| Titre | Actualités de la convention sur la diversité biologique : science et politique, équité et biosécurité | |
|---|---|---|
| Auteur | M. - A. Hermitte, S. Maljean - Dubois, E. Truilhé - Marengo | |
 |
Revue | Annuaire français de droit international |
| Numéro | LVII, 2011 | |
| Rubrique / Thématique | Espaces et communications - Ressources et environnement |
|
| Page | 399 | |
| Résumé anglais |
Relations between science and politics, bioequity, and biosafety, those are the three salient themes in the development of international law of biological diversity. While knowledge about biodiversity is patchy and little shared, an “ intergovernmental science-Policy Platform on biodiversity and ecosystem services” (iPbes) has been formed, with the hope of becoming the equivalent of the intergovernmental Panel on climate change. While sketchy at present, it will serve as a benchmark not just in the context of the convention on biological diversity, but for other international instruments. Within the framework of the convention, two Protocols were developed in 2010. the nagoya Protocol is intended to set out the context for sharing the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources and the associated knowledge. leaving very great freedom to states parties, it is essentially procedural, and confirms the liberal economic vision of biodiversity. the supplementary Protocol to the Cartagena Protocol, known as the Kuala Lumpur Protocol, urges states to adopt rules and procedures on liability in the event of damage in connection with living modified organisms. Here again, states have an almost entirely free hand. these two instruments deal with important issues, but issues that are marginal relative to the core of the convention, the protection of biological diversity, which has barely moved forward. Rio+ 20 opens therefore in an unconvincing context. Source : Éditeur (via Persée) |
|
| Article en ligne | https://www.persee.fr/doc/afdi_0066-3085_2011_num_57_1_4191 |
