Search

New rules for access and benefit sharing (ABS) of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge have been established by the Nagoya Protocol but have not kept up with rapid scientific and technological advances in biodiscovery. This suggests the need for innovative, transdisciplinary approaches to regulate ABS and emerging technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Biofuels are controversial because of uncertain environmental benefits and reported social drawbacks, including ‘land grabs’ and threats to food security. The present study investigates the relevance of these concerns for a proposed bioethanol project in Cradock, South Africa. The proposed project is anticipated to lead to economic upliftment and could therefore contribute to reduce poverty and thus strengthen food security. With a projected annual production of up to 16,000 l ethanol per hectare, yields would be substantially higher than in most other countries. Agricultural activity would take place on existing farm land, or on biomes classified as ‘least concern’. We estimate a carbon footprint reduction of ~ 30% for sugar beet ethanol in the area. Because various global biofuel concerns do not apply to the proposed Cradock fuel ethanol project, we argue for a more nuanced approach for the evaluation of biofuel projects with more focus on case-specific attributes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The risk assessment of genetically modified (GM) crops is assumed to be a benign regulatory tool due to its perceived objectivity and freedom from the morals and values that pervade society. Yet, against the current backdrop of ecological, social and political volatility, issues that cannot be resolved using the existing framework in South Africa are consistently emerging. This paper calls for a reformation of regulatory procedures by exploring the potential of Feminist Care Ethics to illuminate an alternative approach to the assessment of GM crops. While fresh thinking is welcome into the entangled field of biotechnology governance, there remains little understanding of how to accommodate such approaches in the context of the Global South. Twenty three interviews with participants from governmental, non-governmental and academic bodies were carried out in order to explore the potential of a Feminist Ethic of Care as an alternative framework. By examining the current appraisal procedures and tracing their evolution, problems with the current system were illuminated. To assess the suitability of the care ethic framework and ensure reflexivity, a hybrid approach to thematic analysis was applied. Using themes derived from feminist literature such as relationships, context, power, narrative and emotion, new 'ways of seeing' risk emerged and illuminated salient issues that are habitually ignored by the current science-based risk approach to assessment. The current approach was found to be flawed, stemming from a neoliberal, productivist perception of our socio-ecological environment. Feminist perspectives instead ask us to broaden the framing of risk, to consider different knowledges, to re-imagine ourselves as social, rather than economic beings, to tap into the capacity of socio-ecological relations and to recognize and dismantle power structures. The research concludes that although the care ethics themes offer a new approach to GM crop regulation, meaningful change will not arise from simply adding these elements to the current system. Rather, a call must be made for a re-imagining, and redesigning, both institutionally and politically-economically. • Scientists, academics, NGO and government representatives involved in GM crop regulation were interviewed. • Current risk appraisal is not a neutral regulatory tool but further embeds values of technological rationalism. • Feminist care ethics broaden the framing of risk. • A post-development approach may be more suitable for countries in the Global South. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Developing a governance framework for Marine Genetic Resources (MGRs) is a crucial element of the proposed treaty on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ). Negotiating countries' positions on MGRs, including questions on the sharing of benefits from their use, range from no regulation to elaborate infrastructure for access and benefit sharing (ABS) of all MGRs. This article proposes a Tiered Approach to MGR governance that finds a middle ground between negotiating countries' positions on ABS and aims to foster scientific research on samples and data, protect traditional and local knowledge, promote consistency with existing ABS frameworks within national jurisdiction and address conservation gaps including the absence of a biosafety framework. This practical activities approach to MGR governance provides an alternative to the 'one size fits all' approach to ABS currently under negotiation with range of governance options more suited to ABNJ's unique environmental and geo-political conditions. These include an ABNJ Activity Notification and Monitoring System, a Facilitated Information and Sample Sharing Hub, an ABNJ Benefit Sharing System and an End-user Due Diligence approach to monitoring and benefit sharing. This article concludes that MGR governance should implement the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 's vision for an 'equitable and efficient' utilisation of resources and protection of the marine environment, offering a range of tools and approaches that complement ABS, but that are more diverse and flexible than the ABS concept alone. • This is a critical time for UN treaty negotiations on marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. • The Tiered Approach provides an alternative to the proposed 'one size fits all' framework for marine biological resources. • It proposes a range of governance options more suited to the areas' unique environment and geo-political conditions. • It offers a fresh approach to address digital sequence information and conservation measures in the governance framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]