When the cure kills—CBD limits biodiversity research

The Convention on Biological Diversity

(CBD) commits its 196 nation parties

to conserve biological diversity, use

its components sustainably, and share

fairly and equitably the benefits from

the utilization of genetic resources. The

last of these objectives was further codified

in the Convention’s Nagoya Protocol (NP),

which came into effect in 2014. Although

these aspirations are laudable, the NP and

resulting national ambitions on Access and

Benefit Sharing (ABS) of genetic resources

have generated several national regulatory

regimes fraught with unintended consequences

(1). Anticipated benefits from the

commercial use of genetic resources, especially

those that might flow to local or indigenous

communities because of regulated

access to those resources, have largely been

exaggerated and not yet realized. Instead,

national regulations created in anticipation

of commercial benefits, particularly in many

countries that are rich in biodiversity, have

curtailed biodiversity research by in-country

scientists as well as international collaboration

(1). This weakens the first and foremost

objective of the CBD—conservation of biological

diversity. We suggest ways that the Conference

of the Parties (CoP) of the CBD may

proactively engage scientists to create a regulatory

environment conducive to advancing

biodiversity science.