The Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework as a ‘specialized international access and benefit-sharing instrument’ under the Nagoya Protocol

M. Rourke, Mark Eccleston-Turner
{"title":"The Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework as a ‘specialized international access and benefit-sharing instrument’ under the Nagoya Protocol","authors":"M. Rourke, Mark Eccleston-Turner","doi":"10.53386/nilq.v72i3.881","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The World Health Organization (WHO) is starting to come to terms with the public health implications of the United Nations’ Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its supplementary Nagoya Protocol about genetic resource access and benefit-sharing (ABS). Since 2017 there have been calls to recognize the WHO’s Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Framework as a specialized international ABS instrument under the Nagoya Protocol. This article will examine whether the PIP Framework meets the criteria of a specialized international ABS instrument as laid out in a 2018 study commissioned by the Subsidiary Body on Implementation to the CBD (CBD/SBI/2/INF/17). Our analysis concludes that while the PIP Framework meets the specialization criteria, it fails to meet the supportiveness criteria and does not provide legal certainty for pandemic influenza virus ABS. Furthermore, we demonstrate that recognition of the PIP Framework as a specialized instrument would not mean that the CBD and Nagoya Protocol no longer apply to influenza viruses with human pandemic potential as has been asserted, rendering the relationship between the three international agreements unclear. As the WHO grapples with how to regulate access to other (non-influenza) human pathogens and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits associated with their use, a full appreciation of what ABS means when applied to pathogens is essential.","PeriodicalId":83211,"journal":{"name":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Northern Ireland legal quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v72i3.881","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

The World Health Organization (WHO) is starting to come to terms with the public health implications of the United Nations’ Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its supplementary Nagoya Protocol about genetic resource access and benefit-sharing (ABS). Since 2017 there have been calls to recognize the WHO’s Pandemic Influenza Preparedness (PIP) Framework as a specialized international ABS instrument under the Nagoya Protocol. This article will examine whether the PIP Framework meets the criteria of a specialized international ABS instrument as laid out in a 2018 study commissioned by the Subsidiary Body on Implementation to the CBD (CBD/SBI/2/INF/17). Our analysis concludes that while the PIP Framework meets the specialization criteria, it fails to meet the supportiveness criteria and does not provide legal certainty for pandemic influenza virus ABS. Furthermore, we demonstrate that recognition of the PIP Framework as a specialized instrument would not mean that the CBD and Nagoya Protocol no longer apply to influenza viruses with human pandemic potential as has been asserted, rendering the relationship between the three international agreements unclear. As the WHO grapples with how to regulate access to other (non-influenza) human pathogens and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits associated with their use, a full appreciation of what ABS means when applied to pathogens is essential.
作为《名古屋议定书》下的“专门国际获取和利益共享工具”的大流行性流感防范框架
世界卫生组织(世界卫生组织)开始接受《联合国生物多样性公约》及其关于遗传资源获取和利益分享的补充《名古屋议定书》对公共卫生的影响。自2017年以来,有人呼吁承认世界卫生组织的大流行性流感防备(PIP)框架是《名古屋议定书》下的一项专门国际ABS文书。本文将审查《执行计划框架》是否符合《生物多样性公约》附属履行机构2018年委托进行的一项研究(CBD/SBI/2/INF/17)中规定的一项专门的国际ABS文书的标准。我们的分析得出结论,虽然PIP框架符合专业化标准,但它没有达到支持性标准,也没有为大流行性流感病毒ABS提供法律确定性。此外,我们证明,承认《执行计划框架》是一项专门文书,并不意味着《生物多样性公约》和《名古屋议定书》不再适用于已经断言的具有人类大流行潜力的流感病毒,从而使这三项国际协议之间的关系变得不明确。在世界卫生组织努力解决如何监管其他(非流感)人类病原体的获取以及公平、公正地分享与使用这些病原体相关的利益时,充分理解ABS在应用于病原体时的意义至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信