The Rooibos Benefit Sharing Agreement–Breaking New Ground with Respect, Honesty, Fairness, and Care

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 29 (2):285-301 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its 2010 Nagoya Protocol brought about a breakthrough in global policy making. They combined a concern for the environment with a commitment to resolving longstanding human injustices regarding access to, and use of biological resources. In particular, the traditional knowledge of indigenous communities was no longer going to be exploited without fair benefit sharing. Yet, for 25 years after the adoption of the CBD, there were no major benefit sharing agreements that led to significant funding streams for indigenous communities. This changed with the signing of the Rooibos Benefit Sharing Agreement in South Africa, described in this paper. As the authors report, the Rooibos Agreement is a superlative in two respects. It is the biggest benefit sharing agreement between industry and indigenous peoples to date. It is also the first industry-wide agreement to be formed in accordance with biodiversity legislation. This article is a co-production between traditional knowledge holders, the lawyer who represented their interests, the Co-Chair of the Nagoya Protocol negotiations, and an ethicist who analyzed the major challenges of this historic agreement. With no precedent in the benefit sharing world, the agreement stands as a concrete example of the ‘art of the possible.’ Although the rooibos case is unique in a number of aspects, the experience offers many transferable insights, including: patience; incrementalism; honesty; trust; genuine dialogue; strong legal support; a shared recognition that a fair, win-win deal is possible; government leadership; and unity amongst indigenous peoples. Such ingredients of success can apply well beyond southern Africa.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Benefit Sharing.Doris Schroeder - 2020 - In Ron Iphofen (ed.), Handbook of Research Ethics and Scientific Integrity. Springer International Publishing. pp. 1-2.
Benefit sharing: it's time for a definition.Doris Schroeder - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (4):205-209.
Benefit Sharing - it's time for a definition.Doris Schroeder - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33:205-209.
What is Fair and Equitable Benefit-sharing?Bram De Jonge - 2011 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (2):127-146.
Self-respect and Honesty.M. Mauri - 2011 - Filozofia 66:74-82.
What is Fair and Equitable Benefit-sharing?Bram Jonge - 2011 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (2):127-146.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-11-05

Downloads
16 (#886,588)

6 months
4 (#800,606)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Doris Schroeder
University of Central Lancashire

References found in this work

Vulnerability: Too Vague and Too Broad?Doris Schroeder & Eugenijus Gefenas - 2009 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 18 (2):113.
Protecting Communities in Research: Philosophical and Pragmatic Challenges.Charles Weijer - 1999 - Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 8 (4):501-513.
Benefit sharing: it's time for a definition.Doris Schroeder - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33 (4):205-209.
Benefit Sharing - it's time for a definition.Doris Schroeder - 2007 - Journal of Medical Ethics 33:205-209.

Add more references