|
Most states yet to implement Biological Diversity Act, 2002
|
|
Shardul Nautiyal, Mumbai
November 25 , 2014
|
|
|
Only a few states like Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Karnataka,
Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Sikkim, West Bengal and Maharashtra have been
able to implement Biological Diversity Act, 2002 towards sustainable use
of bio-resources and benefit sharing.
Meanwhile, a uniform
national-level guideline on benefit sharing for Ayush units is likely to
be notified by the Central Government shortly. According to officials,
lack of political will, awareness and control over manufacturers in the
absence of a clearly defined uniform guideline on benefit sharing has
however impacted the compliance of the act.
In order to
implement the act, state biodiversity boards had started issuing notices
to the Ayush manufacturers not registered with them, a few months ago,
directing them to do so at the earliest.
As per the act,
manufacturer has the responsibility to share details of the source from
where the raw material has been procured and also share 2 per cent of
the revenue generated out of the production to further the cause of
biodiversity conservation and its sustainable use. Dr AP Singh, member
secretary, Gujarat Biodiversity Board (GBB), "The act provisions for a
mutual agreement between the industry and the respective bio-diversity
boards towards benefit sharing on bio-resources. The much awaited
uniform guideline will help state bio-diversity boards in a big way."
Echoing similar views, officials opine, "Notified guidelines on benefit
sharing will allow and empower respective state biodiversity boards to
determine the amount of benefit sharing to be given by Ayush
manufacturers to the state exchequer."
Till date, over 34, 000
Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs) and 29 State Biodiversity
Boards (SBBs) have been set up under Section 22(2) of the Act across the
country. Local bodies have constituted the BMCs in respective states as
per Section 41 of the act. BMCs also prepare, maintain and validate
People’s Biodiversity Register (PBR) in consultation with the local
people. PBR gives information about the details of biological resources
and traditional knowledge.
Till date, there is no clarity on the
amount of benefit sharing to be accrued from the Ayush manufacturer
annually in the absence of a guideline. Due to lack of proper benefit
sharing guidelines boards of all the states were losing Rs.25,000 crore every year since 2004. Similarly, NBA is losing Rs.10,000
crore every year since 2004. National Green Tribunal (NGT) is also
awaiting a clear-cut and well-defined guideline on benefit sharing for
its effective implementation. This move from the tribunal comes in the
wake of over dozen such cases of litigations pending in NGT Bhopal bench
of Madhya Pradesh (MP) and in various benches of High Court of MP.
Explains
Dr R G Soni, former member secretary, Madhya Pradesh State Biodiversity
Board (MPSBB), "Cases are pending at NGT for final order which is
awaiting notified guidelines of benefit sharing."
Dr Soni is
credited to have initiated the action during his tenure at MPSBB
following which companies moved to NGT. However, NGT approved the
actions taken by MPSBB finally.
The notice served by different
state boards as per the act states that the manufacturer is required to
furnish information like name and address of the company, name of
panchayat or nagar palika from where raw materials are procured, name
and quantity of biological resources used annually, area and annual
production (year wise) and annual gross turnover (gross revenue). State
biodiversity boards set up in different states started issuing notices
to the manufacturers not registered with them, a few months ago,
directing them to do so at the earliest.
According to Section 7
and 24(2) of the Act, organisations extracting plant based material for
commercial purpose without intimation to state biodiversity boards are
liable under Section 55(2) of the Act and shall be punishable with
imprisonment which may extend up to three years with fine or five years
with fine or both.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOPICS
|
That foods might provide therapeutic benefits is clearly not a new concept. ...
|
|
|
|
|