jurisdiction of States parties, and the processes and activities carried out beyond
national jurisdiction.
46 It also covers the conservation of the components of biodiversity inside and outside their natural habitat.
47
As per the third main objective of the CBD, the access to genetic resources,
48 and
the fair and equitable sharing of their benefits, lies at the heart of the regulatory
framework established by the CBD. These aspects are further regulated by the
Nagoya Protocol
49 which aims for more transparency and predictability in the access
to genetic resources.
50 The Nagoya Protocol also elaborates on the clearing-house
mechanism
51 established under the CBD.
52 This measure embodies one of the
objectives of the Protocol to support appropriate transfer of technologies,
53 and is
linked to the access to and transfer of technology found in the CBD itself.
54
The framework set forth in the CBD is additionally complemented by soft law
instruments. This includes, for example, the Jakarta Mandate on the conservation
and sustainable use of marine and coastal biodiversity adopted by the conference of
the parties,
55 which commits the CBD to goals that specifically target the marine
environment.
56 Further, the 2010 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 provides an overarching plan for all actors, stakeholders and partners involved in
biodiversity management through, among others, the revision and update of national
strategies and action plans targeting biodiversity.
57 This Plan also includes the Aichi
Biodiversity targets, classified under five broader strategic goals, including capacity
building.
58
Against this framework, the structural role of the CBD for the development of the
ILBI arises first because of the objectives the two instruments share. Of course, not
only are the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, the first two objectives
of the CBD, at the heart of the overarching goals of the ILBI (and its name!), but the
46 Id., Art. 4.
47 Id., Art. 8–9.
48 Id., Art. 15, see also Art. 8(j).
49 Nagoya Protocol (2010).
50 CBD, About the Nagoya Protocol.
51 Nagoya Protocol (2010), Art. 14.
52 CBD (1992), Art. 18. A clearing-house mechanism works for the collection, centralisation, and
distribution of information and materials.
53 Nagoya Protocol (2010), Art. 1.
54 CBD (1992), Arts 16 and 18.
55 CBP COP Dec II/10 (1995).
56 Indeed, biodiversity specifically in the context of the costal and marine environment are not
discussed at length in the CBD. The Jakarta mandate completes the CBD in that field, see Wolfrum
and Matz (2000), p. 459.
57 CBD, Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020.
58 CBD, Aichi Biodiversity targets.
19 Three Structural Pillars of the Future International Legally Binding Instrument. . .
361
national jurisdiction.
46 It also covers the conservation of the components of biodiversity inside and outside their natural habitat.
47
As per the third main objective of the CBD, the access to genetic resources,
48 and
the fair and equitable sharing of their benefits, lies at the heart of the regulatory
framework established by the CBD. These aspects are further regulated by the
Nagoya Protocol
49 which aims for more transparency and predictability in the access
to genetic resources.
50 The Nagoya Protocol also elaborates on the clearing-house
mechanism
51 established under the CBD.
52 This measure embodies one of the
objectives of the Protocol to support appropriate transfer of technologies,
53 and is
linked to the access to and transfer of technology found in the CBD itself.
54
The framework set forth in the CBD is additionally complemented by soft law
instruments. This includes, for example, the Jakarta Mandate on the conservation
and sustainable use of marine and coastal biodiversity adopted by the conference of
the parties,
55 which commits the CBD to goals that specifically target the marine
environment.
56 Further, the 2010 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 provides an overarching plan for all actors, stakeholders and partners involved in
biodiversity management through, among others, the revision and update of national
strategies and action plans targeting biodiversity.
57 This Plan also includes the Aichi
Biodiversity targets, classified under five broader strategic goals, including capacity
building.
58
Against this framework, the structural role of the CBD for the development of the
ILBI arises first because of the objectives the two instruments share. Of course, not
only are the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, the first two objectives
of the CBD, at the heart of the overarching goals of the ILBI (and its name!), but the
46 Id., Art. 4.
47 Id., Art. 8–9.
48 Id., Art. 15, see also Art. 8(j).
49 Nagoya Protocol (2010).
50 CBD, About the Nagoya Protocol.
51 Nagoya Protocol (2010), Art. 14.
52 CBD (1992), Art. 18. A clearing-house mechanism works for the collection, centralisation, and
distribution of information and materials.
53 Nagoya Protocol (2010), Art. 1.
54 CBD (1992), Arts 16 and 18.
55 CBP COP Dec II/10 (1995).
56 Indeed, biodiversity specifically in the context of the costal and marine environment are not
discussed at length in the CBD. The Jakarta mandate completes the CBD in that field, see Wolfrum
and Matz (2000), p. 459.
57 CBD, Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020.
58 CBD, Aichi Biodiversity targets.
19 Three Structural Pillars of the Future International Legally Binding Instrument. . .
361