ABSTRACT
Whereas Article 15.1 of the Convention on Biological Resources (CBD) recognizes the sovereign rights of states over their natural resources, as well as their authority to determine access to GRs subject to their national legislations, Article 15.2 requires that contracting parties facilitate access to GRs and do not impose restrictions that run counter to the objectives of the CBD. Article 15 tries to engage both providers and users to collaborate in order to achieve mutual benefits for both parties, as well as benefits for the environment. Such collaboration, however, seems still far from being achieved. A mismatch of expectations has largely led to a deadlock; part of which is related to access procedures. In many cases, provider regimes have created too many constraints, making access to GRs extremely strenuous. In some instances, users have opted for synthetic raw materials in place of biological ones. Lack of legislative capacity has also contributed to the constraints. Users have also contributed to the stalemate. Until now, no user country has implemented the Article 15.7 obligation by putting in place ‘legislative, administrative or policy measures with the aim of sharing in a fair and equitable way the results of research and development and the benefits arising from the commercial and other utilization of GR with the Contracting Party providing such resources’. To protect their interests, many provider countries have one-sidedly opted for stringent measures. As a result, they introduce often-insurmountable conditions for access.
