The Biocultural Community Protocols (BCP) is a set of protocols designed to protect and manage local biological and cultural resources. These protocols ensure the integrity of environmental law and policy by encouraging local communities to make collective decisions about their natural and cultural resources and take responsibility for their stewardship. The BCP provides a framework for developing agreements between stakeholders and their surrounding community. These agreements will ensure that local inhabitants have a say in the management of their environment and that sustainable practices are being properly implemented and enforced.
Biocultural Community Protocols are important for communities because they promote the preservation of their traditional resources within the context of environmental law and policy. They allow for the community to create their own way of protecting their natural resources and maintaining their cultural traditions. Through the framework of this protocol, communities can take part in decision-making over the fate of their natural resources, ensuring that their voices are heard and respected. This can help communities protect their traditional resources and cultural practices and strengthen their ties to the environment. Additionally, Biocultural Community Protocols help promote the conservation and management of natural resources, protecting and providing access to vital resources for generations to come.
BCPs are a way for communities to take control of their resources and actively participate in the legal framework. They are created to provide and maintain the long-term protection of customary laws, local resources, and Indigenous Peoples’ rights to self-determination. BCPs usually attempt to recognise the sovereignty of Traditional Owners, and will include provisions for a social contract between the Traditional Owners and any outsiders who are allowed access to their resources.
In addition to protecting biological and cultural assets, BCPs can also form a bridge between the community and the state by including environmental policies, promoting environmental education, and fostering existing local environmental conservation programs. The protocols may also enable communities to receive additional state funding, as they can become more visible to the state if they self-regulate their own activities.
The development and implementation of BCPs is a growing trend among communities with high biodiversity that rely on natural resources for their livelihoods. Examples of BCPs can be found in Haiti, Indonesia, and India communities. As communities become more aware of the importance of self-governance and the capacity for state support for local governance initiatives increases, more BCPs are likely to be created and recognised.
Through the use of the Bio-Cultural Community Protocols, local communities can ensure that their environment and its resources are used in an equitable and sustainable manner. The protocols provide a framework for cooperation and collaboration between local inhabitants, regional governments, and global entities; and create opportunities for communities to take ownership of their resources. The protocols can help determine which activities have a positive impact on the environment and which could have a negative impact by setting resource management, monitoring, and conservation guidelines. They also ensure that resources are managed in ways that will benefit all local community members and protect the environment’s biodiversity. In addition, the protocols ensure that decisions related to the management of local resources are made in consultation with the community. This can help to ensure appropriate decision-making and accountability while empowering local populations to protect the environment. Ultimately, the BCP is designed to help protect the global environment by protecting the local ecosystems that make up its parts.
Understanding the history behind the development of BCP
In order to safeguard the rights of indigenous and local communities over their traditional knowledge, genetic resources, and cultural expressions, the Bio-Cultural Community Protocols (BCP) were developed. The recognition of the value of traditional knowledge in biodiversity conservation and sustainable use, as well as the need to address the difficulties faced by indigenous and local communities in protecting their resources and knowledge, all had an impact on the development of BCP.
The growing understanding of traditional knowledge’s significance in the preservation and sustainable use of biodiversity was one of the main forces behind the development of BCP. Policymakers and scientists began to realise more and more in the 1990s how beneficial traditional knowledge could be for managing and preserving biodiversity. Traditional knowledge has now been formally incorporated into the Convention on Biological Diversity, an international agreement aiming to conserve biodiversity and advance its sustainable use.
The loss of their traditional knowledge and resources as a result of the actions of outside actors like governments, businesses, and researchers was causing growing concern among indigenous and local communities at the same time. These communities were frequently left out of discussions about how to use and manage their resources, and occasionally their knowledge was appropriated without their permission or payment. As a result of these difficulties, the concept of community protocols started to take shape. In 1998, the San people of southern Africa created the first set of community rules. The San community created a protocol to prevent outsiders from abusing their traditional knowledge and resources. The protocol established guidelines for gaining access to their information, assets, bargaining processes, and allocating rewards to outside parties.
The Indigenous Peoples Biodiversity Network, a global network of Indigenous people’s organisations working on issues related to biodiversity and traditional knowledge, further developed the idea of community protocols. The IPBN acknowledged the need for a legal framework that would uphold and defend indigenous peoples’ rights to manage and control their genetic resources and traditional knowledge. From this work, BCP as a concept was born.
The IPBN first suggested BCP in the 1990s. The team understood the need for a legal framework that would uphold and defend indigenous peoples’ rights to manage and control their genetic resources and traditional knowledge. BCP was viewed as a way for local and indigenous communities to make their rights and obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity known.
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted the Bonn Guidelines on Access to Genetic Resources and Fair and Equitable Sharing of the Benefits Arising from their Utilization in 2002. These rules were created to serve as a framework for putting the CBD’s goals for biodiversity conservation and sustainable use into action. They also recognised the importance of traditional knowledge and the need to respect the rights of indigenous and local communities. The Bonn Guidelines provided a foundation for the development of BCP.
Many other indigenous and local communities have developed their own BCP since the Kuna people of Panama created the first BCP in 2003. These communities now frequently use BCP to negotiate with governments, businesses, and other stakeholders about issues relating to access to and use of their genetic resources as well as to protect their traditional knowledge. In addition, BCP supports the recognition of the value of indigenous and local knowledge in achieving these objectives as well as the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.
There are some existing BCP
Bio-Cultural Community Protocols are community-led frameworks for protecting and managing biological and cultural resources. They are typically developed by indigenous peoples and local communities, who intimately know their local ecosystems and traditional practices. Here are some examples of existing Bio-Cultural Community Protocols:
- Batek Indigenous Peoples Community Protocol – The Batek people of Malaysia developed this protocol to protect their ancestral lands and traditional knowledge. It includes provisions for the sustainable use of forest resources and the preservation of cultural heritage.
- Yaaxche Community Protocol – The Yaaxche Community Protocol was developed by the Maya people of southern Belize to protect their traditional lands and resources. It includes provisions for the sustainable use of forest resources, protecting sacred sites, and preserving traditional knowledge.
- Indigenous Seed Savers Network – The Indigenous Seed Savers Network is a network of indigenous farmers and seed keepers from around the world. Their community protocol focuses on conserving and sharing traditional seed varieties and protecting the knowledge and cultural practices associated with seed saving.
- The Potato Park Biocultural Protocol – The Quechua people of the Potato Park in Peru developed the Potato Park Biocultural Protocol. It includes provisions for the protection and management of traditional potato varieties, as well as the conservation of associated ecosystems and cultural heritage.
- Guna Yala Community Protocol – The Guna people of Panama developed it to protect their traditional lands and resources. It includes provisions for the sustainable use of marine resources, protecting sacred sites, and preserving traditional knowledge.
These are just a few examples of the many Biocultural Community Protocols that exist around the world. Each protocol is tailored to the unique needs and circumstances of the community that developed it, reflecting the diversity of traditional knowledge and practices found in different cultures and ecosystems.
Gaps in Biocultural Community Protocols
Some of the gaps in biocultural community protocols include:
- Lack of Legal Recognition: Despite the increasing recognition of the importance of biocultural community protocols, they still lack legal recognition in many countries. This makes it difficult for communities to enforce their protocols and protect their rights.
- Limited Participation: Biocultural community protocols are often developed by a small group of community members, which can limit the participation of other members of the community. This can lead to the exclusion of certain groups, particularly women and youth, from decision-making processes.
- Inadequate Implementation: Even when biocultural community protocols are developed and agreed upon, they may not always be implemented effectively. This can be due to a lack of resources, capacity, or political will.
- Limited Coverage: Biocultural community protocols typically only cover a specific area or resource, which can leave other areas and resources vulnerable to exploitation.
- Lack of Monitoring and Evaluation: Monitoring and evaluation are critical for assessing the effectiveness of biocultural community protocols. However, many protocols do not include these components, which can make it difficult to identify weaknesses and make improvements.
- External Pressures: Biocultural community protocols can be undermined by external pressures, such as government policies, development projects, and commercial interests. These pressures can be difficult to resist, particularly if the community lacks legal recognition or political power.
Addressing these gaps will require greater support for the development and implementation of bio-cultural community protocols, as well as greater recognition of the rights of indigenous and local communities to manage their resources and traditional knowledge.
What can we learn for the future of bio-Cultural Protocols
To ensure the success of BCP in the future, it is important to learn from past experiences and best practices. Some key lessons that can be learned include:
- Recognising the importance of community participation and ownership: BCP should be developed through a participatory process involving the community members. This ensures that the protocol is in line with the community’s cultural values, practices, and priorities and that they have a sense of ownership over the agreement.
- Ensuring equitable benefit-sharing: BCP should ensure that the benefits of any research, development, or commercial use of the community’s resources are shared equitably with the community, including financial benefits and the recognition of the community’s traditional knowledge and intellectual property rights.
- Incorporating traditional knowledge: BCP should incorporate the community’s traditional knowledge and practices, often based on centuries of experience and key to the community’s livelihoods and cultural identity.
- Balancing conservation and development goals: BCP should balance the need for conservation and the protection of the community’s resources with the need for development and economic opportunities, such as ecotourism or sustainable harvesting.
- Addressing power imbalances: BCP should address power imbalances between the community and external stakeholders, such as researchers or businesses, by ensuring that the community’s rights and interests are respected and that they have a meaningful voice in decision-making processes.
By learning from past experiences and best practices, we can ensure that BCP effectively promote sustainable development and safeguard indigenous peoples’ cultural and biological resources for future generations.
Overall, biocultural protocols are critical for supporting the conservation and sustainable use of natural resources while respecting and valuing local knowledge and cultural traditions. They offer a framework for collaboration and partnership between Indigenous peoples, local communities, and researchers to address pressing environmental and social issues.
References:
- Gavin, M. C., McCarter, J., Mead, A., Berkes, F., Stepp, J. R., Peterson, D., & Tang, R. (2015). Defining biocultural approaches to conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 30(3), 140-145.
- Posey, D. A. (2002). Indigenous knowledge and biocultural diversity. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 8(3), 469-488.
- Reyes-García, V., Fernández-Llamazares, Á., McElwee, P., Molnár, Z., Öllerer, K., & Wilson, S. J. (2019). The contributions of Indigenous and local knowledge to IPBES: a review of knowledge types and assessment functions. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 40, 26-34.
- Turner, N. J., Ignace, M. B., & Ignace, R. (2000). Traditional ecological knowledge and wisdom of aboriginal peoples in British Columbia. Ecological Applications, 10(5), 1275-1287.
- Biocultural Community Protocols. (n.d.). Natural Justice. https://naturaljustice.org/publication/biocultural-community-protocols/
- United Nations Environment Programme, & Natural Justice (2009). Bio-Cultural Community Protocols A Community Approach to Ensuring the Integrity of Environmental Law and Policy. https://wedocs.unep.org/20.500.11822/9819.
- Wurzinger, M., Haile, A., Rischkowsky, B., VanTassell, C. P., Sonstegard, T. S., Mwai, O., & Sölkner, J. (2016, October 1). 0837 Community-based breeding programs: A sustainable solution for livestock keepers? Journal of Animal Science, 94(suppl_5), 402–403. https://doi.org/10.2527/jam2016-0837
- Rakotondrabe, M., & Girard, F. (2021, September 14). Protecting Traditional Knowledge through Biocultural Community Protocols in Madagascar: Do Not Forget the “B” in BCP. Sustainability, 13(18), 10255. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810255
- gGmbH, A. R. (n.d.). Biocultural Protocols – Community Approaches to Access and Benefit Sharing. SEED – Promoting Entrepreneurship for Sustainable Development. https://seed.uno/enterprise-profiles/biocultural-protocols-community-approaches-to-access-and-benefit-sharing
- Franco, F. M. (2022, January 28). Ecocultural or Biocultural? Towards Appropriate Terminologies in Biocultural Diversity. Biology, 11(2), 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology11020207
- A New Global Biodiversity Framework: Kunming-Montreal Global … – DCCEEW. https://www.dcceew.gov.au/environment/biodiversity/international/un-convention-biological-diversity/global-biodiversity-framework
