The Biological Diversity Act, 2002: Policy Analysis

Policy Theory:

It an elite theory model as both nationally and internationally the people who wanted the conservation, sustainable use and equitable distribution of benefits of biological diversity actually tried to sensitized the masses and government to this issue and hence made the government to come up with this policy.

Policy Statements:

To solve issues which came up on their agenda they decided to take following measures:

1. Approval of Indian Government is needed for transfer of Indian genetic material outside the country and anyone claiming an Intellectual Property Right (IPR), such as a patent, over biodiversity or related knowledge.

2. Other than local communities all Indian nationals were regulated for collection and use of biodiversity. 

3. Measures for sharing of benefits from the use of biodiversity, including transfer of technology, monetary returns, joint Research & Development, joint IPR ownership, etc.; 

4. Measures to conserve and sustainably use biological resources, including habitat and species protection, environmental impact assessments (EIAs) of projects, integration of biodiversity into the plans, programmes, and policies of various departments/sectors;

5. Provisions for local communities to have a say in the use of their resources and knowledge, and to charge fees for this;

6. Protection of indigenous or traditional knowledge, through appropriate laws or other measures such as registration of such knowledge;

7. Regulation of the use of genetically modified organisms;

8. Setting up of National, State, and Local Biodiversity Funds, to be used to support conservation and benefit-sharing;

9. Setting up of Biodiversity Management Committees (BMC) at local village level, State Biodiversity Boards (SBB) at state level, and a National Biodiversity Authority (NBA)

Policy Analysis:

The Bill has received some adverse comments. For instance, the Bill differentiates between domestic companies and the MNCs, although the provisions of TRIPS demand that MNCs be treated at par with domestic companies. The Bill may also adversely affect research, because the researchers from abroad may need approval of NBA and the domestic researchers may need to register with SSB for using the biological resources for research purposes. Several NGOs also criticized the Bill for keeping agro biodiversity outside the purview of the Bill. Further, the Bill does not seem to have an overall riding effect on the existing laws on wildlife and forests, and it is not clear which law will prevail, in case of a dispute.

Policy Advocacy:

It has been recommended that the current law need to have clear and stringent rules for it to be strong enough to have some real impact.

In addition, it is demanded to amend the law or make provisions or exemptions in the law for biodiversity research because the cost and time to get permits is very prohibitive and many amateur, self-financed researchers might not be able to carry on with their research.

Conclusion:

It can be seen that although bill aimed at important issues, the fulfillment of the goals can be a problem if the weaknesses pointed out are not sorted out quickly. Since, then it will be just like any other environmental bill that creates no impact in society just because it cannot sort the criticisms which it gives rise to.