How does India's ABS framework operationalise its obligations under the Nagoya Protocol? Examine the institutional architecture involving NBA, SBBs, and BMCs.

The Nagoya Protocol (2010), in force since October 2014, creates a legally binding framework for prior informed consent and fair, equitable sharing of benefits from genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge [4]. India gives this effect not through policy but through statute — the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 — making Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) an enforceable obligation on users.

How the Protocol's obligations are operationalised

• Regulated access: commercial utilisation, research, IPR applications, bio-survey and bio-utilisation of Indian biological resources require NBA approval, mirroring the Protocol's prior-informed-consent requirement [1].
• Mutually agreed terms: approvals carry benefit-sharing agreements; ABS was realised from firms such as Bayer, HM Clause and Advanta for accessing vegetable and oilseed genetic resources [3].
• Demonstrated monetary flows: NBA has realised about ₹266 crore in ABS funds, of which ₹145 crore has been disbursed to beneficiaries, including ₹21.26 crore realised in FY 2025-26 — led by the seed sector (₹11.75 crore) and AYUSH (₹5.56 crore) [1].
• Traditional knowledge safeguarded: benefits from resources like Bacillus soil micro-organisms used in probiotic products flow back to the local community that conserved them [2].

Institutional architecture: a three-tier design

NBA (national, Chennai; MoEFCC)  — approvals, ABS agreements, foreign/commercial access
        ↓ funds + oversight
State Biodiversity Boards / UT Councils — intra-State access, routing of ABS
        ↓ disbursal
Biodiversity Management Committees (local body level) — People's Biodiversity Registers

• The tiers work in practice: ₹3.79 crore was routed to 33 SBBs/UT Councils and institutions such as ICAR-NBPGR [3], while ₹17 lakh reached the Brihanmumbai BMC through the Maharashtra State Biodiversity Board [2].
• Weaknesses persist — dependence on BMC capacity, concentration in a few high-value sectors, and last-mile delays in a multi-tier transfer chain [3].

India thus converts an international obligation into a functioning fiscal pipeline from laboratory to panchayat, treating biodiversity as a community asset. Strengthening BMC capacity and completing People's Biodiversity Registers would make this architecture a genuine model for delivering the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework's equity goals.