Elisa Morgera, Elsa Tsioumani, Matthias Buck
access, benefit-sharing, environmental sustainability, sustainable development, international law, human rights, intellectual property rights, health, food, oceans
The Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit-sharing is an international environmental agreement that concerns environmental sustainability, other sustainable development issues and equity. It addresses a complex subject matter that affects a range of research, development and commercial activities and is relevant to different areas of international law such as human rights, intellectual property rights, health, food and oceans.
Unraveling the Nagoya Protocol identifies textual, contextual and systemic interpretative questions and suggests solutions that aim to give a coherent and balanced meaning to the text of the Protocol. Offering a systematic discussion of the Protocol’s legal innovations against the background of general international law, this commentary aims to be of use to international biodiversity law scholars and practitioners, as well as to international lawyers that approach access and benefit-sharing for the first time
E. Morgera et al. 2014. Unraveling the Nagoya Protocol: A Commentary on the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Martinus Nijhoff.
Unraveling the Nagoya Protocol: A Commentary on the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing to the Convention on Biological Diversity
UN, human rights, health, environmental sustainability
Over the past several months I have sat nervously in fear, busily biting my lip, listening to my colleagues one by one declare the death of the United Nations. Their fears, and mine alike, were triggered by the unilateral U.S. declaration of war on Iraq without bringing a Security Council resolution to vote. The talk around the academic coffeehouse circuit says that the UN’s legitimacy has been completely undermined and that its ability to effectively manage future conflicts is uncertain. Recently various liberal-minded editorials have attempted to reaffirm the UN’s relevance, giving particular attention to post-war reconstruction and its continuous global work in human rights, health and environmental sustainability. But even these UN successes are not free from jeopardy. In its treatment of post-war Iraq the U.S. has managed to ignore or undermine the UN’s experience in these regards as well. These editorials have stated the obvious: that the U.S. still scoffs at the idea of global governance and seemingly only wants to play by its own rules. While truthful, these observations remain locked in the nation-state military security paradigm. It existed when the UN was formed, and unfortunately remains just as dominant today. Perhaps the greatest threat posed by the belligerent U.S. security policy is that it undermines the hope provided by other UN functions, such as promoting human rights standards, clean water supplies, women’s education and reproductive health, social and political justice, programs of disarmament, and environmental sustainability.
(2003) 15 Peace Review 479-482
Exhuming a UN for “We the Peoples”
Clean development mechanism; climate change; environmental sustainability; environmentally sound technology; intellectual property rights; millennium development goals; multilateral environmental agreements; poverty alleviation; technology transfer
To achieve the Millennium Development Goals, international technology transfer can play a major role for poverty alleviation and environmental sustainability. At present, there are economic, social and legal (rather than technical) barriers preventing the transfer of environmentally sound technology (EST) from a wider use in international regimes. Removing these barriers requires greater political and regulatory efforts both domestically and internationally. To enable EST transfer, developed States need to improve domestic market conditions such as removal of negative subsidies and barriers to foreign investment, targeted fiscal incentives and law reforms favouring sustainable production and use of energy. There is no realistic perspective for international EST transfer as long as it is disadvantaged domestically. A coherent EST transfer regime is only possible through greater governmental intervention at the national and international level, including environmental regulations, national systems of innovation, and creating an enabling environment for EST. Such intervention should include effective public-private partnerships, both within and between States. Partnerships, if guided by law, could ensure EST innovation more efficiently than purely State-driven or market-driven EST transfers. In search for a model, the EST transfer regime under the Vienna Ozone Layer Convention and the Montreal Protocol deserves recognition. For example, the clean development mechanism under the Kyoto Protocol allows for considerable scope for EST transfer. The potential of EST transfer for climate change and for meeting the Millennium Development Goals has yet to be realized.
(2006) 2(1) Law, Environment and Development Journal 19
Poverty Alleviation and Environmental Sustainability through Improved Regimes of Technology Transfer