|
|
FARMERS' RIGHTS IN
ITPGRFA:
Little progress on
sustainable use at the Third Session of the Plant
Treaty
Due to a combination of unfortunate circumstances,
the Governing Body at its Third Session made little progress with regard to the
implementation of Article 6 of the
International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (Plant
Treaty). Whereas the Secretariat is to develop a toolbox to assist countries in
their implementation of Article 6, the assessment of progress in this regard
was referred to the reporting mechanism of the Global Plan of Action for the
Conservation and Sustainable Utilization of Plant Genetic Resources for Food
and Agriculture. For several reasons this may weaken the implementation of
Article 6, and it does by no means represent the major steps forwards that are
so urgently needed to ensure that crop genetic diversity can be maintained for
present and future generations.
Article 6 provides that the
Contracting Parties shall develop and maintain appropriate policies and legal
measures that promote the sustainable use of plant genetic resources for food
and agriculture and lists a number of measures that Contracting Parties may
adopt in this regard. The implementation of Article 6 is crucial for the
realization of Farmers' Rights, as it is basically about enabling farmers to
continue to sustainably use crop genetic diversity, thereby making it available
for present and future generations. As such it can be seen as another way of
implementing Farmers' Rights, a reason why this analysis is included at the
Farmers' Rights website.
Since the First Session of the Governing Body
in Madrid, 2006, sustainable use of crop genetic resources, as set out in
Article 6 of the Plant Treaty, has been given priority in the work of this
Body, and decisions have been adopted, which brought the work forward (read
more here).
The
work of the Governing Body has been followed by side events and reports seeking
to promote progress on the implementation of Article 6. Particularly
Switzerland and some non-governmental organizations (for example Searice) have
been active in this regard.
Despite a comprehensive report from the
Secretariat, with guidance on further potential steps by the Governing Body,
and several background documents (see more information
here), the Governing Body
made little progress at its Third Session.
Agenda Item 13 of the
Third Session
After the Secretariat had presented the documentation
for this agenda item, a rich exchange of views and experiences took place. Many
delegations, as well as non-governmental organizations made statements, and
there were many suggestions as to what the Governing Body could do. However, no
concrete proposals in terms of resolutions or decisions were put forward for
consideration. When the exchange of statements was over, the Chair of the
Governing Body concluded that the item was closed, and introduced the next item
on the agenda. Thus, the agenda item on sustainable use was closed before the
Governing Body had arrived at any decision or resolution with regard to further
steps - as no concrete proposals had been made.
This situation caused
discussions outside the negotiation hall, and several delegates expressed their
view that something needed to be done to ensure that new steps were taken,
based on the document prepared by the Secretariat. After all, sustainable use
has been emphasised as a priority of the Governing Body. However, such an
intervention needed to be prepared, and that afternoon another important issue
was on the agenda: Farmers' Rights. Thus, only during the night was it possible
to prepare an intervention on sustainable use - to be presented the following
day.
A lost opportunity
Friday morning, the last day of
the Third Session, the Philippines on behalf of Asia asked for the floor
regarding point of order, and informed about the situation that had emerged
after Item 13 on sustainable use had been closed without any decision. On that
background the Asian resolution
proposal was announced, but it was left to the Chair to decide when it
would be appropriate to discuss it. Thus, the resolution text was not
presented. Switzerland responded that it was too late for a resolution at this
stage of the Session, but that the text could be distributed to all and that
the Governing Body could seek to bring the elements of the resolution in the
report, as appropriate. The Chair concluded that the text be given to the
Secretariat for inclusion in the report, and then the Philippines could make
further suggestions during the adoption of the report on that item.
As
no other countries supported the proposal of Asia, the Philippines accepted the
Chair's suggestion. As a result, the proposed resolution was not distributed,
but submitted to the secretariat (but you can read it
here).
The
report
Friday afternoon, the draft report was distributed. It
contained five paragraphs on
sustainable use, two of which have operational implications for the Governing
Body. The first invites the Contracting Parties to regularly submit progress
reports on the implementation of Article 6 through the reporting mechanism of
the Global Plan of Action for the
Conservation and Sustainable Utilization of Plant Genetic Resources for Food
and Agriculture (GPA). The second operational provision requested the
Secretariat to develop a toolbox to assist countries in the design of measures
to promote sustainable use and submit it to the Contracting Parties in the next
session of the Governing Body.
Both of these suggestions were actually
controversial: the first because the implications with regard to the
responsibility of the Governing Body to monitor progress and ensure compliance
as set out in the Treaty has not been considered, and because the reporting
mechanism of the GPA does not cover all important aspects of Article 6 of the
Plant Treaty; the second because it was not clear to all delegates, as
expressed in the discussion the previous day, what was meant with a toolbox,
and that more consideration would have been due with regard to the process of
arriving at such a toolbox (transparency and participation).
When the
adoption of the report from the Third Session finally came up Friday evening,
the delegations were quite exhausted and many were also hungry, as there had
been limited time for meals. Although it was expected that Asia would take the
word to ensure inclusion of items from its proposed resolution that were not
included in the draft report, they did not do so, probably because they
considered that the Secretariat had included what could be included at this
stage, and because the resolution as such had not received support earlier that
day.
Another lost opportunity
Norway, however,
intervened with regard to the paragraph 24 of the report on delegating the
assessment of progress to the reporting mechanism of the GPA, and proposed a
new text for this paragraph (see Norwegian statement and proposal
here). The argument was that
a procedure as outlined in the draft report had not been proposed or discussed
in the Governing Body, and that the implications for the ability of the
Governing Body to monitor progress could be serious. Instead it was proposed
that the Secretariat develop a methodology for the assessment of progress, for
consideration at its next session, thereby considering the possibilities of
linking this methodology to the reporting mechanism of the Global Plan of
Action for the Conservation and Sustainable Utilization of Plant Genetic
Resources for Food and Agriculture.
It seems, however, that delegations
did not really understand the contents of this proposal. The Norwegian delegate
was asked to repeat her proposal and then to take some time to consider whether
the proposal could be withdrawn. This would also have given delegations the
possibility to consider the proposal and would perhaps have changed the
situation. However, the Chair summarized the response by asking the Norwegian
delegate only to take time to consider withdrawing the proposal, and not to
read it one more time. After all, there was heavy time pressure at this stage
of the session. The Norwegian delegate withdrew the proposal at once.
The results
After three sessions of the Governing Body
we are thus left with the decision that the Secretariat develop a toolbox until
the next session, and that all reporting is to go through the GPA-mechanism.
What the latter will imply may be taken up at the
next meeting in the Commission on Genetic
Resources for Food and Agriculture in October 2009. Contracting Parties and
relevant organizations that wish to speed up the implementation of Article 6
will thus have to engage in the work of the Commission as well as of the
Secretariat for the next inter-sessional period. It is vital that Contracting
Parties give more consideration to the desired output of the Fourth Session of
the Governing Body than of the Third Session, to ensure further progress with
regard to the implementation of Article 6.
Read more
about:
Implementation of Article 6 at
earlier sessions of the Governing Body
Documents on
sustainable use for the Third Session of the Governing Body
Information and documents on agenda item 13: sustainable
use:
Official text of the report from
Governing Body Session 1 on sustainable use (excerpt)
Official text of
the report from Governing Body Session 2 on sustainable use
(excerpt)
Excerpts from the Working
Document for Governing Body Session 3 on sustainable use
Text of proposed
resolution from the Asian Regional Group (not distributed)
Draft report from
Governing Body Session 3 on sustainable use (excerpt)
Intervention from
Norway on paragraph 24 of the report (proposal withdrawn)
Other
relevant links:
IAO
Report on Sustainable Use of Agrobiodiversity in Italy
Pages in this sub-section:
FARMERS' RIGHTS IN ITPGRFA
On the International
Treaty
Central provisions on
Farmers' Rights
Follow-up
in the Governing Body of the Treaty
The Benefit-Sharing Fund of the
International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and
Agriculture
New
resolution on Farmers' Rights under the Plant Treaty
Little progress
on sustainable use at the Third Session of the Plant Treaty
Global Consultations on Farmers' Rights
Second State of the World's Plant
Genetic Resources |
Top
 |
|
|
In this
section:
|

  |
|