Fears of parallels with Copenhagen at biodiversity summit in Nagoya

Yesterday marked the start of the second week of negotiations at the UN biodiversity summit in Nagoya, Japan. Having ended last week with scant progress, the 192 participating nations will spend this week trying to overcome differences and avoid mirroring the disappointment of last year's talks in Copenhagen.

As was the case in Copenhagen, the problem stems mainly from the often frail relationship between developed and developing nations. Last week witnessed wealthy nations, mostly within the European Union, being accused of holding back the money needed for the protection of biodiversity hotspots in poorer countries. Canada are reported to be blocking discussion on bio-piracy and the rights of indigenous people while China are reported to be making any talks on expanding maritime reserves increasingly difficult.

Developing nations are looking to negotiate two issues in particular. The first is how much richer nations are willing to pay to prevent poorer nations from cutting down forests. Developed nations, in turn, want to know exactly what will be done to protect these forests should funding be provided.

A considerable stand off is also developing around the second issue, a proposed Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) Protocol. This will aim to determine exactly how companies and researchers gain access to and distribute profits from genetic resources and knowledge gathered in other countries.

The proposals could have major repercussions for the global pharmaceutical company, which frequently draws on natural biodiversity found in developing nations to develop new drugs.

Discussions over the ABS Protocol are effectively stalling talks. A senior member of the Brazilian delegation stated, "No ABS, no deal", while a member of the French delegation said, "As developing countries are seeking very high amounts for ABS, the entire financing structure is breaking down."

NGO representatives are also present at the summit and are keen to emphasise the importance of effectively tackling biodiversity loss. Helena Paul, co-executive director of Eco-Nexus, said, "Biodiversity lies at the very heart of the most serious challenges facing the planet today."

She continued, "According to the UN, we've lost 75 percent of the world's crop and livestock varieties - and continue to lose more each day. We're in a crisis of biodiversity, losing species we have not even seen yet. We can't afford to lose any more of the diversity that helps us create, innovate, and be resilient to shocks. This is the wealth of our planet, this is what feeds people."

In 2002, an agreement was reached that promised to arrest global diversity loss. This agreement has yet to achieve any substantial success. Head of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Ahmed Djoghlaf, has now proposed that countries focus on biodiversity loss in the coming decade.

Mr Djoghlaf rejected, however, suggestions that the talks were subject to the same controversies as Copenhagen,

"There has been tremendous progress on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) Protocol, with more than 20 articles adopted-and after one week of negotiations, this is tremendous progress … There's no comparison with Copenhagen at all - the spirit is there, the spirit of conciliation, the spirit to continue discussing."

If agreed, a new strategy could succeed in setting a new target for the mitigation of global biodiversity loss after the previous target for 2010 was missed. Yet another disappointing outcome would, however, place increasing pressure on the next summit in Hyderabad, India in 2012.


Author: Tom Watts | Climate Action
Images: IHP & Pedro Segura | Flickr