Next Article in Journal
Metal Extraction Processes for Electronic Waste and Existing Industrial Routes: A Review and Australian Perspective
Next Article in Special Issue
The Multiple Functions and Services of Community Seedbanks
Previous Article in Journal
Social and Environmental Impact of the Rare Earth Industries
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Challenges for Implementing the Nagoya Protocol in a Multi-Level Governance Context: Lessons from the Belgian Case
Resources 2014, 3(1), 135-151; doi:10.3390/resources3010135
Article

The Nagoya Protocol: Fragmentation or Consolidation?

Received: 23 December 2013; in revised form: 1 February 2014 / Accepted: 6 February 2014 / Published: 17 February 2014
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Equitable and Sustainable Use of Genetic Resources)
View Full-Text   |   Download PDF [210 KB, uploaded 17 February 2014]
Abstract: In October, 2010, a protocol on access and benefit-sharing (ABS) of genetic resources was adopted, the so-called Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Before the adoption of the Nagoya Protocol, the governance architecture of ABS was already characterized by a multifaceted institutional environment. The use of genetic resources is confronted with many issues (conservation, research and development, intellectual property rights, food security, health issues, climate change) that are governed by different institutions and agreements. The Nagoya Protocol contributes to increased fragmentation. However, the question arises whether this new regulatory framework can help to advance the implementation of the ABS provisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). This paper attempts to find an answer to that question by following three analytical steps. First, it analyzes the causes of change against the background of theories of institutional change. Second, it aims to assess the typology of the architecture in order to find out if this new set of rules will contribute to a more synergistic, cooperative or conflictive architecture of ABS governance. Third, the paper looks at the problem of “fit” and identifies criteria that can be used to assess the new ABS governance architecture with regard to its effectiveness.
Keywords: Convention on Biological Diversity; Nagoya Protocol; institutional change Convention on Biological Diversity; Nagoya Protocol; institutional change
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Export to BibTeX |
EndNote


MDPI and ACS Style

Richerzhagen, C. The Nagoya Protocol: Fragmentation or Consolidation? Resources 2014, 3, 135-151.

AMA Style

Richerzhagen C. The Nagoya Protocol: Fragmentation or Consolidation? Resources. 2014; 3(1):135-151.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Richerzhagen, Carmen. 2014. "The Nagoya Protocol: Fragmentation or Consolidation?" Resources 3, no. 1: 135-151.


Resources EISSN 2079-9276 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert