By Emilio Godoy
MONTREAL, Dec 16 2022 – In addition to its nutritional properties, quinoa, an ancestral grain from the Andes, also has cosmetic uses, as stated by the resource use and benefit-sharing permit ABSCH-IRCC-PE-261033-1 awarded in February to a private individual under a 15-month commercial use contract.

The permit, issued by the Peruvian government’s National Institute for Agrarian Innovation, allows the Peruvian beneficiary to use the material in a skin regeneration cream.

But it also sets restrictions on the registration of products obtained from quinoa or the removal of its elements from the Andean nation, to prevent the risk of irregular exploitation without a fair distribution of benefits, in other words, biopiracy.”The scientific community is willing to share benefits through simple mechanisms that do not unfairly burden researchers in low- and middle-income countries.” — Amber Scholz

The licensed material may have a digital representation of its genetic structure which in turn may generate new structures from which formulas or products may emerge. This is called digital sequence information (DSI), in the universe of research or commercial applications within the CBD.

Treatment of DSI forms part of the debates at the 15th Conference of the Parties (COP15) to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), which began on Dec. 7 and is due to end on Dec. 19 at the Palais des Congrès in the Canadian city of Montreal.

The summit has brought together some 15,000 people representing the 196 States Parties to the CBD, non-governmental organizations, academia, international bodies and companies.

The focus of the debate is the Post-2020 Global Framework on Biodiversity, which consists of 22 targets in areas including financing for conservation, guidelines on digital sequencing of genetic material, degraded ecosystems, protected areas, endangered species, the role of business and gender equality.

Like most of the issues, negotiations on DSI and the sharing of resulting benefits, contained in one of the Global Framework’s four objectives and in target 13, are at a deadlock, on everything from definitions to possible sharing mechanisms.

Except for the digital twist, the issue is at the heart of the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization, part of the CBD, signed in that Japanese city in 2010 and in force since 2014.

The delegations of the 196 States Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity have failed to make progress at COP15 in the negotiations on new targets for the protection of the world’s natural heritage, in the Canadian city of Montreal. In the picture, a working group reviews a proposal on the complex issue. CREDIT: IISD/ENB

Amber Scholz, a German member of the DSI Scientific Network, a group of 70 experts from 25 countries, said there is an urgent need to close the gap between the existing innovation potential and a fair benefit-sharing system so that digital sequencing benefits everyone.

“It’s been a decade now and things haven’t turned out so well. The promise of a system of innovation, open access and benefit sharing is broken,” Scholz, a researcher at the Department of Microbial Ecology and Diversity in the Leibniz Institute’s DSMZ German Collection of Microorganisms and Cell Cultures, told IPS.

DSI stems from the revolution in the massive use of technological tools, which has reached biology as well, fundamental in the discovery and manufacture of molecules and drugs such as those used in vaccines against the coronavirus that caused the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Aichi Biodiversity Targets, adopted in 2010 in that Japanese city during the CBD COP10, were missed by the target year, 2020, and will now be renewed and updated by the Global Framework that will emerge from Montreal.

The targets included respect for the traditional knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities related to the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, their customary use of biological resources, and the full and effective participation of indigenous and local communities in the implementation of the CBD.

Lack of clarity in the definition of DSI, challenges in the traceability of the country of origin of the sequence via digital databases, fear of loss of open access to data and different outlooks on benefit-sharing mechanisms are other aspects complicating the debate among government delegates.

Through the Action Agenda: Make a Pledge platform, organizations, companies and individuals have already made 586 voluntary commitments at COP15, whose theme is “Ecological civilization: Building a shared future for all life on earth”.

Of these, 44 deal with access and benefit sharing, while 294 address conservation and restoration of terrestrial ecosystems, 185 involve partnerships and alliances, and 155 focus on adaptation to climate change and emission reductions.

Genetic havens

Access to genetic resources for commercial or non-commercial purposes has become an issue of great concern in the countries of the global South, due to the fear of biopiracy, especially with the advent of digital sequencing, given that physical access to genetic materials is not absolutely necessary.

Although the Nagoya Protocol includes access and benefit-sharing mechanisms, digital sequencing mechanisms have generated confusion. In fact, this instrument has created a market in which lax jurisdictions have taken advantage by becoming genetic havens.

Around 2,000 gene banks operate worldwide, attracting some 15 million users. Almost two billion sequences have been registered, according to statistics from GenBank, one of the main databases in the sector and part of the U.S. National Center for Biotechnology Information.

Argentina leads the list of permits for access to genetic resources in Latin America under the Protocol, with a total of 56, two of which are commercial, followed by Peru (54, four commercial) and Panama (39, one commercial). Mexico curbed access to such permits in 2019, following a scandal triggered by the registration of maize in 2016.

There are more than 100 gene banks operating in Mexico, 88 in Peru, 56 in Brazil, 47 in Argentina and 25 in Colombia.

The largest providers of genetic resources leading to publicly available DSI are the United States, China and Japan. Brazil ranks 10th among sources and users of samples, according to a study published in 2021 by Scholz and five other researchers.

The mechanisms for managing genetic information sequences have become a condition for negotiating the new post-2020 Global Framework for biodiversity, which poses a conflict between the most biodiverse countries (generally middle- and low-income) and the nations of the industrialized North.

Brazilian indigenous activist Cristiane Juliao, a leader of the Pankararu people, calls for a fair system of benefit-sharing for access to and use of genetic resources and their digital sequences at COP15, being held at the Palais des Congrès in the Canadian city of Montreal. CREDIT: Emilio Godoy/IPS

Indigenous people and their share

Cristiane Juliao, an indigenous woman of the Pankararu people, who is a member of the Brazilian Coordinator of Indigenous Peoples and Organizations of the Northeast, Minas Gerais and Espírito Santo, said the mechanisms adopted must favor the participation of native peoples and guarantee a fair distribution of benefits.

“We don’t look at one small element of a plant. We look at the whole context and the role of that plant. All traditional knowledge is associated with genetic heritage, because we use it in food, medicine or spiritual activities,” she told IPS at COP15.

Therefore, she said, “traceability is important, to know where the knowledge was acquired or accessed.”

In Montreal, Brazilian native organizations are seeking recognition that the digital sequencing contains information that indigenous peoples and local communities protect and that digital information must be subject to benefit-sharing. They are also demanding guarantees of free consultation and the effective participation of indigenous groups in the digital information records.

Thanks to the system based on the country’s Biodiversity Law, in effect since 2016, the Brazilian government has recorded revenues of five million dollars for permits issued.

The Working Group responsible for drafting the new Global Framework put forward a set of options for benefit-sharing measures.

They range from leaving in place the current status quo, to the integration of digital sequence information on genetic resources into national access and benefit-sharing measures, or the creation of a one percent tax on retail sales of genetic resources.

Lagging behind

There is a legal vacuum regarding this issue, because the CBD, the World Intellectual Property Organization and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, in force since 2004, do not cover all of its aspects.

Scholz suggested the COP reach a decision that demonstrates the political will to establish a fair and equitable system. “The scientific community is willing to share benefits through simple mechanisms that do not unfairly burden researchers in low- and middle-income countries,” she said.

For her part, Juliao demanded a more inclusive and fairer system. “There is no clear record of indigenous peoples who have agreed to benefit sharing. It is said that some knowledge comes from native peoples, but there is no mechanism for the sharing of benefits with us.”

IPS produced this article with support from Internews’ Earth Journalism Network.

By Francine Pickup
NEW YORK, Dec 16 2022 – Climate change is the defining issue of our time. In the words of the UN Secretary General at COP27, “we are on a highway to climate hell with our foot still on the accelerator.” Cutting greenhouse gas emissions to net-zero by 2050 is crucial when it comes to meeting the 1.5 degrees Celsius target.

At the same time, if we don’t effectively deal with corruption in climate action, it will severely impede our abilities to fight the climate crisis through scaled-up adaptation and mitigation efforts.

According to Transparency International, up to 35 percent of climate action funds, depending on programme, have been lost to corruption in the last five years.

Corruption and the climate crisis reinforce each other

On the one hand, corruption fuels the climate crisis by depriving countries of much-needed revenues to act on climate change and build resilience, while also significantly altering the efficient allocation and distribution of resources to achieve development objectives.

For example, according to the U4 Anti-corruption Resource Centre, the top recipients of climate finance are among the riskiest places in the world for corruption.

On the other hand, climate impacts reinforce corruption by creating economic and social instability and inequality, fostering an environment more conducive to corruption and misuse of funds, that ultimately deprives the poorest and hardest hit.

Overcoming corruption in the race against the climate crisis requires collective action and bold partnerships between government, private sector, and civil society to recognise and combat the issue through more effective management of resources and programmes.

This calls for:

• Governments to step up their efforts in environmental governance,
• Businesses to strengthen business integrity,
• Media, youth, and communities to continue to advocate against corruption.

The four immediate actions that require commitment from all actors:

1. Management of funds: A much greater transparency and accountability is needed in the use and management of climate finance in adaptation and mitigation programmes.

Access to finance is often presented as the main obstacle to achieving a just transition and transformative climate action, but that’s only one side of the problem. The other side is to make sure that the much-needed resources to address climate crisis are not lost due to corruption and mismanagement.

One good example is that of the Colombian climate finance tracking system, which provides updated data on domestic, public, private, and international climate funding.

It is one of the first countries in the world to have developed a comprehensive Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (MRV) framework to transparently track the inflow and outflow of climate finance from public, private and international sources.

2. Voice and Accountability: This means leveraging the power of advocacy and accountability mechanisms, and providing civic spaces for meaningful participation of society, empowering them to hold policy makers and private sector accountable.

For example, UNDP is empowering communities in Uganda and Sri Lanka, to use digital tools to mainstream integrity and transparency in environmental resource management. In Sri Lanka,

UNDP has launched a digital platform, in collaboration with the Ministry of Wildlife and Forest Conservation and other partners, for citizens to engage and monitor illicit environmental activities. The initiative is supported through UNDP’s Global Project – Anti-Corruption for Peaceful and Inclusive Societies (ACPIS) funded by the Norad— Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation.

Meanwhile, in Uganda, UNDP and the National Forestry Authority have launched the Uganda Natural Resource Information System (NARIS), designed to monitor and mediate deforestation throughout Uganda to protect the country’s forests and biodiversity.

In the climate change agenda, fighting corruption is not only about the money. It is also about building trust in institutions and restoring hope in the future. Studies show that ‘eco-anxiety’ is increasing, particularly amongst young people.

A global study of 10,000 youth from 10 countries in 2021 found that over 50 percent of young people felt sad, anxious, angry, powerless, helpless, and guilty about climate change. But we have also seen youth, civil society and communities taking action against the environmental damage and climate change from Serbia to India.

Through UNDP’s Climate promise alone, more than 110,000 people have been engaged in stakeholder consultations to revise key national climate strategies, known as nationally determined contributions –, helping to build social consensus and explicit recognition of the roles of youth and women’s leadership in renewed climate pledges in 120 countries.

3. Private sector has a key role to play: Public capacity needs to be strengthened to implement policies to regulate private sector activities to protect the environment. At the same time, businesses should also play their part with fair, human-rights based business practices, business integrity, and environmental sustainability goals.

4. The normative framework to protect human rights: An intensified focus on ‘environmental justice’ at global and national level is needed. On 28 July 2022, the UN General Assembly adopted a historic resolution that gave universal recognition to the human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment (R2HE). UNDP promotes responsible business by strengthening human rights standards across 17 countries, with support from Japan.

UNDP has supported over 100 national human rights institutions to address the human rights implications of climate change and environmental degradation. In Tanzania, UNDP has supported the ‘Commission for Human Rights and Good Governance’ to manage disputes related to environmental human rights violations. In Chile, UNDP has supported an ongoing process of constitutional reform which includes strong references to environmental rights.

The development community needs to ensure integrated approaches and break the siloes between the governance and environmental communities; and between public and private sectors to tackle the interlinked crises of corruption and climate change.

IPS UN Bureau

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);  

Excerpt:

The writer is Deputy Director, Bureau for Policy and Programme Support, UNDP

By Ed Holt
BRATISLAVA, Dec 16 2022 – A new law banning LGBTQI ‘propaganda’ in Russia will further stigmatise LGBTQI people in the country and could worsen what is already one of the world’s worst HIV/AIDS epidemics, critics have warned.

The legislation, approved by President Vladimir Putin at the start of this month, bans any promotion of what authorities see as “non-traditional sexual relations”.

Groups working with Russia’s LGBTQI community say the new law – an extension of 2013 legislation banning the positive portrayal of same-sex relationships to minors – will effectively make outreach work illegal, potentially severely impacting HIV prevention and treatment among what is a key population for the disease.

It also comes amid intensifying anti-LGBTQI political rhetoric and a Kremlin crackdown on the minority and civic organisations helping it.

“Since 2014, Russia has been purposefully driving HIV service organizations underground. The new law is another nail in the coffin of effective HIV prevention among vulnerable populations,” Evgeny Pisemsky, an LGBTQI activist from Orel in Russia, who runs the Russian LGBTQI information and news website parniplus.com, told IPS.

Russia has one of the worst HIV epidemics in the world. For much of the last decade the country has seen some of the highest rates of new infection recorded anywhere – between 80,000 and 100,000 per year between 2013 and 2019, although this has fallen to 60,000 in the last two years.

Officials figures for the total number of people infected range from between 850,000 cited by the Health Ministry and 1.3 million according to data from the Russian Federal AIDS Centre. The real figure though is believed to be much higher as the Russian Federal AIDS Centre estimates half of people with HIV are unaware of their infection.

Experts on the disease have repeatedly criticised Russian authorities’ approach to HIV prevention and treatment, especially the criminalisation and stigmatisation of key populations, including LGBTQI people.

Indeed, the new legislation is an extension of a controversial 2013 law banning the promotion of LGBTQI relationships to minors. This was denounced by human rights groups as discriminatory, but also criticised by infectious disease experts who suggested it further stigmatised gay men and men who have sex with men (MSM), affecting their access to HIV prevention and treatment.

Organisations working with the LGBTQI community in Russia worry the new legislation could make the situation even worse.

Gennady Roshchupkin, Community Systems Advisor at the Eurasian Coalition on Health, Rights, Gender and Sexual Diversity NGO, told IPS: “Practice in many countries has proved that increased stigma of marginalized populations leads to increased discrimination towards these groups, and, subsequently, these people increasingly frequently refuse to come forward for [HIV] testing and help.

“Formally, the new anti-LGBTQI law puts no limits on providing LGBTQI people with medical help and examinations. But, of course, the ban on sharing information with anyone about the specific characteristics of their sexual life may significantly decrease the quality and timeliness of testing and care.”

Meanwhile, Pisemsky said outreach work was likely to stop in its current form as provision of some services will now be too risky.

“All outreach work will go deep underground. Even online counselling will be dangerous,” he said.

The law could also impact LGBTQI mental health – research showed LGBTQI youth mental health was negatively affected after implementation of the 2013 legislation – which could, in turn, promote risky sexual behaviours.

“We cannot know what exactly will happen. Use of alcohol and practice of chemsex may increase, and there could be a rise in cases of long-term depression and suicides. But what we can say with certainty is that there will be a dramatic decrease in the use of condoms and pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) – unprotected sex with an unknown partner is also an indicator of mental and cognitive conditions in the age of HIV – sexual health literacy, and self-esteem among LGBTQI people,” said Roshchupkin.

Meanwhile, international organisations heading the fight against HIV/AIDS have attacked the law, warning of its potentially serious impact on public health.

“Punitive and restrictive laws increase the risk of acquiring HIV and decrease access to services… Such laws make it harder for people to protect their health and that of their communities,” UNAIDS Executive Director Winnie Byanyima said in a statement.

But such warnings are almost certain to fall on deaf ears, at least among Russian lawmakers.

Although homosexuality was decriminalised in the early 1990s after the fall of communism, LGBTQI people face widespread prejudice and discrimination in Russia. The country placed 46 out of 49 European countries in the latest rankings of LGBTQI inclusion by the rights group ILGA-Europe.

These attitudes are fuelled by what many LGBTQI activists say is a systematic state policy to stigmatise and persecute the minority.

Since the 2013 law was implemented, authorities have cracked down on NGOs campaigning for LGBTQI rights, using various legislation to force them to close. At the same time, politicians have intensified anti-LGBTQI rhetoric, and regularly attack the community.

Indeed, the new legislation was overwhelmingly supported in parliament, with senior political figures rushing to defend it as a necessary measure against Western threats to traditional Russian values.

Chairman of Russia’s federal parliament, Vyacheslav Volodin, said about the law: “We must do everything to protect our children and those who want to live a normal life. Everything else is sin, sodomy, darkness, and our country is fighting this.”

International rights groups say it is clear the law has been brought in for a specific discriminatory purpose.

“There is no other way of seeing it than as an extreme and systematic effort to stigmatise, isolate, and marginalise the entire Russian LGBTQI community. It is an abhorrent example of homophobia and should be repealed,” Rachel Denber, Deputy Director of the Europe and Central Asia Division at Human Rights Watch, told IPS.

“This law has a characteristic similarity to other repressive laws adopted in Russia in recent years – the opportunity for its arbitrary interpretation. In an environment that is as repressive as Russia’s is right now, rather than deciding to take the risk of falling foul of the law and speaking openly about relationships or sexuality, people will just remain silent.

“This law emerged in a climate of cumulative repression of human rights and repressive laws across the board, which seek to silence dissent, and, through the force of law, enforce conformism,” she added.

Pisemsky agreed: “Laws like this one are designed to scare people. Fear needs to be constantly fed with something, otherwise it stops working. This law is not the last step in the escalation of homophobia in Russia.”

The effects of the ban, which essentially makes any positive depictions of the LGBTQI community in literature, film, television, online, and other media illegal with stiff fines (up to 80,000 US Dollars for organisations) for breaches, have been immediately visible.

Pisemsky described how HIV service organizations had altered their websites and social media pages to comply with the law, while Roshchupkin said LGBTQI community health centres were removing from their premises homoerotic posters and brochures with explicit depictions of same-sex sexual acts.

Meanwhile, Russia’s first queer museum, in St Petersburg, had to close its doors just weeks after opening to comply with the law, bookshops have cleared their shelves of works dealing with LGBTQI themes and libraries have taken to displaying similar works with blank covers.

It is unclear what other effects the law will have, but some LGBTQI organisations which spoke to IPS said people had been in touch with them asking for advice on emigrating.

Nikita Iarkov, a volunteer with the Andrey Rylkov Foundation, an NGO which helps people with HIV in Russia, said that though he did not think there was yet widespread fear among LGBTQI people in Russia, he is realistic about what the future holds for many of them.

“Unfortunately, this is not the first law discriminating [against LGBTQI people]. This kind of ban is sort of a regular practice now,” he told IPS.

“I hope that clubs in Moscow and St Petersburg will remain safe spaces for queer people, but I think that it will be impossible to have openly queer parties and clubs.”

IPS UN Bureau Report

Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?’http’:’https’;if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+’://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js’;fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, ‘script’, ‘twitter-wjs’);