Technology transfer (from those who have it to those who need it), capacity building and cooperation are topics of fundamental importance for the implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). This applies, in particular, to obligations under Articles 16 through 19 which address technology transfer, exchange of information, scientific co-operation and biotechnology.
In the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), obligations also exist with respect to the provision of enabling environments, the promotion and facilitation of access by particularly affected developing country Parties to appropriate technology, knowledge and know-how. Funding responsibilities also include encouraging the mobilization of private sector as well other non-governmental resources.
The Trondheim conference The Trondheim Conference on Technology Transfer and Capacity Building, which took place in Trondheim, Norway in June 2003, made its deliberations on definitions of technology transfer as well as strategic considerations and operational aspects thereof.
Technology transfer was defined as the transfer of systematic knowledge, skills and innovations for the development and use of products, application of processes or rendering of services. Capacity building was seen as the development of the ability in a nation’s people and institutions to understand, absorb, apply, modify, and further develop the knowledge and technologies available for the implementation of the Convention and the achievement of its goals. Technology transfer was also seen as relating to knowledge, methods and technologies within the various economic sectors (i.e. agriculture, forestry and fisheries) that might be essential to achieve the objectives of the CBD. Several challenges were identified that needed to be overcome in order to enable a better understanding and use of available and potential opportunities and benefits deriving from technology transfer and capacity building. These include: (1) insufficiently receptive social and economic conditions to allow successful technology transfer and capacity building; (2) inadequate information on available technologies; (3) uncertainty with respect to terms under which technology transfer could and should be undertaken; and (4) lack of appropriate regulatory, financial and institutional frameworks at the local, national, regional and international levels.
Achieving improved and better-targeted technology transfer and capacity building would require developing concrete targets and improved synergies between biodiversity and development policies, with obligations and needs under other conventions, and between sectors at the national level.
It was agreed, in Trondheim, that these needs will require different technologies and be used by different users. Transferring or acquiring technologies relevant for the conservation of biological diversity requires appropriate economic incentives. Such technologies are not necessarily available on the market, and usually also need to be developed and refined locally.
As an operational principle, the Parties to the CBD and bodies and entities established by the Conference of the Parties should engage in technology transfer and capacity building in co-operation and in partnerships with intergovernmental, governmental, non-governmental and private sector organizations.
The conference identified three key areas for further analysis and work as well as where operational measures should be identified, tested and evaluated. These areas were related to technology needs, capacity building needs and enabling environments.
Keys areas of analysis Technology needs assessments should be country driven, primarily by the receiving country, and should be based on the obligations under the Convention and other needs relevant to conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. A more proactive use of the Clearing-House Mechanism (CHM) could play an important role. The assessment process should involve relevant stakeholders such as business, the research community and non-governmental organisations.
Capacity building needs assessments should include needs related to information and communication, public awareness, networks and partnerships, safety science and management, including risk assessments (for biotechnology and biodiversity in general), education and research, and inventory and monitoring. The role of business would also be essential here.
Such assessments related to technology and capacity building needs should be made transparent and involve all relevant stakeholders as far as possible. Assessments should also aim at stimulating increased interest in biodiversity-relevant issues from a wider audience, such as improving the understanding of the fundamental role of biodiversity in sustainable development and the provision of ecosystem services. A necessary focus should be put on the economic value of these resources and services, as key economic interests and business will be expected to adapt to the risks and opportunities related to these values. Greater public and political awareness could increase the demand and supply for science and technology relevant to the CBD.
Last, the enabling environment is crucial for successful technology transfer and capacity building. Important elements were identified for improving the enabling environment, inter alia, promotion and in some cases revision of legal frameworks, fostering and strengthening of their implementation, and developing workable law-enforcement (compliance) mechanisms that foster responsible transfer and clarify the rights and responsibilities involved.
Other important aspects related to an enabling environment include establishing national institutions related to the conservation of biodiversity and sustainable use of biological resources, the development of mechanisms for co-ordination and oversight of biodiversity-related or biodiversity-affecting technology transfer within a country or region, establishing suitable mechanisms and standards for participation of relevant stakeholders, developing appropriate incentives both economic and others, and establishing mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating the state of biodiversity. There is also a need to facilitate institutional synergies and policy integration. The need to build the necessary institutional framework at various levels for continued work on technology transfer and capacity building was stressed.
Moving forward Subsequent to the 2003 Trondheim conference, a Programme of Work on technology transfer and technological and scientific cooperation has been established under the Convention, and important steps for its implementation are under way. The fifth Trondheim Conference on Biodiversity, hosted by the Norwegian government in collaboration with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), will be held on 29 October - 2 November 2007, under the title “Ecosystems and people — biodiversity for development — the road to 2010 and beyond”, it will focus on the importance of biodiversity for poverty alleviation and for moving towards sustainable development as well as on the difficult trade-offs that often result.
Technology transfer should be viewed in a broad sense, not only to include installation of hard technology, but also be coupled to long-term needs of the recipient country regarding developing and maintaining an enabling environment. This is important in order for the recipients to have a wide overview with respect to the design of their own incentives and is invariably connected to having good governance and management structures in place. This again implies that, in the concept of technology transfer and cooperation, is also included the transfer of competence regarding management and governance, e.g. development and implementation of rules and regulations, cooperation at the local, sub-national and national level, including horizontal cooperation at the ministerial level.
Besides technology transfer related to management issues, mostly related to institutional capacity building of environment institutions at the national level, there is a growing awareness among other sector institutions at the national level of their specific needs to consider the environmental impacts of their own policies and actions. National and provincial government sector institutions are therefore also gradually building the capacity to manage the environment through technology transfer cooperation programmes in accordance with Article 6 (b) of the Convention.
The considerable technological resources of the business community should be engaged more actively to contribute to the implementation of the Convention. Improved communication with and involvement of business is therefore essential. At the same time, when it comes to technology transfer, there is a need for engagement from the government authorities in both donor and recipient countries in order to underpin the development of an enabling environment for policy and decision making relative to the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.
‘Quadruple partnerships’ involving long-term commitments from the private and public sector in both donor and recipient countries could thus be of utmost importance in carrying out activities relevant for achieving the objectives of the Convention.
Gunn M. Paulsen (
Gunn.Paulsen@dirnat.no) is Head, International Division,
Directorate for Nature Management (Norway).
