Assess the extent to which the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Act, 2023 balances ease of doing business with the rights of local communities over biological resources and traditional knowledge.

Parliament passed the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Act in August 2023 [1]. It rewrote the Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) rules of the 2002 Act to make compliance easier for the AYUSH, seed and biotech sectors. It improves ease of doing business a great deal, but protects community rights only in part.

Ease of doing business: substantial gains

• Decriminalisation: fines of Rs 1 lakh–50 lakh replace imprisonment, rising to Rs 1 crore for continuing violations [1].
• IPR approval deferred: approval is now needed before an IPR is granted, not before the application is filed. Domestic entities only register with the NBA, and need approval only when they commercialise [1]. IPR applications rose from 857 (2024-25) to 1,077 (2025-26) [2].
• Research and bio-survey no longer have to share benefits [1].
• Predictability: the e-filing system has handled 11,273 applications and produced 6,074 agreements or approvals [3].

Community rights: diluted safeguards

• Codified TK and AYUSH exemption: "codified traditional knowledge" is left undefined. This could free a large part of TK use from benefit-sharing obligations to communities [1].
• Less participation: benefit terms are agreed between the user and the BMC "represented by the NBA". Benefit claimers have no direct role in the negotiation [1].
• Executive adjudication: officers of Joint Secretary or Secretary rank decide penalties, which raises concerns about executive discretion [1].
• Thin inflows: the NBA received only Rs 12.93 crore in 2025-26 [3].

Benefits still reaching the ground

• Over Rs 200 crore has been disbursed to more than 10,500 BMCs, 28 SBBs and 7 UTBCs [3].
• About Rs 100 crore has gone to Red Sanders conservation in Andhra Pradesh. SBBs have raised more than Rs 51 crore from Indian entities [3].

Assessment The Act moves the balance clearly towards ease of doing business. Community rights survive through the flow of money, but are weaker in voice and scope.

Overall, the amendment makes ABS efficient without making it fully equitable. A better balance needs four steps:

• a clear definition of codified TK in the Rules;
• a mandatory community seat in benefit negotiations;
• stronger BMCs and People's Biodiversity Registers;
• faster disbursal.

These steps would bring the law in line with the Nagoya Protocol and KMGBF Target 13. That would keep the Act's promise of fair and equitable benefit sharing and support inclusive, sustainable growth [3].