<p>There is a growing interplay of competing realities facing the international community in the general areas of innovation, technological advancement and overall economic development. The highly industrialised wealthy nations, largely located on the Northern hemisphere are on the one hand undoubtedly at the forefront in global research, technology and infrastructure development. The developing and least developed countries on the other hand are mostly situated on the Southern hemisphere. They are not as wealthy or technologically advanced as their&nbsp / Northern counterparts, but are naturally endowed with unique variations of plant, animal and micro-organism species occurring in natural ecosystems, as well as the traditional knowledge on&nbsp / how to use these unique species. This knowledge has been adjudged to be responsible for the sustainable maintenance of the earth&rsquo / s biodiversity. Increasing exploitation of biodiversity,&nbsp / spurred on by the competing realities identified above, has left the earth in a present state of alarm with respect to the uncontrolled loss of biodiversity. The traditional knowledge of local&nbsp / peoples has significantly offered leads to research institutes from the North in developing major advancements in drugs, cosmetics and agriculture. Little or no compensation has however been seen to go back to the indigenous&nbsp / communities and countries that provide resources, and indicate various possibilities through their traditional knowledge to the use of such resources. Efforts by some biodiversity rich countries to&nbsp / ddress this trend through legislation developed in accordance with the principles of the Convention on Biological Diversity have been frustrated due to the inability to enforce their domestic laws outside their borders. Theft of genetic resources and its associated traditional knowledge&nbsp / from such countries has therefore remained a major challenge. Against this backdrop, and on the&nbsp / insistence of biodiversity-rich developing countries, an international regime on access and benefit sharing was negotiated and its final text adopted in 2010. This international regime is as&nbsp / contained in the Nagoya Protocol. This research sets out to examine whether the Nagoya Protocol offers a final solution to the protection of traditional knowledge associated with biodiversity in&nbsp / biodiverse countries. It further examines the importance of domestic legislation in achieving the objectives of the Protocol. The research has been tailored to African biodiverse countries, and&nbsp / seeks these answers within the context of Africa.<br /> &nbsp / </p>

<p>There is a growing interplay of competing realities facing the international community in the general areas of innovation, technological advancement and overall economic development. The highly industrialised wealthy nations, largely located on the Northern hemisphere are on the one hand undoubtedly at the forefront in global research, technology and infrastructure development. The developing and least developed countries on the other hand are mostly situated on the Southern hemisphere. They are not as wealthy or technologically advanced as their&nbsp / Northern counterparts, but are naturally endowed with unique variations of plant, animal and micro-organism species occurring in natural ecosystems, as well as the traditional knowledge on&nbsp / how to use these unique species. This knowledge has been adjudged to be responsible for the sustainable maintenance of the earth&rsquo / s biodiversity. Increasing exploitation of biodiversity,&nbsp / spurred on by the competing realities identified above, has left the earth in a present state of alarm with respect to the uncontrolled loss of biodiversity. The traditional knowledge of local&nbsp / peoples has significantly offered leads to research institutes from the North in developing major advancements in drugs, cosmetics and agriculture. Little or no compensation has however been seen to go back to the indigenous&nbsp / communities and countries that provide resources, and indicate various possibilities through their traditional knowledge to the use of such resources. Efforts by some biodiversity rich countries to&nbsp / ddress this trend through legislation developed in accordance with the principles of the Convention on Biological Diversity have been frustrated due to the inability to enforce their domestic laws outside their borders. Theft of genetic resources and its associated traditional knowledge&nbsp / from such countries has therefore remained a major challenge. Against this backdrop, and on the&nbsp / insistence of biodiversity-rich developing countries, an international regime on access and benefit sharing was negotiated and its final text adopted in 2010. This international regime is as&nbsp / contained in the Nagoya Protocol. This research sets out to examine whether the Nagoya Protocol offers a final solution to the protection of traditional knowledge associated with biodiversity in&nbsp / biodiverse countries. It further examines the importance of domestic legislation in achieving the objectives of the Protocol. The research has been tailored to African biodiverse countries, and&nbsp / seeks these answers within the context of Africa.<br /> &nbsp / </p>

Magister Legum - LLM / There is a growing interplay of competing realities facing the international community in the general areas of innovation, technological advancement and overall economic development. The highly industrialised wealthy nations, largely located on the Northern hemisphere are on the one hand undoubtedly at the forefront in global research, technology and infrastructure development. The developing and least developed countries on the other hand are mostly situated on the Southern hemisphere. They are not as wealthy or technologically advanced as their Northern counterparts, but are naturally endowed with unique variations of plant, animal and micro-organism species occurring in natural ecosystems, as well as the traditional knowledge on how to use these unique species. This knowledge has been adjudged to be responsible for the sustainable maintenance of the earth biodiversity. Increasing exploitation of biodiversity spurred on by the competing realities identified above, has left the earth in a present state of alarm with respect to the uncontrolled loss of biodiversity. The traditional knowledge of local peoples has significantly offered leads to research institutes from the North in developing major advancements in drugs, cosmetics and agriculture. Little or no compensation has however been seen to go back to the indigenous communities and countries that provide resources, and indicate various possibilities through their traditional knowledge to the use of such resources. Efforts by some biodiversity rich countries to ddress this trend through legislation developed in accordance with the principles of the Convention on Biological Diversity have been frustrated due to the inability to enforce their domestic laws outside their borders. Theft of genetic resources and its associated traditional knowledge from such countries has therefore remained a major challenge. Against this backdrop, and on the insistence of biodiversity-rich developing countries, an international regime on access and benefit sharing was negotiated and its final text adopted in 2010. This international regime is as contained in the Nagoya Protocol. This research sets out to examine whether the Nagoya Protocol offers a final solution to the protection of traditional knowledge associated with biodiversity in biodiverse countries. It further examines the importance of domestic legislation in achieving the objectives of the Protocol. The research has been tailored to African biodiverse countries, and seeks these answers within the context of Africa. / South Africa

Natural hazards are predicted to only increase in frequency and severity over the next decade, making it crucial to avoid their negative consequences by disaster risk reduction. Reducing risks of natural hazards is not a recent invention as it has been shown that indigenous and local communities possess indigenous and local knowledge systems related to reducing disaster risks. These knowledge systems are however largely being ignored in policy and research. They are also subjected to pressures which risk altering, eroding or destroying them. In this thesis, these indigenous and local knowledge systems and the pressures that might threaten them are explored through a field study with interviews and observations in rural indigenous and local communities in northern Thailand. The findings show clear evidence of multiple and varying types of indigenous and local knowledge systems, such as knowledges, practices, and beliefs that reduce disaster risk. However, multiple types of pressures to the indigenous and local knowledge systems are also found. These pressures have in some cases already resulted in a loss of indigenous and local knowledge systems, or risk doing so in the future. The conclusion of the thesis is that these indigenous and local knowledge systems and the pressures to them should be kept in close mind in research, policy and intervention to improve disaster risk reduction and not perpetuate the current western paradigm.

Sources de convoitises, les ressources naturelles font parfois l'objet d’actes de prédation tels que la biopiraterie. Le phénomène, de plus en plus médiatisé, mais encore largement sous-étudié, est souvent dénoncé comme un véritable pillage des ressources naturelles. En fait, même si elle recouvre une réalité plurielle, la pratique de la biopirateriepeut être caractérisée comme un accaparement des ressources naturelles. Saisie comme telle, il est permis de comprendre comment elle est née et a évolué, ce qui est du plus grand intérêt pour son appréhension. Aussi, parce que la biopiraterie interroge les modalités de partage des ressources naturelles, elle contribue à un renforcement des dimensions solidaristes du statut juridique de ces ressources. Cependant, si des règles existent, elles ne sont pas pleinement satisfaisantes. Cette situation invite à une réflexion plus globale sur le statut juridique de l'environnement et conduisant à le considérer, juridiquement, comme un bien commun. / Because they are highly desired, natural resources are subjected to acts of predation, like biopiracy. The phenomenon draws more and more attention but is still not much studied. It is often condemned as real plundering of natural resources. Indeed, even if it covers a pluralist reality, the biopiracy practice can be characteristic of a monopolizing of naturalresources. Thus, it is possible to understand how it emerged and developed, which is important to comprehend it. Furthermore, biopiracy raises the question of the sharing conditions of natural resources and thereby contributes to strengthen the solidarist dimensions of the natural resources legal status. However, current rules are insufficient. This situation is inviting for a general reflection about the legal status of the environment that leads to consider it as a common good.