Alejandro Lago was the manager of the UNDP-GEF Global ABS Project. The Global ABS Project was a three-year project that assisted 24 countries in the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol by strengthening human resources, legal frameworks, and institutional capacities at the national level. The project was directly implemented by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) with funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF). It started in 2017 and ended in June 2021.
The Project showed me that we need to promote and fully integrate all Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS) mechanisms and claim ABS’s role as a tool for economic development, human rights, science, social progress, biotechnology, and research. At the end of the day, ABS provides opportunities for all.
Why did the Global ABS Project start and what was its main goal?
The fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources is one of the three pillars of the Convention on Biological Diversity and its implementation is the primary purpose of the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS).
Genetic resources are inextricably linked to sustainable development. They are essential for the development of agriculture, food and beverage, and biotechnological and pharmaceutical products. These products support poverty alleviation, food security, human well-being, and underpin the Earth’s life support systems. Since its adoption in 2010, the Nagoya Protocol promotes access to these genetic resources, provided they are used sustainably and in a fair and equitable way for both users and providers. It recognizes the potential of genetic resources as drivers of sustainable development and innovation through science and biotechnology, and it sets forth the key human rights of indigenous peoples and local communities (IPLCs) with respect to their genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge.
But advancing the effective implementation of the Nagoya Protocol faces several challenges in many countries. Among them, the lack of clear ABS national legal frameworks and procedures; reduced involvement of key right holders and stakeholders; limited knowledge of IPLCs concerning their rights over their traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources and the instruments to articulate and protect them; and limited involvement and compliance with the ABS principle by companies using genetic resources.
The Project was designed to tackle these challenges by strengthening legal, policy and institutional capacities; building trust between users and providers; strengthening capacities of IPLCs and implementing an online community of practice (the Global ABS Community).
The main goal was to push the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol in as many countries as possible. The idea was to set aside some funds at the GEF to promote the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol in a larger number of countries. In this case, around 5-6 countries per region, and in total we worked in 24 countries. As the Protocol entered into force in 2014, the ABS Project was approved in 2015 at the GEF council and from that date we started with all the preparations until we initiated the implementation of the Project in 2017.
The UNDP released two publications: "ABS is Genetic Resources for Sustainable Development" and "Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing. Theory to Practice under the Nagoya Protocol." Can you tell me a bit more about these publications and the types of information they contain?
“Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing. Theory to Practice under the Nagoya Protocol” is a publication that displays the outcomes of ABS implementation efforts undertaken by 24 countries and supported by the UNDP-GEF Global ABS Project and national ABS projects, from six regions: Africa, the Arab States, Asia, Central & Eastern Europe, Latin America & the Caribbean and the Pacific Islands. It was launched in June 2021.
It follows the first publication on the same theme in 2018, titled "ABS is Genetic Resources for Sustainable Development." This publication highlights how 27 countries from Africa, Arab States, Asia, Central and Eastern Europe, Central America and The Caribbean, and Pacific Islands are “investing in biodiversity for people and planet”.
Assisted by the UNDP GEF Global ABS Project, these countries in both publications have articulated in writing very impressive cases of how they are exploring and harnessing the research, commercial and socio-economic benefits of genetic resources and traditional knowledge in compliance to the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol.
Both publications underscore the importance of genetic resources for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, not only as catalyzers of processes for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, but also as drivers for recovery during post-pandemic times.
In your experience what are some of the key challenges in the implementation of the Protocol?
In the context of the Global ABS Project, the key challenge was to push for the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol and to position ABS at the national level.
The main outcome of the project was the national implementation of the Protocol, which requires legal frameworks, institutional capacities, and public awareness to be successful. You need all the different players that are going to be part of the process, and that includes researchers, public administration bodies dealing with intellectual property, science, and the environment, but other departments that may often not be directly related such as health, so they need to be incorporated and aware of this tool. That’s why public awareness is a key component to build trust between the providers and users of genetic resources. Distrust is one of the key problems or challenges between the different players, such as IPLCs and the public administration or the legislations that are in place, for example. Sometimes this occurs between researchers and the private sector – and the same goes for other actors.
The last component was to empower, in particular, IPLCs, as this Project was about giving them an opportunity to articulate their rights, and in some cases even their human rights. So, this could be a very powerful tool for them now.
It’s quite a challenging process. The idea was to initiate that process in some countries that were not doing much on the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol. This was an opportunity not only for the countries, but for all these stakeholders and rights holders at the national level.
What were some of the most successful or innovative things about the first phase of the Global ABS Project?
One of the most innovative outcomes of this process was the establishment of the Global ABS Community. The elements that I mentioned before are preconditions to make the Nagoya Protocol work (building trust, capacity, and awareness). You need all those things, but the most innovative element was the introduction and establishment of a community of practice on ABS. We were trying to bring together all the different actors at the local, regional, national and international levels to share experiences, to learn from each other to build a community that could accelerate the implementation of the Protocol directly.
The Global ABS Project has promoted a truly global community of practice on ABS. It has served to increase the impact of national and regional activities and to generate resources in different languages. This virtual platform has allowed the project to continue and even to increase its support to countries under the hard conditions provoked by the COVID-19 pandemic. The project was able to adapt very quickly to this virtual environment, generating opportunities for all, such as the Global ABS Conference (under The ABS we ALL need campaign from 2020) or the webinar series “Custodians of Biodiversity”, dedicated to indigenous peoples. The project identified existing organizations and activities in order not to duplicate efforts and support as much as possible activities conducted by other partners. (Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Bioversity International, ABS Initiative, German cooperation, Equator Initiative, etc.).
What would you say discouraged you most in your work with the Project?
One of the challenging things as we began implementation, in particular at the national level, was that there were moments where we could not make progress for different reasons. The most common reason was when we had, for instance, a change of government or when we had elections in one country that stalled progress on the project and reduced capacity to make decisions. Normally if there is a change in government—a normal part of our democratic processes—you would need to restart, so it's very time consuming and requires enormous effort from the teams at the national level. It would waste time because with this type of project we need to have fluid implementation, and as it was not a long project—only three years—any time that you waste or you are not implementing it on the ground, is perceived as a negative. To have these stages of inaction in certain countries was a bit frustrating.
What would you say inspires/encourages you most in your work?
When you communicate ABS and you see that the audience and your target groups—governments, politicians, researchers, indigenous peoples and local communities—are receptive to ABS, understand ABS and the potential of it as a transformative tool, and they immediately want to implement it and want to be part of the process. That has really been encouraging and fortunately we had countries that have been fantastic in this aspect.
We always use the example of Ecuador, which has mobilized indigenous peoples and local communities in the implementation of ABS and the Nagoya Protocol, which has been really encouraging.
What role do you see the Nagoya Protocol play in the post-2020 global biodiversity framework?
The Nagoya Protocol and the ABS principle are still in an early stage of implementation. And I think it is going to have a crucial role in the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. The Nagoya Protocol is a great example of a horizontal tool, which we crucially need more of. Horizontal tools integrate different areas and help us to work together in the same direction. ABS brings to the Nagoya Protocol, the Convention on Biological Diversity, and to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development a much more integrative narrative for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. The Protocol positions ABS at the center of social development, and it fully aligns and integrates the United Nations’ agendas and goals, including the Sustainable Development Goals, economic development, innovation, poverty and hunger alleviation, and the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.
If you could send one message to the delegates at COP-15/MOP4, what would it be?
To me, the ABS principle and the Nagoya Protocol are still in early stages of implementation and there needs to be more attention and awareness for them to be understood as tools for integration and for the execution of the Sustainable Development Goals. In that sense, we need to promote and fully integrate all the ABS mechanisms and claim ABS’s role as a tool for economic development, human rights, science, social progress, biotechnology, and research. At the end of the day, ABS provides opportunities for all. In that sense, we need more standardization regarding ABS and the Protocol.
If you could change one thing about the Nagoya Protocol or ABS, what would you change?
I was part of the negotiation process for the Protocol and a co-chair of the compliance measures. Of course, I think it was a good product at the time and I think it is very valid, but as a product of an international negotiation, it is, by definition, imperfect - it's a compromise between all the parties that were involved in the negotiation. I think the path forward calls for more standardization. The Protocol was very good in the sense that it was very open and allowed for flexible implementation by the Parties. However, now that we move into the next decade for environmental governance, generating a tool that can be widely and broadly implemented at the international level requires standardization. In that sense, I think we also need more innovative tools that allow us to have more information to check and measure the results and the impact of the implementation of the Protocol and the ABS principle at different levels.
The first phase of the Global ABS Project is celebrated as a success. What is the next step for these countries?
The next step or challenge for them is to consolidate what they have done at the national level through the mobilization of internal and external resources. Some countries have managed to launch national ABS projects under GEF-7 or through other funding mechanisms, immediately after the finalization of the Project, and some are planning to do that at the beginning of GEF-8. For me, that is a great signal of progress because it is difficult to obtain this kind of priority in the development of national projects and obtaining the necessary funds. The next step is to consolidate and to keep working, and to attract research opportunities and investment from the private sector.
Going forward, what is the most urgent ABS capacity-building work that remains to be done?
I think it's a combination: we need a more innovative tools and we need to work with biotechnology to monitor the utilization of genetic sources. There is an urgent need to keep working on ABS because only few groups of indigenous peoples and local communities have been made aware of how ABS and the Protocol can help with the implementation and articulation of their rights.
The same goes for countries, researchers and the private sector. We need to keep working with all of them to consolidate national ABS systems. We need systems that are simple, effective, easy to use, and that bring this beneficial impact to the country, as an opportunity for all these players.
What opportunities will the post-2020 global biodiversity framework, once passed, bring to ABS capacity-building?
The new post-2020 global biodiversity framework should bring visibility to ABS as a horizontal and integrative tool of the Convention. That should also increase available funding for its implementation. It is challenging to prioritize funds for ABS at the national level against other issues, so to set aside funds for a project like the Global ABS Project would be a boost, because, in many cases, ABS is not able to compete with other projects at the national level. The idea is to claim the added value of the Protocol and to boost the attention it is currently receiving.
Another proposal is to test, for instance, blockchain technology and you see in other fields how an app or similar technology development can make a difference. It can expedite things, and so that can also happen to ABS so that we can monitor whether benefit-sharing is taking place and at what level. So definitely these kinds of normative tools, properly implemented, could make a difference and could be used to standardize, streamline and bring everyone on board.