/ Distr.
GENERAL
UNEP/CBD/SBI/1/2/Add.3
15 January 2016[**]
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
FIRST MEETING OF THE SUBSIDIARY
BODY ON IMPLEMENTATION
Eighth meeting
Montreal, 2 – 6 May 2016
Item 5.3 of the provisional agenda[*]
PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTING ARTICLE 8(J) AND RELATED PROVISIONS, INCLUDING THE PLAN OF ACTION ON CUSTOMARY SUSTAINABLE USE OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
Note by the Executive Secretary
INTRODUCTION
1. In order to review progress in implementation, the Conference of the Parties in decision XII/12 A, paragraph 4, invited Parties, other Governments, international organizations, indigenous and local communities and other relevant organizations to submit information on the implementation of Article 8(j) and related provisions and requested the Executive Secretary to compile and analyse information received and to make it available for consideration and, as appropriate, during the period of implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020”.
2. Additionally, in decision XII/12 B, paragraph 1, the Conference of the Parties, endorsed the global Plan of Action on Customary Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity and in paragraph 2 invited Parties, other Governments, relevant organizations, indigenous and local communities and stakeholders to implement it, taking into account diverse national circumstances including legal and policy regimes, and to report on progress to the Executive Secretary, as well as through the national reporting process.
3. Taking into account the establishment of the subsidiary body on implementation with a mandate to review progress in the implementation of the Convention, the ninth meeting of the Working Group on Article 8(j) and related provisions requested the Executive Secretary to convey the following items, which are at an implementation stage, to the Subsidiary Body on Implementation for consideration at its first meeting and at subsequent meetings, as appropriate[1]:
(a) Progress in implementing Article8(j) and related provisions, at the national level, including the participation of indigenous peoples and local communities;
(b) Implementation of the Plan of Action on Customary Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity (Article10(c))[2].
(c) Progress in mainstreaming Article8(j) and related provisions across the areas of work of the Convention, including capacity-building and participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in the work of the Secretariat;
4. Parties, other Governments, international organizations, indigenous peoples and local communities, non-governmental organizations and other relevant organizations were invited to submit views on these matters in notification SCBD/NP/VN/JS/DM/85188 (2015-132) dated 20 November 2015. Views and information received[3] are compiled and made available in UNEP/CBD/SBI/1/Inf.8jcompil[4].
5. In addition, considering that the last review of progress was carried out at the eighth meeting of the Working Group on Article 8(j), information made available for the ninth meeting of the Working Group on Article 8(j) is also made available to SBI 1, for ease of reference[5].
6. A supplementary information document, Progress report on capacity development and participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in the work of the Convention, is provided in (UNEP/CBD/SBI/I/Inf.CapDev).
7. This document UNEP/CBD/SBI/I/2/Add.3, has been prepared to assist the SBI I in consideration of these issues. Section I contains an analysis concerning the progress on implementation of Article 8(j) and related provisions at the national level, drawing on GBO 4, the 5th national reports, the revised NBSAPs[6] and submissions received. Section II contains an analysis based on information received regarding the implementation of global Plan of Action on Customary Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity. Finally, Section III contains an overview of progress in mainstreaming Article 8(j) and related provisions across the areas of work of the Convention, including capacity-building and participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in the work of the Convention. A draft recommendation on progress towards Aichi Target 18[7] for consideration of the Subsidiary Body on Implementation will be made available in UNEP/CBD/SBI/I/2.
I. PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTING ARTICLE8(J) AND RELATED PROVISIONS, AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL, INCLUDING THE PARTICIPATION OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES
8. In order to consider trends in the implementation of article8(j) and related provisions, in efforts to attain Target 18 by 2020, sub-section (i) revisits the GBO 4 chapter on Aichi Target 18[8] as a starting point, against which recent information may be compared. Sub-section (ii) considers progress in implementing Article8(j) and related provisions, at the national level and is arranged thematically. Sub-section (iii) considers progress in the participation of IPLCs at the national level in the NBSAPs related processes[9]. Sub-section (iv) provides an update on IPLCs initiatives concerning national implementation and finally, sub-section (v) draws some conclusions. This information complements the analysis of NBSAPS and national targets, and progress towards the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, including Target 18, provided in UNEP/CBD/SBI/1/2/Add.1 and UNEP/CBD/SBI/1/2/Add.2.
(i) Global Biodiversity Outlook 4 - Target 18, Indicators and the Mid-Term Review
9. GBO 4 was launched as an integral component of the mid-term review of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020, at COP 12 in October 2014. The following table, extracted from GBO 4, provides an overview of Parties efforts towards Aichi Target 18[10], at the time of the mid-term review (2014)
10. .
11. On whether the Parties to the Convention are on track to achieve Target 18 by 2020, GBO 4 notes that Target 18 is extremely complex to measure and information is variable across countries and communities and frequently is not easily accessible. To assess status and trends globally for traditional knowledge (TK) the following headline indicators[11] have therefore been agreed as proxies and these are being considered and adapted for national contexts, where appropriate: [12]
· Trends of linguistic diversity and numbers of speakers of indigenous languages;
· Trends in land-use change and land tenure in the traditional territories of indigenous and local communities;
· Trends in the practice of traditional occupations;
· Trends in which traditional knowledge and practices are respected through their full integration, safeguards and the full and effective participation of indigenous and local communities in the national implementation of the Strategic Plan.
12. In its assessment of progress towards Aichi Target 18 on traditional knowledge (TK), GBO 4 further reports that a dataset is being advanced by UNESCO to determine trends over time only for the first of these headline indicators, that on linguistic diversity. Even for linguistic diversity, however, considerable uncertainty remains, primarily due to a lack of reliable data that is geographically and chronologically comparable.
13. Advancing information and data on the indicators of traditional occupations and land change and tenure is under discussion with relevant international organizations including the International Labour Organization, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the International Land Coalition, the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, and the Working Group on Indicators of the International Indigenous Forum on Biodiversity, who are also considering these indicators under the framework of the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
14. Overall, the two primary obstacles hindering the operationalization of the first three (3) global indicators adopted for Target 18 on traditional knowledge and customary sustainable use remain lack of reliable disaggregated data that is geographically and chronologically comparable coupled with a lack of financial and human resources to possible lead Agencies. The fourth indicator on participation is being considered in the analysis of the fifth and future national reports and is taken up in the sub-section III, below.
15. To complement the assessment of GBO-4 on progress towards the achievement of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, a report titled Outlooks on Biodiversity: Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities’ contributions to the implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020. A complement to the fourth edition of the Global Biodiversity Outlook is being prepared under the lead of the Forest Peoples Programme. The report will consider the contributions of IPLCs towards each of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets as well as analysing how progress towards their achievement affects IPLCs. A draft of the report will be made available as an information document.
(ii) Progress in implementing Article8(j) and related provisions, at the national level
16. This sub-section provides an overview of efforts by Parties concerning progress towards Aichi Target 18, based on information received and is arranged thematically. Based on recent submissions[13], and submissions to the ninth meeting of the Working Group on Article 8(j)[14], eighteen countries have provided information on progress towards Target 18.
17. Of all the submissions received, of particular note is the submission from Benin. Benin’s submission provides an insight into traditional knowledge within the national context but the lessons learned may be applicable for the broader African region and many developing countries. Benin reports a richness of traditional knowledge associated with the biological resources, especially the medicinal TK, of the country supported by high levels of biological and cultural diversity. Benin also reports that the majority of the national population relies upon traditional knowledge and traditional medicines for primary health care. Benin provides an interesting example concerning the official recognition of traditional healers and traditional medicines and pharmacies, which also provides for multiple benefits for the national community. At the same time, factors working against TK retention include the rapid urbanization and modernity of society and the indifference of the younger generation towards traditions, cultural practices or local knowledge, and a lack of any formal projects to record TK, which is fast being lost. Additionally Benin reports that the lack of legal protection of TK is further undermining TK and calls for the development of a legal framework to improve confidence between TK holders and researchers and also to empower TK holders and to value their knowledge. The same may be true for many developing Parties.
Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS)
21. In relation to the issue of access and benefit sharing, at the national level, some countries, such as Australia, are encouraging ABS measures through such mechanisms as joint participatory research and development of products based on traditional knowledge, in efforts to explore, encourage and promote its use. ABS measures generally include that access to TK is based on prior informed consent of the TK owners or holders and that the use of TK is based on mutually agreed terms and equitable sharing of benefits. A number of countries, for example Suriname, have also included references to access and benefit sharing in their commitments related to Aichi Biodiversity Target 18
Prior Informed Consent/Approval and Involvement
21. Some Parties such as Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Finland, and India require prior informed consent (PIC) of the relevant IPLCs for access to TK as well as, more generally for the registration of TK and for related project planning and implementation.
22. In some countries such as Australia, Canada and Sweden, this includes the development of ‘two-way’ (Indigenous and western scientific) approaches to land, water and sea management, protected areas management and the exchange of ideas and practices, and through improved engagement with science on relevant topics including indigenous livelihoods, monitoring and evaluation. Parties pursuing initiatives to bring knowledge systems together (such as science and TK) are discovering traditional knowledge and sciences can be complimentary and mutually beneficial to scientists and communities so long as there is recognition of the particular strengths and limitations of both types of knowledge[15]. Developing effective strategies that bring together Governments, the national community and IPLCs and different pools of knowledge in order to meet the conservation goals of the CBD’s strategic plan (2011-2020) requires mutual learning from multiple knowledge systems, more effective communication across sectors and among academic disciplines, deeper analysis of what is working at the community level and identification of where there are gaps in expertise and application”.[16]
23. The Norwegian Government and the Sami Parliament have an agreement on procedures intended to contribute to the practical implementation of the State’s obligations to consult indigenous peoples under international law, whenever consideration is being given to legislative and administrative measures that may directly affect Sami interests. The procedures aim to facilitate the development of partnerships between State authorities and the Sami Parliament that contributes to the strengthening of Sami culture and society. Related to this, the Swedish Sami Parliament in its submission, stresses that one of the most important aspect for accessing traditional knowledge is FPIC (free prior informed consent).
24. Canada, in its submission, uses case studies to explain approval and involvement processes, in action. In the Canadian context, Governments work with indigenous communities to build enduring relationships of mutual benefit, over time. Some of the examples provided include: Co-Management Committees under the Inuit Impact and Benefit Agreement for National Wildlife Areas and Migratory Bird Sanctuaries, Wildlife Management Boards, such as for the Polar Bear Harvest, and Management of the Porcupine Caribou Herd and Parks Canada.
25. The concept of consent or approval for access and use of traditional knowledge is well accepted by the Parties to the Convention[17]. The ninth meeting of the Working Group on Article 8(j) and related provisions has advanced draft guidelines for access and benefit sharing of traditional knowledge, which include [free] prior informed consent [or approval and involvement], that will be considered for possible adoption at the thirteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
Sui Generis Systems of protection for TK
26. In the most recent submissions, Peru has provided information on national sui generis systems and practices in protecting traditional knowledge, which contribute to better conditions for negotiating equitable sharing of benefits arising from access and use of traditional knowledge, as well for monitoring of the misappropriation of traditional knowledge. Peru continues to make progress on the registration of traditional knowledge through an in-situ registration process, which constitutes in itself a sui generis system for the protection of traditional knowledge. The Working Group on Article 8(j) at its fourth meeting, considered under the agenda item on sui generis systems, Parties which have adopted sui generis arrangements for TK. Document UNEP/CBD/WG8J/4, Annex I, provides a list of Parties with sui generis arrangements for traditional knowledge[18].