Editorial Summary: Down to Earth argues that India submitted its first national report (November 2017 - December 2025) under the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Nagoya Protocol, showing that it issued about 56% of global Internationally Recognised Certificates of Compliance (3,561 of 6,311) and mobilised ₹216.31 crore in Access and Benefit Sharing benefits with ₹139.69 crore disbursed. India’s ABS architecture is now a global template, and although India ratified the Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on liability and redress in December 2014, the domestic legislative framework operationalising it remains to be fully implemented.
The Nagoya Protocol
The Nagoya Protocol is the principal international instrument operationalising the third objective of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD, 1992) — the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of genetic resources.
| Indicator | Detail |
|---|---|
| Full name | Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization |
| Adopted | October 29, 2010, Nagoya, Japan |
| Entry into force | October 12, 2014 |
| Parties | 142 (as of 2025) |
| Parent treaty | Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 1992 |
The protocol functions through a two-tier compliance system — Prior Informed Consent (PIC) from the country of origin and Mutually Agreed Terms (MAT) for benefit-sharing — combined with national-law compliance in both provider and user countries.
India’s Domestic Architecture
India’s Access and Benefit Sharing regime is built on the Biological Diversity Act 2002 (amended 2023).
| Institution | Role |
|---|---|
| National Biodiversity Authority (NBA), Chennai | Statutory body — clears foreign-user access |
| State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs) | 29 SBBs across states and UTs |
| Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs) | ~2.76 lakh at local level |
Key statutory provisions:
- Section 6 BDA: Foreign user must seek NBA approval
- Section 19 BDA: Research and commercial-use clearances
- People’s Biodiversity Registers (PBRs): Local documentation by BMCs
India ratified the CBD on February 18, 1994 and the Nagoya Protocol on October 9, 2012.
India’s First Nagoya Report: The Headline Numbers
The reporting period covers November 2017 to December 2025.
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| India’s share of global IRCCs | ~56% (3,561 of 6,311) |
| ABS benefits mobilised (NBA) | ₹216.31 crore |
| ABS benefits disbursed | ₹139.69 crore |
| Additional through SBBs/UTBCs (Section 7) | ₹51.96 crore |
| Beneficiaries | Indigenous communities, biodiversity-rich states, conservation entities |
Internationally Recognised Certificate of Compliance (IRCC)
An IRCC is the document evidencing PIC and MAT, posted at the ABS Clearing House under the protocol. It provides legal certainty to users in their home jurisdictions. India’s 3,561 IRCCs — about 56% of the global total of 6,311 — make it the single largest operational ABS jurisdiction in the world. The next-largest are France (964), Spain (320) and Argentina (257).
The 2023 Amendment Debate
The Biological Diversity (Amendment) Act 2023 generated a sharp policy debate.
- Easing measures: Compliance simplified for AYUSH practitioners; decriminalisation of certain offences
- Critics’ position: Weakens biopiracy controls and dilutes the precautionary principle
- Defenders’ position: Aligns regulation with a biodiversity-as-resource framework and reduces compliance friction for traditional-medicine practitioners
The debate is unresolved, but the operational data from the first national report suggests that India’s ABS machinery has continued to issue IRCCs at scale and disburse benefits.
The Supplementary Protocol — Ratified, but Awaiting Domestic Operationalisation
A frequently misunderstood point in the policy discourse concerns the Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress. India has ratified the protocol — but the domestic legislative framework operationalising it for damage from Living Modified Organisms (LMOs) remains to be fully implemented.
| Indicator | Detail |
|---|---|
| Adopted | October 15, 2010, Nagoya |
| Entry into force | March 5, 2018 |
| Subject matter | Liability for damage from Living Modified Organisms (LMOs) |
| Parent treaty | Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety |
| India’s status | Signed October 11, 2011; Cabinet approval October 29, 2014; instrument of ratification deposited at UN December 19, 2014 (28th country to ratify) |
India is a party to both the Cartagena Protocol and the Supplementary Protocol — what remains is the domestic legislation that gives the liability-and-redress framework operational force in a country with extensive transgenic-crop research and biotechnology activity.
The Biopiracy Legacy
India’s ABS architecture is built on lessons from a series of pre-Nagoya biopiracy disputes.
| Case | Year | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Turmeric patent revocation | 1995 | US patent revoked after India’s challenge |
| Neem patent dispute | Late 1990s-2000s | European Patent Office revoked patent |
| Basmati GI case | Late 1990s | Partial victory; GI architecture strengthened |
These cases led directly to the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL), launched in 2001 by CSIR and the Department of AYUSH.
| TKDL Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Launched | 2001 (CSIR + Department of AYUSH) |
| Medicinal formulations documented | ~2.26 million across 34 million pages |
| Languages | English, German, French, Japanese, Spanish |
TKDL is the world’s largest defensive prior-art database for traditional knowledge and has prevented many subsequent misappropriation attempts.
India’s Biodiversity Profile
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Megadiverse-country status | 1 of 17 |
| Global biodiversity hotspots | 4 (Himalaya, Indo-Burma, Western Ghats-Sri Lanka, Sundaland) |
| Share of global land area | 2.4% |
| Share of recorded species | 7-8% |
This profile gives India both the standing and the strategic interest to lead Global South negotiations on access and benefit-sharing.
The DSI Frontier
The next frontier is Digital Sequence Information (DSI) — the question of whether benefit-sharing should apply to genetic-sequence data, not just physical samples.
- India and Global South position: Yes, DSI must be inside the benefit-sharing tent
- Developed countries (pharma, biotech): Cautious — concerned about research friction
- Cali Fund: Operationalised modestly at CBD COP-16 (Cali, Colombia, October-November 2024)
- NBSAP 2024-2030: Submitted at COP-16 Cali
- Next conference: CBD COP-17, Yerevan, Armenia, 2026
The CBD COP-15 Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (December 2022) Target 13 explicitly mandates ABS implementation, and the Cali Fund is the early test of how the framework operationalises DSI.
Way Forward
- Fully operationalise the Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol (ratified by India in December 2014) through domestic liability-and-redress legislation
- Strengthen controlled access to TKDL for legitimate research while preserving anti-biopiracy protection
- Scale BMCs and People’s Biodiversity Registers beyond the existing ~2.76 lakh
- Lead Global South DSI negotiations at CBD COP-17 (Yerevan, 2026) and subsequent fora
- Operationalise the Cali Fund at scale with credible contributions and disbursement mechanisms
- Implement NBSAP 2024-2030 submitted at COP-16
UPSC Mains Analysis
GS Paper 3 — Environment and Biodiversity
- Biodiversity governance: Biological Diversity Act 2002 / 2023 amendment, NBA, SBBs, BMCs
- Access and Benefit Sharing: Nagoya Protocol architecture, IRCCs, PIC, MAT
- Traditional knowledge: TKDL, biopiracy cases (turmeric, neem, basmati)
- Hotspots and megadiverse status: India’s 4 hotspots, 17 megadiverse countries
GS Paper 2 — International Institutions and Treaties
- CBD (1992) and its three objectives
- Nagoya Protocol (2010) and Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol (2010)
- Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
- CBD COP-15 (Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, 2022), COP-16 (Cali, 2024), COP-17 (Yerevan, 2026)
Keywords: Nagoya Protocol October 29 2010, entry into force October 12 2014, India ratification October 9 2012, CBD February 18 1994, Biological Diversity Act 2002 / 2023, NBA Chennai, IRCC (3,561 / 6,311 ~56%), PIC, MAT, ABS benefits ₹216.31 crore mobilised, ₹139.69 crore disbursed, Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol October 15 2010 / March 5 2018 (India ratified December 19 2014), Cartagena Protocol, TKDL 2001 (~2.26 million formulations), KMGBF Target 13, Cali Fund COP-16 2024, COP-17 Yerevan 2026, NBSAP 2024-2030.
Editorial Insight
India’s first national Nagoya Protocol report is more than a procedural filing — it is the operational ledger of a country that has converted its megadiverse status into a working benefit-sharing architecture. About 56% of global IRCCs (3,561 of 6,311) and ₹139.69 crore disbursed to indigenous communities and biodiversity-rich states is not an incidental statistic; it is structural leadership. But the architecture is unfinished. The Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on liability for damage from Living Modified Organisms — which India ratified back in December 2014 — still awaits the domestic legislative scaffolding to give it operational force, the Digital Sequence Information negotiation is unresolved, and the 2023 amendment debate is unsettled. India can credibly lead the Global South at CBD COP-17 in Yerevan in October 2026 — but only if it operationalises what it has ratified, strengthens what it has built, and treats benefit-sharing as a fairness principle, not merely a treaty obligation.
Sources: Down to Earth, NBA, MoEFCC
