<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 (Mercantile and Labour Law) / Traditional Knowledge (TK) has previously been considered a 'subject' in the public domain, unworthy of legal protection. However, the last few decades have witnessed increased discussions on the need to protect the knowledge of indigenous peoples for their economic sustenance, the conservation of biodiversity and modern scientific innovation. Questions remain as to how TK can best be protected through existing, adapted or sui generis legal frameworks. Based on an examination of the formal knowledge-protection mechanisms (i.e. the existing intellectual property system), this mini-thesis contends that these existing systems are inadequate for protecting TK. As a matter of fact, they serve as veritable platforms for incidences of biopiracy. It further argues that the many international initiatives designed to protect TK have so far failed owing to inherent shortcomings embedded in them. Furthermore, a comparative assessment of several national initiatives (in New Zealand, South Africa and Kenya) supports an understanding that several domestic efforts to protect TK have been rendered ineffective due to the insurmountable challenge of dealing with the international violations of local TK rights. It is therefore important that on-going international negotiations for the protection of TK, including the negotiations within the World Intellectual Property Organisation's Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (IGC), do not adopt similar approaches to those employed in previous initiatives if TK must be efficiently and effectively protected. This mini-thesis concludes that indigenous peoples possess peculiar protection mechanisms for their TK within the ambit of their customary legal systems and that these indigenous mechanisms are the required anchors for effective global protections.

Magister Legum - LLM (Mercantile and Labour Law) / Traditional Knowledge (TK) has previously been considered a 'subject' in the public domain, unworthy of legal protection. However, the last few decades have witnessed increased discussions on the need to protect the knowledge of indigenous peoples for their economic sustenance, the conservation of biodiversity and modern scientific innovation. Questions remain as to how TK can best be protected through existing, adapted or sui generis legal frameworks. Based on an examination of the formal knowledge-protection mechanisms (i.e. the existing intellectual property system), this mini-thesis contends that these existing systems are inadequate for protecting TK. As a matter of fact, they serve as veritable platforms for incidences of biopiracy. It further argues that the many international initiatives designed to protect TK have so far failed owing to inherent shortcomings embedded in them. Furthermore, a comparative assessment of several national initiatives (in New Zealand, South Africa and Kenya) supports an understanding that several domestic efforts to protect TK have been rendered ineffective due to the insurmountable challenge of dealing with the international violations of local TK rights. It is therefore important that on-going international negotiations for the protection of TK, including the negotiations within the World Intellectual Property Organisation's Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (IGC), do not adopt similar approaches to those employed in previous initiatives if TK must be efficiently and effectively protected. This mini-thesis concludes that indigenous peoples possess peculiar protection mechanisms for their TK within the ambit of their customary legal systems and that these indigenous mechanisms are the required anchors for effective global protections.

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

No description available.

This study engages in an ethical examination of contemporary socio-ecological and economic issues which takes seriously the plight of Africa, African communities, indigenous knowledge and biodiversity. It studies the impact of bioprospecting, biopiracy and intellectual property rights regimes on the protection, use, access to, and conservation of biodiversity and indigenous knowledge in Africa. The study also examines the ways in which northern multinational pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and their agents prospect and convert African resources (biological commons and indigenous knowledge) into their intellectual property as well as private property. It argues that the transfer of African biological commons and indigenous knowledge is exacerbated by economic globalisation and the neo-colonial mentality of conquest concealed under the guise of commerce. The study demonstrates through concrete case studies the tactics used by northern multinational corporations to claim these resources as their intellectual property rights and private property. It observes that the privatisation of biological commons and indigenous knowledge only brings about nominal or no benefits to African communities who have nurtured and continue to nurture them. It also observes that this privatisation results in fewer benefits for biodiversity as they lead to the promotion of monoculture, i.e. commercialisation of all things. To address the injustice and exploitative implications of bioprospecting, biopiracy and intellectual property rights, the study recommends the adoption and implementation of the African model law, the establishment of defensive intellectual property rights mechanisms, and the strategy of resistance and advocacy. It suggests that these measures ought to be grounded on the African normative principle of botho and the Christian ethical principle of justice. / Systematic Theology and Theological Ethics / D.Th.(Theological Ethics)

Le droit international de l’environnement est fondé sur deux principes fondamentaux qui sont le principe de la souveraineté permanente sur les ressources naturelles et le principe de la conservation de la nature. La conjoncture économique contemporaine se caractérise par la systématique violation de ces normes juridiques à travers la surexploitation et la pollution des écosystèmes, ainsi que l’accès clandestin aux ressources biologiques, c’est-à-dire, la biopiraterie. Cette thèse a été développée spécialement à partir des discussions sur la gestion quantitative des ressources biologiques biotiques (la faune et la flore) et des ressources biologiques abiotiques (l’eau), ainsi qu’à partir d’analyses sur le problème de la pollution. Ces analyses sont cependant toujours en connexion avec la surexploitation et la biopiraterie, qui sont vraiment deux des grands enjeux contemporains du droit international de l’environnement. Afin de démontrer combien ces questions environnementales sont désormais de portée universelle, tous les régimes d’utilisation des ressources ont été étudiés, qu’ils soient relatifs à l’air, à la mer ou à la terre. L’on a ainsi pu vérifier l’existence d’un système juridique commun de l’utilisation des ressources biologiques fondé sur la coopération internationale, la bonne foi et le devoir de ne pas causer un préjudice aux autres États, outre les deux principes fondamentaux supra. Toutes ces normes juridiques de gestion de la nature sont matérialisées dans les accords internationaux d’utilisation d’une ressource biologique fondés sur les notions de quotas de durabilité et de quotas nationaux d’exploitation. Par conséquent, les États ont la capacité d’assurer le respect du droit international de l’environnement en assurant la conservation de la nature et la lutte contre la biopiraterie. / Environmental international law is based on two fundamental principles: the principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources, and the principle of conservation of nature. The contemporary global economy is characterized by systematic violations of these legal norms through overexploitation and pollution of ecosystems, as well as the clandestine access to biological resources, or biopiracy. This thesis has been especially developed from discussions on the quantitative management of biotic biological resources (fauna and flora) and abiotic biological resources (water), in spite of the analysis on pollution, which can be found in the body of the thesis. The latter analysis is, however, always connected with the overexploitation and biopiracy, which are actually two major contemporary issues of environmental international law. For the demonstration of the generalization of these environmental issues, all regimes relating to the use of resources have been examined, independently of whether they concern the air, the sea, or land. That which could be verified is the existence of a common legal system for the use of biological resources based, in addition to the two fundamental principles mentioned supra, on international cooperation, good faith and the duty not to cause transboundary harm to other States. All these legal norms on nature management are established in international agreements on the use of a biological resource based on the notion of sustainability quotas and national quotas of exploitation. Therefore, States may control the compliance with environmental international law by ensuring the conservation of nature and the fight against biopiracy.

<p>Genetic resources are vital to all people, but especially the poor. They are also important for biodiversity, in turn a key factor in sustainable development. Since 1980, the bio industries have utilized genetic resources in their work, for example on pharmaceuticals, and patented their findings. This has created mistrust and malcontent among biodiverse poor countries in the South. To promote biodiversity protection and ensure access to and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from the usage of genetic resources, the Convention of Biological Diversity requests an international regime. Negotiations for the Access and Benefit Sharing regime began in 2001 and have intensified as its end date, 2010, draws nearer.</p><p>People in Babati, Tanzania are as dependant on traditional medicine, which utilizes wild genetic resources, as they are on modern medicine. The status in the regime of communities such as those of Babati is principally important if sustainable development is to be reached. The greatest issue for the model currently under negotiation to deal with in order to truly promote sustainable development is equity.</p>

Genetic resources are vital to all people, but especially the poor. They are also important for biodiversity, in turn a key factor in sustainable development. Since 1980, the bio industries have utilized genetic resources in their work, for example on pharmaceuticals, and patented their findings. This has created mistrust and malcontent among biodiverse poor countries in the South. To promote biodiversity protection and ensure access to and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits from the usage of genetic resources, the Convention of Biological Diversity requests an international regime. Negotiations for the Access and Benefit Sharing regime began in 2001 and have intensified as its end date, 2010, draws nearer. People in Babati, Tanzania are as dependant on traditional medicine, which utilizes wild genetic resources, as they are on modern medicine. The status in the regime of communities such as those of Babati is principally important if sustainable development is to be reached. The greatest issue for the model currently under negotiation to deal with in order to truly promote sustainable development is equity.