such as indigenous and local communities, environmental NGOs as well as educational and scientific institutions, have a role to play in the successful implementation of the ABS regulations under the CBD. In order to use the specific strength and potential of the stakeholders to adequately implement the obligations under the CBD there is a continuous need at all levels for institutional strengthening, capacity-building, and further financial support.
The documentation of these cases and pieces of legislation on the workshop website (www.abs-africa.info) is a first step towards a common knowledge base on the reality of ABS on the African continent, which among others can
- be used to identify needs and options for regulations at the local, national and international level,
- stimulate cross-boarder cooperation between institutions (research, governance) and stakeholder groups,
- help to clarify terms and definitions, and
- be used to identify capacity-building and awareness raising needs for the different stakeholder groups.
Furthermore the participants of the workshop highlighted the responsibility of countries with users of genetic resources under their jurisdiction: The implementation of measures to prevent misappropriation of genetic resources and disrespect of foreign legislation is key for functioning and efficient national ABS regimes in provider countries.
It was also reiterated that the African Model Legislation for the Protection of the Rights of Local Communities, Farmers and Breeders, and for the Regulation of Access to Biological Resources (AU Model Law) does not allow for the patenting of life forms. National and international legislation should be adapted accordingly.
Finally many participants expressed deep concerns about ongoing research on and use of human genetic resources. Discussions of the international ABS regime need therefore to address human genetic resources related research, information and ABS.
