FAQ – Frequently Asked Questions
The procedures for obtaining access permits are very complicated. The government agency even wants public notification and participation, and the right to appeal the final decision. Is all this really necessary?
If this procedure is required by the national legislation, it has to be applied. If you are planning a complicated project involving, for example, different government levels, communities and/or a geographically extensive area, the applicable procedure may ultimately simplify matters. It mobilizes potential opposition before the research begins and makes it possible to take decisions on potential objections in an impartial way. If the procedures for access are too burdensome, you may have to look for other countries to carry out your research.
Do the PIC and MAT cover all the necessary permits?
This may only apply in exceptional cases. Thus, it is essential that you do not take this for granted and ensure that you have all other necessary permits (e.g. research, collection, export, and CITES permits).
There is no focal point, no designated competent national authority in the country in which I would like to carry out research. What should I do?
Up to now, only a minority of the Member States have designated the responsible authorities. Try to find out whether colleagues from your scientific community have already carried out research in this country. If you are unable to obtain any information in this way, contact the Swiss ABS Focal Point. Consider carrying out the research in another country that has the necessary ABS structures.
Overview over Stage of National Implementation (2004):
http://www.canmexworkshop.com/documents/papers/I.1.pdf
Swiss Focal Point for ABS:
Mr. Robert Lamb
Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN)
3003 Bern -
Switzerland
Phone: +41(0)31 32 449 89
E-mail: Robert.Lamb (at) bafu.admin.ch
Local people may be interested in/opposed to my research, but the competent national authority sees no need to inform them. What should I do?
Try to contact the local communities anyway. Contact the community leaders and discuss with them how best to inform the community about the proposed research (e.g. by being invited to a community assembly) in a way that is understandable to them, i.e. if possible in their own language and using suitable means (they may not be able to read)
Local NGOs are campaigning against our research. According to them the locals are selling their biological patrimony. What should I do?
If you encounter NGOs in the region in which you intend to do your research that actively advocate to local and indigenous people that they conserve their «biological patrimony», contact them before you start your research and inform them of your plans. Transparency is essential throughout the entire research process. It is essential to provide reassurance on the following points: 1) the nature of the objectives of your research (e.g. non-commercial); 2) the fact that the implementation of the project will fully respect local customs and privacy; 3) the fact that no information about the communities will be published without their consent; 4) the willingness on the part of project organizers and researchers to provide information about the research to the local community; 6) the advantages the research will bring to the local community/country.
Local people are refusing to grant access to the material I require for my research. What should I do?
Check whether they were involved in the PIC/MAT procedure. If not and if they have the right to be involved, this step of the procedure must be repeated. If this is not the case, try to inform them yourself (see question 4 above). If they insist on their refusal, this must be respected. In any case, if you work on privately-owned land, and the local people or the private land-owner need not be included in the ABS-procedure in accordance with the national legislation, it is still wise (and polite) to approach the owners officially before embarking on the research.
The application of the ABS system is ok for industrial research and development leading to economic benefits, but it is not ok for academic research. It forestalls necessary basic research in the interest of biodiversity and of provider countries themselves. It seriously limits the freedom of academic research. Would it not be better to state this point clearly and lobby against this system?
No, this is not a suitable way to improve the situation.
The Access and Benefit Sharing regulations were accepted on the conclusion of the CBD which took place in 1992!
The CBD clearly confirms the sovereignty of the Member States over their genetic resources. One consequence of this is that the Member States have the right and obligation to rule on access to their resources.
The CBD is an international convention. Thus, its provisions are binding on its contracting parties. Switzerland is obliged to ensure that it is applied. To this end, rather than creating binding legislation on ABS, it has opted for the voluntary implementation of the system, part of which involves this «Good Practice».
The articles on ABS do not differentiate between access for academic and industrial purposes. However, the voluntary Bonn Guidelines, which concretize the ABS regulations, recommend that taxonomic research should not be hindered. Accordingly, providers should facilitate the acquisition of material for systematic use, and users should make available all information associated with the specimens obtained in this way (BGL 11 l). However, provider states also remain free to establish an ABS procedure for this type of access.
A more binding International Regime on Access and Benefit is currently being negotiated by the Parties to the Convention (see «Politics»). A good way to defend the interests of academic research would be to participate in this process, in order to create conditions for access which are in the interest of academic research, both in provider and user countries.
