2023 amendments to India’s Biological Diversity Act of 2002

Context

The 2023 amendments to India’s Biological Diversity Act of 2002 has sparked a debate concerning biodiversity protection and India’s responsibilities as a signatory to the Kunming-Montreal framework.

 Key Highlights

• In 2022, at the United Nations Biodiversity Conference, countries everywhere in the world followed the Kunming-Montreal framework to decorate biodiversity protection and conservation. 
• The nations adopted calls to shield 30 percent of all ecosystems by 2030, to guard biodiversity and genetic range and ensure honest and equitable sharing of benefits of traditional expertise with the local and indigenous communities that steward this knowledge.

Amendments under scrutiny

• Under the unique 2002 Act, approvals from the National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) have been required earlier than making use of intellectual property rights (IPR) related to organic sources.
  • The 2023 amendments have eased this requirement, no longer mandating approval from the National Biodiversity Authority for IPR, but only requiring them to be registered with the authority before granting approvals – raising concerns about possible resource overexploitation.
• The exemption of codified traditional information from the benefit-sharing mechanism and stringent regulatory oversight has additionally raised similar concerns.
  • These changes undermine the principle of fair and equitable benefit-sharing, which is central to both the original Act and Nagoya Protocol.
• By permitting AYUSH practitioners and related industries access to biological resources without previous approval, the amendments open the door to business exploitation without ok reimbursement to local communities that preserve conventional expertise.
• Decriminalization of offenses: Previously, violations should bring about imprisonment and fines, but the amendments now update imprisonment with civil penalties.

What are the Concerns?

• The amendments should cause fake claims about the cultivation of bio-resources and ability manipulation by communities. 
• It is argued that without stringent oversight, there might be significant misuse and exploitation of local resources, adversely affecting both biodiversity and the livelihoods of local communities depending on these resources. 
• In the North East, in which traditional knowledge about medicinal vegetation and ecological management is profound, this alteration could exacerbate current socio-financial disparities and make a contribution to cultural erosion. 

Strengthening monitoring systems

• The amendments strengthen the function of Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs) with the aid of clarifying their capabilities and mandating their status quo in rural and concrete regions.
• The new provisions additionally place a stronger emphasis on monitoring biological sources derived from foreign countries, making sure compliance with international agreements just like the Nagoya Protocol.

Way Ahead

• It is important that the regulatory modifications are carried out with robust safeguards, sturdy tracking, and active involvement of local communities to ensure that biodiversity conservation and sustainable development go hand in hand. 
• Balancing monetary development with conservation and equitable benefit-sharing might be important to shield India’s rich biological heritage for future generations.

Source: The Hindu

UPSC Prelims Practice Question

Q. What’s the mandate of and significance of work being carried out by ‘Bioversity International’ organisation? How is it different from India’s National Biodiversity Authority? Examine.

Download as PDF