Canada and Agenda
21Canada and Agenda
21
CHAPTER 15
Conservation of Biological Diversity and
THE CONVENTION ON BIODIVERSITY
-- Elizabeth May --
Elizabeth May is the Executive Director of Cultural Survival Canada and the Sierra Club of Canada. The views expressed in this chapter are those of the author who has received input from a number of stakeholders, and do not necessarily represent the views of the Projet de Société.
"The Convention on Biological Diversity holds great promise, promise of a new deal between the South and the North. It could also lead to a greater understanding of the value of all living things to the welfare of the planet's inhabitants."
Elizabeth Dowdeswell
Executive Director,
United Nations Environment Program
THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM
The opening words of Chapter 15 of Agenda 21 set out a consensus formulation of biological diversity: "Our planet's essential goods and services depend on the variety and variability of genes, species, populations and ecosystems". These biological resources are what feed and clothe us and provide housing, medicine and spiritual nourishment.
It was the World Commission on Environment and Development (the Brundtland Report) that put "Biodiversity" on the global political agenda, recognizing the accelerating loss of the planet's lifeforms as a threat of international proportions. No longer would the debate about biodiversity focus on individual species (eg. pandas) within nation states as primarily issues of local importance. The elevation of species extirpation from national to global political action successfully bypassed what for other issues was a near-fatal log jam -- sovereignty.
The world's biological diversity is being lost as a result of habitat destruction, overharvesting, pollution and inappropriate introduction of foreign plants and animals -- all as a result of human activities and demands on the planet. Agenda 21 recognized that the loss of biodiversity, while caused by human activity, was also a threat to human development. The urgent need to conserve and maintain genes, species and ecosystems was also recognized.
Meanwhile, as natural systems face a seemingly unstoppable onslaught, humankind has entered a new age. Biotechnology already has vast commercial applications in the fields of agriculture, health and environmental protection, and we are only scratching the surface of its potential. Biotechnology (access to it and control of it) became a major part of the discussion in the Rio process. The packaging and repackaging of the "stuff of life" as a commodity to be exchanged in the marketplace is becoming commonplace.
PROGRAM AREAS AND OBJECTIVES
Chapter 15 identifies one major program area and a number of objectives. In addition, it makes reference to the Convention on Biological Diversity, which was being negotiated in parallel through the United Nations Environment Program between 1990 and 1992. The Convention was signed by most nations at the Earth Summit, when Agenda 21 was adopted. The biotechnology issues dealt with in the body of the Convention are the subject of Chapter 16 in Agenda 21.
The objectives of the Biodiversity Convention include:
the conservation of biological diversity;
the sustainable use of its components; and
the equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the use of genetic resources.
In its essence, the Convention on Biological Diversity is both a conservation and a development instrument. From the viewpoint of the industrialized countries whose publics are alarmed by the unprecedented level of mass extinction, the convention holds the promise of conserving biodiversity. For the developing world, the convention reflects their needs for the sharing of benefits. The discovery of cancer fighting properties in the rosy periwinkle has become a classic example of the need for a mechanism and a guarantee for the sharing of benefits. The rosy periwinkle yielded millions of dollars in profits to the pharmaceutical company that developed the leukaemia drug, but the host country, Madagascar, received nothing and went on to allow the ecosystem that sustained the rosy periwinkle to be destroyed. The convention aims to create an incentive for the conservation of biological diversity through the sharing of benefits.
The Convention, and the chapter in Agenda 21 which supports the aims of the Convention, commit signatory countries to a range of protection strategies, from developing national strategies for biodiversity conservation, to implementing effective environmental assessment of projects that significantly threaten biodiversity, to creating special regimes for protection of "buffer zones" around park and designated wilderness areas. Both in situ and ex situ conservation is covered in the Convention. Specific roles of women and indigenous peoples are mentioned, and indigenous peoples are highlighted for the traditional ecological knowledge they possess. Countries are obliged to preserve, respect and protect traditional knowledge and to ensure that indigenous peoples share equitably in the benefits derived from their traditional knowledge.
The development or "exploitation" side of the Convention's equation refers largely to genetic resources, including potential benefits from biotechnology. It requires that signatories develop ways of ensuring the rights of countries of origin of genetic resources to benefits from the commercial utilization of products derived from such resources.
The range of commitments undertaken by signatories to the Convention is impressive. While it should be noted that virtually every commitment is softened by language such as "as appropriate" and "where necessary", still, if implemented, the Convention on Biological Diversity may well be the sleeper document of the decade or could prove to be the most potent tool emerging from Rio to move global society to sustainability and equity.
The following is a representative sampling of specific commitments within the Convention:
Produce regularly updated world reports on biodiversity;
Develop national strategies for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, and integrate these with other programs and policies;
Identify important components of biological diversity and monitor these components and the activities which are likely to have adverse effects on it;
Establish laws to protect threatened species, develop systems of protected areas to conserve biological diversity, and promote environmentally sound development around these areas;
Rehabilitate and restore degraded ecosystems and promote the recovery of threatened species, helping local people to develop and carry out remedial plans;
Respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities relevant to conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, and encourage the equitable sharing of the benefits of such knowledge;
Establish means to control the risks from organisms modified by biotechnology;
Use environmental impact assessment, with public participation, on projects that threaten biological diversity, in order to avoid or minimize damage;
Prevent the introduction of, control, or eradicate alien species which threaten ecosystems, habitat or species;
Use the media and educational programs to help people to understand the importance of biological diversity;
Establish and maintain programs for scientific and technical education and training in the identification, conservation and sustainable use of biological resources;
Facilitate access to genetic resources for environmentally sound uses by other countries, and to the technologies that are relevant to these uses, under fair and most favourable terms while ensuring effective protection of intellectual property rights;
Take measures which would enable the sharing in an equitable way of the results of research and benefits arising from commercial use of genetic resources with that country which provided the resource;
Promote international technical and scientific cooperation in the field of conservation and sustainable use, and in promoting such cooperation ensure special attention is given to strengthening of national capabilities, particularly in developing countries;
Consider the need for an agreement on the safe handling and use of living organisms modified by biotechnology; and
Provide new and additional financial resources to assist developing countries to meet the costs of implementation under this agreement.
CANADIAN POSITIONS AT RIO
1. Official Canadian Position
Canada's two objectives in negotiating the contents of this chapter, were to ensure that the chapter was consistent with and supportive of Canada's position in the negotiations for the Convention on Biological Diversity, and to ensure that throughout the chapter biodiversity be recognized as consisting of two fundamental values - the ecological services it offers for the maintenance of life on the planet as well as the resources it can provide for human benefit if they are sustainably managed.
Canada wanted the Convention to be the leading force and the Agenda 21 chapter to be a relatively simple reflection of the thrust of the Convention, which it was. The chapter is more substantive than Canada had anticipated, but given that it was compatible with the Convention, there was no concern about having to implement it.
2. Non-Governmental Organizations
A number of Canadian environmental NGOs participated in the Biodiversity Convention Advisory Group (BCAG), convened by Environment Canada and comprising NGOs, industry and other interests. These groups (Cultural Survival (Canada), Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, Rawson Academy of Aquatic Sciences, Wildlife Habitat Canada, Sierra Club of Canada, Canadian Wildlife Federation as well as groups across the country, such as Western Canada Wilderness Committee and the Conservation Council of New Brunswick), participated in the BCAG as well as in UNCED Preparatory Committee meetings. An NGO representative was included in Canada's delegation to the UNEP negotiations, once the negotiations had emerged from early non-productive sessions and the government assessed that real progress was being made.
International environmental NGOs favoured a strong convention with an independent scientific body at the international level, empowered with authority to catalogue the loss of biodiversity worldwide and offer priority suggestions for the application of funds to the developing world. They believed the convention should also initiate a massive effort to catalogue species and ecosystems and monitor how biodiversity is being protected in
every nation. Finally they felt that strong incentives and disincentives were needed to ensure all countries maximize conservation of biological diversity.
Canada considered the issues from a somewhat different perspective. While Canada accepted much of what NGOs favoured, a heated debate developed during negotiations about global lists. The idea of imposing global priorities for conservation ran counter to the principles behind the concept strongly endorsed by Canada that there be strong grassroots involvement in the development of national strategies and in their implementation. Developing countries saw global lists as an infringement on their sovereignty. The result of sometimes vitriolic negotiations was an effective compromise which retained the notion of national strategies, abandoned global lists and provided for the creation of a scientific and technical advisory body composed of government appointments, rather than truly independent advisors.
3. Business and Industry
Business and industry participated in the negotiation sessions in Nairobi and Geneva prior to Rio. Their participation in the federal government's Biodiversity Convention Advisory Group (BCAG) provided input at both the Convention negotiations and negotiations around Chapter 16 (Environmentally Sound Management of Biotechnology). Because of the participation of business from the inception, the positions carried forward by the Government to Rio on this issue were not inconsistent with the needs and concerns of business.
One of the areas of concern for business is in respect of the Biosafety Protocol and the problem posed with respect to national approaches to a science-based or risk-based regulatory system. Business in general supports the latter and continues to voice concerns about a science-based regulatory system.
4. Indigenous
Indigenous views were sought by the Government of Canada through indigenous involvement on the Canadian delegation to PrepComs. Indigenous Peoples were not well represented on the BCAG and a separate consultation process has begun since Rio to identify the vital role of Indigenous Peoples in the implementation of the Convention.
Despite the small delegation of Indigenous Peoples in the negotiating process, Canada's delegation was an early and forceful source of the language relating to the rights of Indigenous Peoples found in both the convention and Chapter 15.
Indigenous Peoples have recommended that they be consulted on all matters of conserving biological diversity. Indigenous Peoples have proved their ability to preserve and live sustainable in the most biodiverse environments in the world.
COMMITMENTS MADE BY CANADIANS
1. Legally-Binding Documents
Canada signed the Convention on Biological Diversity at the Rio conference, and ratified it December 4, 1992. Elements of this binding convention are outlined above.
2. Political Pronouncements
In a speech at the Canadian Museum of Civilization on June 1, 1992, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney helped save the Biodiversity Convention from an ignominious defeat. On May 31, 1992, the day before, U.S. President George Bush announced that the United States would not sign the Convention, despite significant concessions to the U.S. in the negotiating process. Other G-7 leaders, including notably Prime Minister John Major of the U.K. who had been an early supporter of the Convention also appeared to be reconsidering support as did France and Japan. Canada's quick and unequivocal support of the Convention was a major factor in stemming a tide of erosion of support.
In outlining a five-point Agenda for the way ahead, the Prime Minister emphasized the importance of the conventions and committed Canada to ratifying them by the end of 1992. He also suggested that the countries at Rio establish a quick-start agenda for action which would include arrangements for funding projects to preserve biodiversity in developing countries.
Ultimately, the only country to refuse to sign the convention was the United States. On April 22, 1993, newly elected President Bill Clinton reversed his predecessor's position and the U.S. became a signatory on June 5, 1993.
3. Alternative NGO Treaties and Kari-Oca
NGO Treaties
At the same time as UNCED, two major international events were also held at Rio: the Global Forum and the Kari-Oca Conference. At the International Non-Governmental Organization Forum (Global Forum), 3,100 NGOs discussed a number of matters related to environment and development and produced a parallel set of documents: an NGO Earth Charter and 38 Alternative NGO Treaties. Of these treaties, two addressed the issues discussed in Chapter 15.
Citizens Commitment on Biodiversity
This commitment describes the concept of biodiversity as "an expression of life which includes variability of all life forms and their organization and inter-relationships from the molecular to the biosphere level, which includes cultural diversity." It recognizes that life forms have a right to exist, that the diversity of life has its own intrinsic value, and that biodiversity is an essential condition for the preservation and evolution of life on the planet.
A number of principles are outlined to which signatories have subscribed. Some of these include:
Biodiversity conservation includes the sustainable use of its components - sustainable use meaning that it does not interfere with the ecological integrity of any living things or their ecosystems and which is socially equitable to people.
Conservation of biodiversity requires a fundamental change in patterns of socio-economic development globally and changes in individual mindsets toward a more equal partnership with the Earth.
Rehabilitation of degraded ecosystems is essential.
The knowledge, traditions, innovations, understanding and management practices of indigenous people and women must be respected and form a basis for sustaining biodiversity.
No patenting should be allowed on any living thing or product derived from it. This should not however, prejudice the rights of indigenous peoples, traditional farmers and fishermen to maintain control over and access to knowledge, innovations and cultural traditions concerning biodiversity, and the right to just compensation for sharing that knowledge.
The administration of environmental funds should not be done through the World Bank, and particularly by the Global Environmental Fund. An intergovernmental institution is needed to manage financial assistance in a transparent and democratic way.
Draft Protocol On Scientific Research Components for the Conservation of Biodiversity
This protocol outlines both a number of subjects which it is felt should be given special attention in researching the conservation of biological diversity, and a number of principles which the signatories agree to reflect in their research plans. The principles include, for example:
the ecological integrity of the ecosystems and their components must be respected;
the social and cultural integrity of indigenous people must be respected;
studies requiring the sampling of wild species will be avoided in sensitive ecosystems; and
knowledge obtained through international studies of biodiversity must be transferred.
Some of the subjects to be studied include:
studies of possible and existing impacts resulting from the introduction of exogenous species;
studies on the impact of militarism on biodiversity;
basic inventories of ecosystems with regard to their biophysical, socio-economic and cultural assets, and their relationship with neighbouring ecosystems; and
studies of the dynamics of interactions and interlinkages of ecosystems.
Kari-Oca
The second alternative forum at Rio was the International Conference on Territory, Environment and Development (the Kari-Oca Conference). The Kari-Oca Conference was held immediately prior to UNCED by and for the world's indigenous peoples. More than 650 indigenous representatives participated in meetings and cultural events during the conference. They developed and adopted a 109-point Indigenous Peoples Earth Charter. One section of this document is titled, "Biodiversity and Conservation", and clearly illustrates that indigenous people value the efforts being made regarding protection of biodiversity.
DEFICIENCIES, GAPS AND CONSTRAINTS WITHIN CHAPTER 15 AND THE CONVENTION
Despite the successful adoption of the biodiversity and biotechnology chapters of Agenda 21, and Canada's ratification of the Convention, a great deal remains to be negotiated when the Convention enters into force. (Entry into force will occur 90 days after 30 countries have ratified it. As of August, 1993, more than 20 countries had ratified it, so it is possible that the Convention will become legally binding within the calendar year.)
Major gaps surround issues of biotechnology and the equitable sharing of benefits between industrialized country based multi-nationals (largely pharmaceutical companies, but also chemical producers of pesticides, etc.) and developing country governments. The imprecision around these issues was the primary reason for the U.S. initial refusal to sign the Convention.
Also to be negotiated is the financial mechanism for the provision of resources to developing countries for the preservation of their in situ biodiversity. The Global Environmental Facility identifies biodiversity as one of its four program areas, and it is widely assumed that the GEF will be the appropriate mechanism for biodiversity convention arrangements. However, as noted above the NGO alternative treaty strongly opposes the GEF in this role, as do the developing country governments.
Other critical issues are raised, but not resolved by the Convention and chapters. Both speak of the role of indigenous peoples and of their right to the "equitable sharing of benefits arising from the utilization of (traditional ecological) knowledge, innovations and practices." The traditional western concept of rewarding knowledge is through the recognition of intellectual property rights. It is not clear whether intellectual property rights (IPR) can be accommodated to collective wisdom of whole cultures, such as the knowledge of indigenous shaman. It is more likely that intellectual property rights will reward a pharmaceutical company that identified the relevant genetic factor in a traditional cure than the people who have developed and used the cure for centuries. The relationship between IPR and Traditional Ecological Knowledge will be a key area for negotiation as the Convention is implemented.
COMPARISON BETWEEN CURRENT CANADIAN GOVERNMENT POLICY AND COMMITMENTS MADE
1.Canada's Current Plan for Implementation
Canada's implementation of the Biodiversity Convention has largely been coordinated by the Biodiversity Convention Office (BCO), housed within Environment Canada. The BCO chairs and manages the work of the Biodiversity Working Group, comprised of contacts from within each provincial and territorial government. It is charged with bringing forward the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy for ministerial approval, formulating a public awareness campaign for biodiversity conservation and advising on Canadian positions relating to the convention for international fora. As well, the Biodiversity Convention Advisory Group (BCAG) discussed above, continues to meet and provide advice to the BCO and the Working Group.
The target is to develop a Canadian Biodiversity Strategy by November 1994, with an interim report to be ready by November, 1993.
The guiding principles for the development of the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy are as follows:
Scope of the Canadian Biodiversity Strategy to cover entire range of Convention obligations, both domestic and international.
Federal, provincial and territorial components to be independent, but coordinated within a commonly agreed framework and set of criteria. Responsibilities for follow-up actions to be shared in some cases and specific to individual jurisdictions in others. Federal government to lead for international obligations.
Strategy to be developed in a coordinated and integrated way with indigenous people, non-government interests and industry.
Information base to be on coordinated and cooperative basis to maximize efficiencies and avoid duplication.
Strategy to provide for coordinated public awareness and education, including sharing of information and consistent messages. Each jurisdiction to plan and implement its own activities according to its particular circumstances.
Strategy and its application to provide the framework for reporting on Convention implementation.
2. Recommendations For Action Beyond Current Government Plan
Canadian environmental NGOs have criticized the government, both at the provincial and federal level, for failing to meet the commitments made at Rio. In the first annual "Rio Report Card", the federal government received a "C" for Canada's efforts to implement the Convention and chapter domestically. The Report Card issued by a large number of environmental groups and coordinated by the Forum for Sustainability and the Sierra Club RioWatch project, noted that two new national parks had been created, but that both were in the far north and not in areas of southern Canada where development pressures are more extreme. However, the federal government was also given an "A" for timely ratification of both the Biodiversity and Climate Change Conventions. Provincial governments did not fare as well. British Columbia received an "F" for its decision to log most of Clayoquot Sound's ancient temperate rainforest.
A coalition of environmental groups also called on the federal and provincial governments to develop legislation as called for in the Convention for the protection of endangered species. The World Wildlife Fund, Sierra Legal Defense Fund, Canadian Nature Federation, Sierra Club of Canada, Canadian Environmental Law Association, and the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society presented a joint brief to the Standing Committee on the Environment of the House of Commons. The Standing Committee accepted the recommendation for endangered species legislation. The Canadian Bar Association subsequently also endorsed the call for such legislation. Neither the federal nor provincial governments have yet accepted the call for endangered species legislation. (Only Ontario and New Brunswick have endangered species laws on the books, but no enforcement has ever taken place under their legislation.)
The Standing Committee on the Environment of the House of Commons held hearings in November 1992 to identify action for Rio follow-up. They focused extensively on the Biodiversity Convention. The following are their recommendations relating to biodiversity, published in "A Global Partnership: Canada and the Conventions of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development."
This Committee recognizes the importance of organizing Canada's scientific resources and expertise in order to optimize our capacity and effectiveness in meeting our international obligations under the Biodiversity Convention. The committee recommends that the Government of Canada examine the feasibility of re-grouping agencies and professionals working in the area of biodiversity in various federal departments to ensure effective communication and networking.
The Committee considers that one of the fundamental building blocks of an effective National Biodiversity Strategy will be a National Inventory of Canada's Biological Diversity, and we recommend that the development of such an inventory be facilitated by the Government of Canada. The Committee further recommends that the Government of Canada support the creation of an international data bank of the world's species.
The Committee recommends that the Government of Canada ensure sufficient support of institutional research into the classification and study of the species of flora and fauna that make up the biodiversity of life.
The Committee recommends that the Government of Canada begin the design and implementation of economic instruments for the conservation of biological diversity, and re-evaluate government subsidies, policies and programs that contribute to environmental degradation.
The Committee recommends that the Government of Canada consider extending to donations of natural heritage property the same tax treatment that applies to donations of cultural property.
The Committee recommends that the Government of Canada begin the process of determining the value of biological diversity, so that this value can be internalized in its calculations of national accounts.
The Committee recommends that the government of Canada, in cooperation with all levels of government, support the implementation of the five initiatives identified for action at the tri-council meeting (of Canada's Parks, Wildlife and Environment Ministers, November 25, 1992):
1.complete networks of protected areas representative of Canada's land-based natural regions by the year 2000 and accelerate the protection of areas representative of Canada's marine natural regions;
2.accelerate the identification and protection of critical wildlife habitat;
3.adopt frameworks, strategies, and timeframes for the completion of protected areas networks;
4.continue to cooperate in the protection of ecosystems, landscapes and wildlife habitat; and
5.ensure that protected areas are integral components of all sustainable development strategies.
The Committee recommends that the Government of Canada, working with the provinces and territories, consider the necessity of legislation to conserve biological diversity within Canada, and take immediate steps to develop an integrated legislative approach to the protection of endangered species, habitat, ecosystems and biodiversity in Canada.
The Committee recommends that the Government of Canada take whatever steps are necessary to ensure that environmental assessments take full account of Canada's obligations under the Biodiversity Convention.
The Committee recommends that the policies of Parks Canada and the regulations promulgated under the National Parks Act fully reflect and fulfill Canada's obligations under the Biodiversity Convention.
CANADIAN ACTIVITIES EVOLVING THROUGH THE SUSTAINABILITY PROCESS
A number of government actions have been taken which are relevant to the chapter and Convention. The recent re-organization of government arguably weakens our ability to respond to the Convention. As the Standing Committee recommended, the relevant departments and agencies dealing with biodiversity should be centralized to provide for most efficient communication and implementation. The recent removal of Parks Canada from Environment Canada and the placement of it within Heritage runs counter to such a goal. There are no other biodiversity related branches within Heritage, whereas Environment Canada houses the Canadian Wildlife Service and the Biodiversity Convention Office.
Other sectors of Canadian society also play a role in implementing the Convention. The Canadian Museum of Nature has played a significant part in developing Canada's positions, as well as in the "hands-on" inventorying of Canada's biodiversity. Recent cut-backs at the Museum, due to both government budget cuts and a redirection of the museum's purpose, unfortunately result in a loss of scientific research and the erosion of Canada's ability to respond to our Convention obligations to inventory our biodiversity.
The cuts at the Museum of Nature should be seen in the larger context of the steady erosion of Canada's capacity in biosystematics. Agriculture Canada once had world-class biosystematics capacity, but it has been seriously down-graded. Since at least the 1970s, various levels of governments and institutions in Canada have allowed the field of biosystematics to be so severely depleted that Canada now lacks the ability to fulfil obligations under the Convention -- much less to respond to requests from developing nations to lend our biosystematics expertise to their biological inventory commitments. In contrast, in the U.S., the world respected expert in biodiversity, formerly with the Smithsonian, Dr. Tom Lovejoy, has been named to head the new national Biological Survey Organization. In Canada, we do not have a biological parallel to our national Geological Survey.
Significant upcoming decisions by Agriculture Canada should be noted. Two insecticides are currently under a registration review due to their significant impact in reducing biodiversity. Fenitrothion has been described in the Government Review Document as "environmentally unacceptable" due to its high toxicity to many forms of life, but particularly migratory songbirds. Carbofuran is also facing registration review due to its impact on the endangered specie, the burrowing owl. The registration review process has, however, yet to take explicit note of the Biodiversity Convention and Canada's international obligations.
OTHER RELEVANT INTERNATIONAL SUSTAINABILITY-RELATED FORA
The Global Environmental Facility (GEF)
The International Tropical Timber Organization
Consultative Group on International Agriculture Research (CGIAR)
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)
The United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD)
The Intergovernmental Committee on the Convention on Biological Diversity (first meeting October 11-15, Geneva)
Ramsar Convention (Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat)
Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC)
International Whaling Commission (IWC)
International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN)
United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO)
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP)
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
SUGGESTED READINGS AND INFORMATION SOURCES
Global Biodiversity. A publication of the Canadian Museum of Nature.
Government of Canada. Canada's Green Plan, (Ottawa: Environment Canada, 1990).
. Canada's Green Plan and the Earth Summit, (Ottawa: Environment Canada, 1992).
. Canada's National Report: United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development Brazil, June 1992, (Ottawa: Environment Canada, 1991).
International Development Research Centre (IDRC). Agenda 21: Abstracts, Reviews, and
Commentaries, (Theodora Carroll-Foster, editor), (Ottawa: IDRC, 1993).
Juma, Calestous. The Gene Hunters, Biotechnology and the Scramble for Seeds, (Princeton University Press, 1989).
Keating, Michael. Agenda for Change: A Plain Language Version of Agenda 21 and the Other Rio Agreements, (Geneva: Centre for Our Common Future, 1993).
Mander, Jerry. In the Absence of the Sacred, (Sierra Club Books, 1993).
Standing Committee on Environment. A Global Partnership: Canada and the Conventions of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, House of Commons, Canada, April 1993.
World Bank, World Resources Institute (WRI), International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), and World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Conserving the World's Biodiversity, (1990).
World Commission on Environment and Development. Our Common Future, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987)
World Resources Institute. Biodiversity Prospecting, (World Resources Institute, May 1993).
. International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN), and United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). Global Biodiversity Strategy: Guidelines for Action to Save and Use the Earth's Biotic Wealth Sustainably and Equitably, (1992).
Information Sources:
Biodiversity Convention Office, 351 St. Joseph Blvd., 4th Floor, Hull, Quebec, K1A 0H3, tel (819) 953-9669, fax (819) 953-1765.
Interim Secretariat, Convention on Biological Diversity, 15 chemin des Anemones, Case Postale 356, 1219 Chatelaine, Geneva, Switzerland, tel (41 22) 97909111, fax (41 22) 797-2512.
Cite as: Projet de société: Canada and Agenda 21.Winnipeg: IISD, 1995. Online. Internet. http://iisd.ca/worldsd/canada/projet/c15.htm.
