One step forward, two steps back
The Biological Diversity Act (bda) 2002 promised to help arrest the destruction and piracy of India's biological resources and traditional knowledge. This hope was dealt a body blow by its creator, the Union ministry of environment and forests (moef), when on April 15 2004 it notified a thoroughly uninspiring and possibly retrogressive set of rules under the act.
bda is supposed to achieve conservation and sustainable use of the country's biological sources. It is also designed to promote equity in benefit-sharing from their use. The act does have numerous loopholes. Nevertheless, it could have helped check the illegal outflow of genetic material from India, given some protection (and benefits) to local communities for their immense knowledge and put some check on the unbridled exploitation of bio-resources by industries and urban consumers. Many of us expected that subsequent rules and guidelines would help elaborate bda's provisions, and plug some of its weaknesses. But the Biological Diversity Rules 2004 have disappointed us thoroughly.
Some critical problems The new rules hardly empower local communities; indeed, they specify that the "main function' of the Biodiversity Management Committees (bmc) set up by communities is to prepare People's Biodiversity Registers (pbrs)! It seems that moef does not trust communities with anything else
Related Content
- CSE condemns Delhi government decision of scrapping BRT without strategy for integrated public transport systems
- CSE condemns Delhi government decision of scrapping BRT without strategy for integrated public transport systems
- Budget 2013-2014: speech of P. Chidambaram, Minister of Finance
- Sustainable urban transport in Asia 2009: a year in review
- 'We see ourselves as a bridge between the EU and the US'
- Three Steps Back