T. V. Padma
South Asia regional coordinator, SciDev.Net
In case you are wondering why I have not mentioned anything about how the core discussions went at the Hyderabad meet, that is because words are being taken into and out of brackets and replaced by more.
So I was very pleased to learn about the nominees for ‘prestigious Dodo awards’ released by CBD Alliance, the network of NGOs taking part in the meet. The Dodo, it says, is the “quintessential symbol of biodiversity loss, signify governments failure to evolve”.
Brazil – “for trying to sabotage a draft ADIVICE” on safeguards for biodiversity in the REDD+ mechanism under the climate change convention, and for “refusing to recognise the importance of full and effective participation” of indigenous peoples and local communities in process for ecologically and biodlogically significant areas (EBSAs).Canada: “for their strong stance on CBD not being a food venue” which, according to CBD Alliance is an “ingenious way” to ensure that discussions on biofuels do not take into account the impact of biofuels crops on food crops.
I did hear and was taken aback when heard, a Canadian delegate say if countries wanted to re-open discussions on the agreed text, “so could Canada”, whatever it meant. I gather that it is a means to ensure there are no more inclusions on socio-economic issues in the biofuels text.
Canada is also recognised for refusing to recognise the importance of participation of indigenous peoples and local communities in EBSA process, and “for trying to stop the CBD from taking up synthetic biology issue”.
China: for consistently blocking the EBSA process (something I blogged about); for “denying some developing countries of the opportunity to highlight the importance of marine areas in their national waters”.
Paraguay: recognition in retrospect, for blocking any progress on socio-economic issues in the MOP-6 meeting on biosafety; and continuing the good work in COP-11 on GM issues.
UK: for “blocking all attempts in the EU and CBD to adopt a precautionary approach to synthetic biology and geoengineering; for facilitating he monetisation and sale of biodiversity in order to enable continuation of business as usual”, and for its promotion of the “biodiversity offsets” (BBOP) as an innovative way to buck any contribution to a biodiversity budget.
Tomorrow (17 October), I will update you on the winner. Who do you back?
This blog post is part of our coverage on COP 11 Convention on Biological Diversity — which takes place 8–19 October 2012.