·PIB·15 marks·250–350 wordsPolityEconomyEnvironment

Evaluate the role of Biodiversity Management Committees and People's Biodiversity Registers in operationalising fair and equitable benefit sharing in India.

New · District CollectorCan you hold the district for 72 hours?Floods, a heatwave, an outbreak, a grievance queue. Take the decisions, see the consequences.Play →
In this answer
  1. Positive role
  2. Limitations
  3. Verdict and way forward

India's Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) system has three tiers: the NBA, then the State Biodiversity Boards, then Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs). Under Section 41 of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, every local body must set up a BMC [1]. BMCs keep People's Biodiversity Registers (PBRs), which record local resources and knowledge. Together they are the last mile of benefit sharing, but they deliver only part of what the law intends.

Positive role

  • Legal claimant: benefit-sharing terms are agreed with the BMC. Since 2023 the NBA negotiates for it, which protects small communities from facing big firms alone [4].
  • Proof of origin: PBRs record resources and the traditional knowledge (TK) linked to them, so they serve as evidence against biopiracy. The JPC wanted certificates of origin to come from local body records [5].
  • Money channel: ₹45.05 lakh reached more than 90 BMCs in 10 States and 2 UTs [3]. ABS money also pays for updating PBRs and strengthening BMCs [2].
  • Conservation incentive: firms pay for local breeds and crops such as Murrah buffalo semen, Mithun and horse gram [2]. This rewards communities that conserve them.

Limitations

  • Weaker community voice: terms are now agreed between the user and the BMC "represented by NBA". Benefit claimers no longer negotiate directly [4].
  • PBR paradox: the Act does not define "codified TK", and codified TK is exempt from benefit sharing. Knowledge written into a PBR could therefore count as codified and lose its claim, as the JPC warned [4][5].
  • Slow flow: about ₹278 crore has been realised since 2008, but only a little over ₹200 crore has been disbursed [2].
  • Opacity: NBA releases name the payers and the resources, but not which BMC received each payment [2].

Verdict and way forward

  • BMCs and PBRs are essential, but they currently act more as passive recipients than as negotiators.
  • Define codified TK by the classical texts listed in the First Schedule of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, as the JPC proposed [5]. This would protect PBR entries.
  • Publish where each receipt goes, BMC by BMC, and build the capacity of BMCs to negotiate.

BMCs and PBRs connect India's ABS law to the people who hold the resources and the knowledge. If PBRs are legally protected, BMCs are given more say, and payments are tracked openly, they can deliver the fair and equitable sharing that the Nagoya Protocol and SDG target 15.6 aim for.

Sources

  1. 1The Biological Diversity Act, 2002 (India Code): Section 41 on BMCs; the three-tier structure
  2. 2PIB: NBA receives Rs 9.68 crore under ABS Framework, April–September 2026: resources accessed; funds used for PBRs and BMCs; ₹278 crore realised and more than ₹200 crore disbursed; payer-level disclosure
  3. 3PIB: NBA disburses Rs 45.05 lakh to BMCs across 10 States and Two UTs: disbursement to more than 90 BMCs
  4. 4PRS Legislative Research: The Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill, 2021: terms agreed with the BMC "represented by NBA"; codified TK left undefined; the risk to PBR entries
  5. 5PRS: Summary of JPC Report on the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill, 2021: JPC warning on PBRs and codified TK; proposed definition based on the Drugs and Cosmetics Act; certificate of origin from local body records
Practice
7 questions on this item
Check the answer for each question, or reveal all at once.
Practice MCQs →

More from this note

More on Polity