WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION
ORGANISATION MONDIALE DU COMMERCE
ORGANIZACIÓN MUNDIAL DEL COMERCIOWT/CTE/W/116
28 June 1999
(99-2496)
Committee on Trade and Environment Original:  English/
anglais/
inglés
COMMUNICATION FROM THE SECRETARIAT OF THE CONVENTION ON
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
The attached background note1 has been received from the Secretariat of the Convention on
Biological Diversity.  It is being circulated to members of the CTE in preparation for the CommitteeMeeting on Trade and Environment to be held on 29-30 June 1999.
Comité du commerce et de l'environnement
COMMUNICATION DU SECRÉTARIAT DE LA CONVENTION
SUR LA DIVERSITÉ BIOLOGIQUE
La note d'information ci-jointe1 a été reçue du Secrétariat de la Convention sur la diversité
biologique.  Elle est distribuée aux membres du Comité du commerce et de l'environnement en vue de
la réunion que le Comité tiendra les 29 et 30 juin 1999.
Comité de Comercio y Medio Ambiente
COMUNICACIÓN DE LA SECRETARÍA DEL CONVENIO
SOBRE LA DIVERSIDAD BIOLÓGICA
La Secretaría del Convención sobre la Diversidad Biológica ha enviado el documento de base
adjunto1, que se distribuye a los miembros del CCMA como parte de los preparativos para la reunión
sobre comercio y medio ambiente que el Comité  celebrará los días 29 y 30 de junio de 1999.
                                                     
1 English only/En anglais seulement/En inglés solamente.WT/CTE/W/116
Page 2
RESPONSE OF THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE CONVENTION ON
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY TO THE REQUEST OF THE CAIR OF THE COMMITTEE ON
TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT
I. MEMBERSHIP
A. WHICH COUNTRIES ARE PARTY TO THE MEA?
1. There are 175 Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity.  A list of those Parties is
contained in the Annex to this document.
B. WHO, IN YOUR VIEW , ARE “KEY PLAYERS ’ THAT ARE NOT YET PARTY TO THE MEA?
2. The objectives of the Convention are the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable
use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the use of
genetic resources.  Accordingly, countries which contain significant amounts of biological diversity orimportant elements of this diversity may be considered as having a “key role” to play in the
Convention and are thus “key players”.  Moreover, in light of the latter objective, those countries
which use or import biological diversity derived products are also important.  Under these criteria all
states that are not Parties to the Convention are in the view of the Secretariat ‘“key players” that are
not yet party to the MEA’.
C. W
HO ARE THE NON -PARTIES THAT ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE MEA AND WHY HAVE
THEY NOT JOINED ?
3. The Convention does not have a compliance procedure.  Formal assessment of Parties or non-
Parties compliance with the Convention has not occurred.
4. Article 26 of the Convention does, however, require Parties to present to the Conference of
the Parties, reports on measures which they have taken to implement the provisions of the Convention
and their effectiveness in meeting the objectives of the Convention.  The Conference of the Parties
requested that Parties submit their first report by 31 December 1998.  In the absence of any
compliance procedure, information regarding Part ies' compliance with the Convention derives from
their reports. One non-Party has submitted a report.
5. The Secretariat is aware of a variety of reasons why states have not become Parties to the
Convention.  Some non-Parties are currently undertaking the process of ratification and expect to have
this completed in due course.  Others are experiencing a level of domestic difficulties that prevent the
necessary action to ratify the Convention.  In other countries the necessary public or political support
does not exist.
II. TRADE MEASURES
A. WHAT ARE THE TRADE MEASURES (EXISTING AND PROPOSED ) IN THE MEA?
6. The text of the Convention does not explicitly refer to trade measures.  Nor does the
Convention generally prescribe specific measures.  The provisions of the Convention, with a few
exceptions, set goals.  The specific measures required to achieve these goals are largely the
prerogative of Parties.
7. The Convention does, however, contain a number of provisions that are generally understood
to require measures by Parties that could have consequences for trade.  Provisions of the Convention
that are often characterized in this way include:WT/CTE/W/116
Page 3
(a) Paragraph (b), Article 6 which calls upon Parties to “[i]ntegrate, as far as possible and
as appropriate, the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity into
relevant sectoral or cross-sectoral plans, programme and policies”;
(b) Paragraph (c), Article 7 which calls upon Parties to “[i]dentify process and categories
of activities which have or are likely to have significant adverse impacts on theconservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, and monitor their effects”.
Paragraph (l), Article 8 then provides that Parties shall as far as possible “regulate or
manage the relevant processes and categories of activities” so identified;
(c) Paragraph (b), Article 10 provides that Parties shall “[a]dopt measures relating to the
use of biological resources to avoid or minimize adverse impacts on biological
diversity”;
(d) Article 11 calls upon Parties to “adopt economically and socially sound measures that
act as incentives for conservation and sust ainable use of components of biological
diversity”;
(e) Article 14 requires Parties to introduce environmental impact assessment procedures;
(f) Article 15, which establishes a basis for the regime use of genetic resources based on
the fair and equitable distribution of their use;
(g) Articles 16 and 19 require Parties to take measures to promote the transfer of relevant
technologies; and
(h) Paragraph 3 of Article 19 require Parties to consider the need for a protocol on
biosafety.
8. How these and other aspects of the Convention relate to the issue of trade measures in general
and the World Trade Organization (WTO) regime in particular has been described by the Secretariat
to previous sessions of the Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE), (see documents
WT/CTE/W/64 and WT/CTE/W/92).
B. H
AVE ANY DECISIONS BEEN TAKEN THAT CONTAIN ADDITIONAL TRADE MEASURES ?
9. The last ordinary meeting of the Conference of the Parties was in May 1998.  The Secretariat
submitted the decisions of this meeting along with a summary of those aspects of the decisions that
are relevant to trade measures in document WT/CTE/W/92.
10. A summary of previous decisions of the C onference of the Parties was made in document
W/CTE/W/64.
11. Since then the Conference of the Parties had an extraordinary meeting to consider a draft text
for a protocol on biosafety.  The results of this meeting are described below.
C. HAVE NON -COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES BEEN ENFORCED ON PARTIES ?
12. The Convention does not establish a formal “compliance” procedure.  As explained above
Parties are, however, required to report on the measures they have taken to implement the Convention
and their effectiveness.  In many of these reports Parties have indicated that further measures are
required in order to fully implement the Convention and /or meet its objectives.WT/CTE/W/116
Page 4
13. Moreover, the Convention contains numerous mechanisms and provisions intended to assist
developing country Parties implement the Convention.  An important aspect of these commitments is
the financial resources provided by the financial mechanism to developing country Parties.  Article 5
also provides that Parties shall cooperate either directly or through competent international
organisations. Further detail regarding such mechanisms is given below.
14. The Convention also contains a procedure for settling disputes between Parties (Article 27
and Annex II).
D. HAVE THE TRADE MEASURES ASSISTED IN ACHIEVING THE OBJECTIVES OF YOUR AGREEMENT ,
AND WHY ?
15. Trade measures are a significant tool for achieving the aims of the Convention in a number of
ways.
16. At the international level, the Conference of the Parties has considered trade measures in a
number of decisions.  One important example in this respect is the impact that trade measures and the
international trading regime has had on the negotiations for the biosafety protocol (considered below).
17. Another important example of the effect of trade measures on the development of the
Convention is seen in the work of the Conference of the Parties with respect to agricultural biological
diversity.  Decision III/11 on conservation and sustainable use of agricultural biological diversityestablishes a multi-year programme of activities.  The aim of this programme is to promote the
positive effects and mitigate the negative impacts of agricultural practices on biological diversity.  It
also hopes to promote the conservation and sustainable use of genetic resources of actual or potential
value for food and agriculture and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the use of
genetic resources.  In this decision the Conference of the Parties acknowledged the importance thattrade measures will play in achieving these aims.  Accordingly, the Conference of the Parties
encouraged the WTO through its Committee on Trade and Environment to consider developing a
better appreciation of the relationship between trade and agricultural biodiversity.  The Conference of
the Parties at its fourth meeting reconfirmed the importance of trade measures by requesting the
Secretariat to apply for observer status in the WTO Committee on Agriculture.
18. Numerous Parties have indicated in their national reports that they have considered the role
that trade measures can play in achieving the aims of the Convention.  Several have stated that they
have taken trade measures to implement the aims of the Convention.
E. D
OES THE MEA CONTAIN INCENTIVES TO ENCOURAGE COUNTRIES TO JOIN , AS WELL AS
FACILITATE IMPLEMENTATION ? (EXAMPLE : TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER , MARKET INCENTIVES ,
CAPACITY BUILDING )
19. The Convention, like the other UNCED agreem ents, recognizes that to achieve its aim
developing countries need to be able to participate fully and effectively in the process.  Due to
capacity restraints most developing country Parties need assistance to ratify the Convention,
implement its provisions and participate in its decision-making processes.
20. The fact that most biological diversity resides within developing countries has meant that the
Convention contains an extensive array of provision addressing these needs.  For example, theConvention contains provisions addressing: transfer of technology (e.g. Articles 16 and 19), market
incentives (e.g. Articles 10 and 11), capacity building (e.g. Articles 12 and 18), financial support for
implementing the Convention (Articles 20 and 21), as  well as participating in its decision-making
(e.g. decision IV/17, Table 4, Special Voluntary Trust Fund for the Facilitating Participation of Parties
in the Convention Process for the Biennium 1999-2000), awareness raising (e.g. Article 13), scientific
and technical cooperation (e.g. Article 18), research and training (e.g. Article 12),  exchange ofWT/CTE/W/116
Page 5
information (e.g. Article 17), sustainable use of biological diversity (e.g. Article 10) and incentive
measures (e.g. Article 11).
21. Indeed, the whole approach of the Convention is based on the principle of common but
differentiated responsibility, as defined in paragraph 4 of Article 20, which provides that:
‘the extent to which developing country Par ties will effectively implement their commitments
under this Convention will depend on the effective implementation by developed country
Parties of their commitments under this Convention related to financial resources and transfer
of technology and will take fully into account the fact that economic and social development
and eradication of poverty are the first and overriding priorities of the developing country
Parties’.
F. HOW HAVE THESE INCENTIVES WORKED AND WHO HAS FUNDED THEM ?
22. The Convention has been ratified by 175 Parties and enjoys almost universal support from
developing and developed countries.  By this measure the incentives to join the Convention have
proved effective.
23. Assessing the effectiveness of such measure in facilitating implementation is a much more
difficult and complex task.  National reports on the implementation of the Convention have been
received from 111 Parties and one non-Party.  A preliminary synthesis of the information contained inthese reports was provided to the fourth meeting of the Conference of the Parties in document
UNEP/CBD/COP/4/11/Rev.1.  The main conclusion of this document is that implementation of the
Convention at the national level has been initiated in most countries and attention has also been given
to regional cooperation.  In the vast majority of countries national biodiversity strategies and action
plans are being developed.  The successful development and implementation of national biodiversitystrategies and action plans is clearly linked to other key provisions of the Convention, the most
prominent of which are public education and awareness and the adoption of appropriate incentive
measures.  The national reports identify the need for continued technical and financial support for
both the planning and implementation phases.  These needs involve capacity building, the sharing of
information and experiences, and access to expertise and financial resources.
24. The financial mechanism of the Convention has played an important role in addressing these
needs and providing incentives to Parties to join  and implement the Convention.  The mechanism is
operated by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and is funded by contributions from states.  The
GEF in its capacity as the financial mechanism has approved projects amounting to over $600m.  The
Conference of the Parties undertook its first review of the effectiveness financial mechanism at its
fourth meeting.  The results of this review are contained in decision IV/11.  The Conference of the
Parties, although welcoming the efforts made to date by the GEF, did recognize that furtherimprovements are needed for the effectiveness of the financial mechanism.  In this respect the
Conference of the Parties made a number of recommendations of a procedural nature for the GEF.
25. Paragraph 3 of Article 20 provides that developed country Parties may also provide financial
resources related to the implementation of the Convention, through bilateral, regional and other
multilateral channels.  The Conference of the Parties requested Parties to include information on theirfinancial support for the objectives of the Convention in their national reports.  The information
provided by developed country Parties in their national reports illustrates that the level of financial
support provided bilaterally to developing country Parties is several times that provided through the
GEF.  These levels are even more significant in an environment of declining overall levels of aid
assistance and indicate that biological diversity remains an important issue.  It should be noted thatfunding from national budgets for domestic measures are considerably more than the support provided
bilaterally and the GEF.WT/CTE/W/116
Page 6
26. The obligation to support such incentives not only falls on developed country Parties: the
Convention also contains references to international organisation and private entities.  For example,
Article 5 provides that Parties shall cooperate where appropriate through competent international
organizations to achieve the purpose of the Convention.  Paragraph 4 of Article 21 provides that
Parties “shall consider strengthening existing financial institutions to provide financial resources forthe purposes of the Convention”.
27. Specific references to the private sector are found in paragraph (e) of Article 10 on
sustainable use of components of biological diversity, paragraph 4 of Article 16 on access to and
transfer of technology and paragraph 4 of Articl e 19 on handling of biotechnology and distribution of
its benefits.
III. DISPUTE SETTLEMENT
A. H
AS IT BEEN USED IN MATTERS DEALING WITH TRADE ?
28. The dispute settlement mechanism of the Convention, as provided in Article 27, has not been
used for the settlement of matters dealing with trade or any other matter.
IV. BIOSAFETY PROTOCOL
29. Paragraph 3, Article 19 of the Convention requires Parties to consider the need for and
modalities of a protocol setting out appropriate procedures, including, in particular, advance informedagreement, in the field of the safe transfer, handlin g and use of any living modified organism resulting
from biotechnology that may have adverse effect on the conservation and sustainable use of biological
diversity.
30. Decision II/5 of the Conference of The Parties established the Open-ended Ad Hoc Working
Group on Biosafety to negotiate a protocol to address the concerns of Parties on those matters.
31. The Group met six times and reported the results of its work to the first extraordinary meeting
of the Conference of the Parties on 22 February 1999.
32. The Working Group agreed to forward to the Co nference of the Parties for its consideration,
as a package, the draft articles proposed by the Chair of the Group as revised by the Legal Drafting
Group.  The Chair agreed to convey the outstanding concerns of the Parties to the Conference of theParties as well.
33. The Open-ended Ad Hoc Working Group on Biosafety provisionally adopted following
articles of the draft protocol: 16, on competent national authorities and national focal points; 19, on
capacity-building; 26, on financial mechanism and resources; 27, on the Conference of the Parties
serving as the meeting of the Parties; 28, on subsidiary bodies and mechanisms; 29, on the secretariat;
30, on the relationship with the Convention; 32, on monitoring and reporting; 33, on compliance; 34,
on assessment and review; 35, on signature; article 36, on entry into force; 38, on withdrawal; and 39,on authentic texts.  In addition, the Working Group had also provisionally adopted, under article 3, on
the use of terms, the definitions of the terms "exporter", "importer", "living modified organism",
"living organism", "modern biotechnology", and "regional economic integration organisation".  It also
provisionally adopted annex I on information required in notifications and annex II on risk
assessment.
34. The Conference of the Parties used the package as the basis for further discussion and
negotiation.  Consensus among the Parties on the draft text was not achieved.WT/CTE/W/116
Page 7
35. The Conference of the Parties therefore decided to suspend its first extraordinary meeting and
to reconvene later.  The Conference of the Parties agreed that the meeting should be reconvened as
soon as possible and in any event no latter than the fifth meeting of the Conference of the Parties,
which is scheduled for May 2000.  The specific date and venue are to be determined by the President
of meeting and the Bureau of the Conference of the Parties.  Subsequently, some Parties haveindicated that the meeting should not be resumed until it is clear that consensus on a protocol is
possible.
36. The Conference of the Parties decided to transmit the text of the draft protocol as proposed by
the Open-ended Ad Hoc Working Group on Biosafety as well as the statements with respect to the
text of the draft protocol contained in that report, to the resumed session of the extraordinary meeting.
37. The Conference of the Parties stressed the importance of concentrating on reaching a
satisfactory resolution at the resumed session on the core issues and related issues as contained in thedraft report of the first part of the meeting. The core  issues and related issues that remained before the
first extraordinary meeting of the Conference of the Parties, as identified in informal consultations
under the chairmanship of the President and reported in the report of the meeting were articles: 4 on
scope, 5 on application of the advanced informed agreement procedure, 6 on notification, 15 on
handling, transport, packaging and identification, 21 on non-Parties, 22 on non-discrimination, 23 onillegal transboundary movements, 24 on socio-economic considerations and 31 on relationship with
other international agreements.  It was agreed by all the negotiating groups at the meeting that the
essential core issues were articles: 4 on scope, 5 on application of the advanced informed agreement
procedure and 31 on relationship with other international agreements.WT/CTE/W/116
Page 8
ANNEX I
CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
Opened for signature at Rio de Janeiro on 5 June 1992
Entry Into Force:  29 December 1993, in accordance with Article 36 (1).
Registration:  29 December 1993, No. 30619.
TEXT:  Doc. UNEP/Bio.Div/N7-INC.5/4 and de positary notification C.N.393.1993.TREATIES-11 of
7 February 1994 ( procès-verbal  of rectification of the authentic English text); and
C.N.329.1996.TREATIES-2 of 18 March 1996 ( procès-verbal  of rectification of the authentic Arabic
text).
STATUS:  Signatories: 168. Parties: 175.Note:  The Convention was adopted by the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a
Convention on Biological Diversity, during its Fi fth session, held at Nairobi from 11 to 22 May 1992.
The Convention was open for signature at Rio de Janeiro by all States and regional economic
integration organizations from 5 June 1992 until 14 June 1992, and remained open at the
United Nations Headquarters in New York until 4 June 1993.
Table I
Participant SignatureRatification
Accession  (a)Acceptance  (A)Approval  (AA)
Afghanistan 12 Jun 1992
Albania 5 Jan 1994 (a)
Algeria 13 Jun 1992
14 Aug 1995
Angola 12 Jun 1992
1 Apr 1998
Antigua and Barbuda 5 Jun 1992
9 Mar 1993
Argentina 12 Jun 1992
22 Nov 1994
Armenia 13 Jun 1992
14 May 1993(A)
Australia 5 Jun 1992
Austria 13 Jun 1992
18 Aug 1994
Azerbaijan 12 Jun 1992
Bahamas 12 Jun 1992
2 Sep 1993
Bahrain 9 Jun 1992
30 Aug 1996
Table I (cont'd)WT/CTE/W/116
Page 9
Participant SignatureRatification
Accession  (a)Acceptance  (A)
Approval  (AA)
Bangladesh 5 Jun 1992
3 May 1994
Barbados 12 Jun 1992
10 Dec 1993
Belarus 11 Jun 1992
8 Sep 1993
Belgium 5 Jun 1992
22 Nov 1996
Belize 13 Jun 1992
30 Dec 1993
Benin 13 Jun 1992
30 Jun 1994
Bhutan 11 Jun 1992
25 Aug 1995
Bolivia 13 Jun 1992
3 Oct 1994
Botswana 8 Jun 1992
12 Oct 1995
Brazil 5 Jun 1992
28 Feb 1994
Bulgaria 12 Jun 1992
17 Apr 1996
Burkina Faso 12 Jun 1992
2 Sep 1993
Burundi 11 Jun 1992
15 Apr 1997
Cambodia 9 Feb 1995 (a)
Cameroon 14 Jun 1992
19 Oct 1994
Canada 11 Jun 1992
4 Dec 1992
Cape Verde 12 Jun 1992
29 Mar 1995
Central African Republic 13 Jun 1992
15 Mar 1995
Chad 12 Jun 1992
7 Jun 1994
Chile 13 Jun 1992
9 Sep 1994
China 11 Jun 1992
5 Jan 1993
Colombia 12 Jun 1992
28 Nov 1994
Comoros 11 Jun 1992
29 Sep 1994
Congo 11 Jun 1992
1 Aug 1996
Cook Islands 12 Jun 1992
20 Apr 1993
Costa Rica 13 Jun 1992
26 Aug 1994
Table I (cont'd)WT/CTE/W/116
Page 10
Participant SignatureRatification
Accession  (a)Acceptance  (A)
Approval  (AA)
Côte d'Ivoire 10 Jun 1992
29 Nov 1994
Croatia 11 Jun 1992
7 Oct 1996
Cuba 12 Jun 1992
8 Mar 1994
Cyprus 12 Jun 1992
10 Jul 1996
Czech Republic 4 Jun 1993
3 Dec 1993(AA)
Democratic People's Republic of Korea 11 Jun 1992
26 Oct 1994(AA)
Democratic Republic of the Congo 11 Jun 1992
3 Dec 1994
Denmark 12 Jun 1992
21 Dec 1993
Djibouti 13 Jun 1992
1 Sep 1994
Dominica 6 Apr 1994 (a)
Dominican Republic 13 Jun 1992
25 Nov 1996
Ecuador 9 Jun 1992
23 Feb 1993
Egypt 9 Jun 1992
2 Jun 1994
El Salvador 13 Jun 1992
 8 Sep 1994
Equatorial Guinea 6 Dec 1994 (a)
Eritrea 21 Mar 1996 (a)
Estonia 12 Jun 1992
27 Jul 1994
Ethiopia 10 Jun 1992
5 Apr 1994
European Community 13 Jun 1992
21 Dec 1993(AA)
Fiji 9 Oct 1992
25 Feb 1993
Finland 5 Jun 1992
27 Jul 1994(A)
France 13 Jun 1992
1 Jul 1994
Gabon 12 Jun 1992
14 Mar 1997
Gambia 12 Jun 1992
10 Jun 1994
Georgia 2 Jun 1994 (a)
Germany 12 Jun 1992
21 Dec 1993
Ghana 12 Jun 1992
29 Aug 1994
Table I (cont'd)WT/CTE/W/116
Page 11
Participant SignatureRatification
Accession  (a)Acceptance  (A)
Approval  (AA)
Greece 12 Jun 1992
4 Aug 1994
Grenada 3 Dec 1992
11 Aug 1994
Guatemala 13 Jun 1992
10 Jul 1995
Guinea 12 Jun 1992
7 May 1993
Guinea-Bissau 12 Jun 1992
27 Oct 1995
Guyana 13 Jun 1992
29 Aug 1994
Haiti 13 Jun 1992
25 Sep 1996
Honduras 13 Jun 1992
31 Jul 1995
Hungary 13 Jun 1992
24 Feb 1994
Iceland 10 Jun 1992
12 Sep 1994
India 5 Jun 1992
18 Feb 1994
Indonesia 5 Jun 1992
23 Aug 1994
Iran (Islamic  Republic of) 14 Jun 1992
6 Aug 1996
Ireland 13 Jun 1992
22 Mar 1996
Israel 11 Jun 1992
7 Aug 1995
Italy 5 Jun 1992
15 Apr 1994
Jamaica 11 Jun 1992
6 Jan 1995
Japan 13 Jun 1992
28 May 1993(A)
Jordan 11 Jun 1992
12 Nov 1993
Kazakhstan 9 Jun 1992
6 Sep 1994
Kenya 11 Jun 1992
26 Jul 1994
Kiribati 16 Aug 1994 (a)
Kuwait 9 Jun 1992
Kyrgyzstan 6 Aug 1996 (a)
Lao People's Democratic Republic 20 Sep 1996 (a)
Latvia 11 Jun 1992
 14 Dec 1995
Lebanon 12 Jun 1992
15 Dec 1994
Table I (cont'd)WT/CTE/W/116
Page 12
Participant SignatureRatification
Accession  (a)Acceptance  (A)
Approval  (AA)
Lesotho 11 Jun 1992
10 Jan 1995
Liberia 12 Jun 1992
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya 29 Jun 1992
Liechtenstein 5 Jun 1992
19 Nov 1997
Lithuania 11 Jun 1992
1 Feb 1996
Luxembourg 9 Jun 1992
9 May 1994
Madagascar 8 Jun 1992
4 Mar 1996
Malawi 10 Jun 1992
2 Feb 1994
Malaysia 12 Jun 1992
24 Jun 1994
Maldives 12 Jun 1992
 9 Nov 1992
Mali 30 Sep 1992
29 Mar 1995
Malta 12 Jun 1992
Marshall Islands 12 Jun 1992
 8 Oct 1992
Mauritania 12 Jun 1992
16 Aug 1996
Mauritius 10 Jun 1992
4 Sep 1992
Mexico 13 Jun 1992
11 Mar 1993
Micronesia (Federated States of) 12 Jun 1992
20 Jun 1994
Monaco 11 Jun 1992
20 Nov 1992
Mongolia 12 Jun 1992
30 Sep 1993
Morocco 13 Jun 1992
21 Aug 1995
Mozambique 12 Jun 1992
25 Aug 1995
Myanmar 11 Jun 1992
25 Nov 1994
Namibia 12 Jun 1992
16 May 1997
Nauru 5 Jun 1992
11 Nov 1993
Nepal 12 Jun 1992
23 Nov 1993
Netherlands 5 Jun 1992
12 Jul 1994(A)
New Zealand 12 Jun 1992
16 Sep 1993
Table I (cont'd)WT/CTE/W/116
Page 13
Participant SignatureRatification
Accession  (a)Acceptance  (A)
Approval  (AA)
Nicaragua 13 Jun 1992
20 Nov 1995
Niger 11 Jun 1992
25 Jul 1995
Nigeria 13 Jun 1992
29 Aug 1994
Niue 28 Feb 1996 (a)
Norway 9 Jun 1992
9 Jul 1993
Oman 10 Jun 1992
 8 Feb 1995
Pakistan 5 Jun 1992
26 Jul 1994
Palau 6 Jan 1999 (a)
Panama 13 Jun 1992
17 Jan 1995
Papua New Guinea 13 Jun 1992
16 Mar 1993
Paraguay 12 Jun 1992
24 Feb 1994
Peru 12 Jun 1992
7 Jun 1993
Philippines 12 Jun 1992
8 Oct 1993
Poland 5 Jun 1992
18 Jan 1996
Portugal 13 Jun 1992
21 Dec 1993
Qatar 11 Jun 1992
 21 Aug 1996
Republic of Korea 13 Jun 1992
3 Oct 1994
Republic of Moldova 5 Jun 1992
20 Oct 1995
Romania 5 Jun 1992
17 Aug 1994
Russian Federation 13 Jun 1992
5 Apr 1995
Rwanda 10 Jun 1992
29 May 1996
Saint Kitts and Nevis 12 Jun 1992
 7 Jan 1993
Saint Lucia 28 Jul 1993 (a)
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 3 Jun 1996 (a)
Samoa 12 Jun 1992
9 Feb 1994
San Marino 10 Jun 1992
28 Oct 1994
Sao Tome and Principe 12 Jun 1992
Table I (cont'd)WT/CTE/W/116
Page 14
Participant SignatureRatification
Accession  (a)Acceptance  (A)
Approval  (AA)
Senegal 13 Jun 1992
 17 Oct 1994
Seychelles 10 Jun 1992
22 Sep 1992
Sierra Leone 12 Dec 1994 (a)
Singapore 10 Mar 1993
21 Dec 1995
Slovakia 19 May 1993
25 Aug 1994(AA)
Slovenia 13 Jun 1992
9 Jul 1996
Solomon Islands 13 Jun 1992
3 Oct 1995
South Africa 4 Jun 1993
2 Nov 1995
Spain 13 Jun 1992
21 Dec 1993
Sri Lanka 10 Jun 1992
23 Mar 1994
Sudan 9 Jun 1992
30 Oct 1995
Suriname 13 Jun 1992
12 Jan 1996
Swaziland 12 Jun 1992
9 Nov 1994
Sweden 8 Jun 1992
16 Dec 1993
Switzerland 12 Jun 1992
21 Nov 1994
Syrian Arab Republic 3 May 1993
4 Jan 1996
Tajikistan 29 Oct 1997 (a)
Thailand 12 Jun 1992
The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 2 Dec 1997 (a)
Togo 12 Jun 1992
4 Oct 1995(A)
Tonga 19 May 1998 (a)
Trinidad and Tobago 11 Jun 1992
1 Aug 1996
Tunisia 13 Jun 1992
15 Jul 1993
Turkey 11 Jun 1992
14 Feb 1997
Turkmenistan 18 Sep 1996 (a)
Tuvalu 8 Jun 1992
Uganda 12 Jun 1992
8 Sep 1993
Ukraine 11 Jun 1992
7 Feb 1995
United Arab Emirates 11 Jun 1992
United Kingdom 12 Jun 1992
3 Jun 1994
Table I (cont'd)WT/CTE/W/116
Page 15
Participant SignatureRatification
Accession  (a)Acceptance  (A)
Approval  (AA)
United Republic of Tanzania 12 Jun 1992
8 Mar 1996
United States of America 4 Jun 1993
Uruguay 9 Jun 1992
5 Nov 1993
Uzbekistan 19 Jul 1995 (a)
Vanuatu 9 Jun 1992
25 Mar 1993
Venezuela 12 Jun 1992
13 Sep 1994
Viet Nam 28 May 1993
16 Nov 1994
Yemen 12 Jun 1992
21 Feb 1996
Yugoslavia 8 Jun 1992
Zambia 11 Jun 1992
28 May 1993
Zimbabwe 12 Jun 1992
11 Nov 1994
DECLARATIONS
(Unless otherwise indicated, the declarations were made
upon ratification, accession, acceptance or approval.)
ARGENTINA
Declaration:
The Argentine Government considers that this Convention represents a step forward in that it
establishes among its objectives the sustainable use of biological diversity.  Likewise, the definitions
contained in Article 2 and other provisions of the Convention indicate that the terms "genetic
resources", "biological resources" and "biological material" do not include the human genome.  Inaccordance with the commitments entered into in  the Convention, the Argentine Nation will pass
legislation on the conditions of access to biological resources and the ownership of future rights and
benefits arising from them.  The Convention is fully consistent with the principles established in the
"Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights", including trade in counterfeit
goods, contained in the Final Act of the Uruguay Round of GATT.
AUSTRIA
Declaration:
"The Republic of Austria declares in accordance with Article 27, paragraph 3 of the
Convention that it accepts both of the means of dispute settlement mentioned in this paragraph as
compulsory in relation to any Party accepting an obligation concerning one or both of these means of
dispute settlement."WT/CTE/W/116
Page 16
CHILE
Declaration:
The Government of Chile, on ratifying the Convention on Biological Diversity of 1992,
wishes to place on record that the pine tree and other species that the country exploits as one of its
forestry resources are considered exotic and are no t taken to fall within the scope of the Convention.
CUBA
Declaration:
The Government of the Republic of Cuba declares, with respect to Article 27 of the
Convention on Biological Diversity, that as far as  the Republic of Cuba is concerned, disputes that
arise between Parties concerning the interpretation or application of this international legal instrument
shall be settled by negotiation through the diplomatic channel or, failing that, by arbitration in
accordance with the procedure laid down in Annex II on arbitration of the Convention."
EUROPEAN COMMUNITY
Declaration:
"Within their respective competence, the European Community and its Member States wish
to reaffirm the importance they attach to transf ers of technology and to biotechnology in order to
ensure the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.  The compliance with intellectual
property rights constitutes an essential element for the implementation of policies for technology
transfer and co-investment.
For the European Community and its member States, transfers of technology and access to
biotechnology, as defined in the text of the Convention on Biological Diversity, will be carried out in
accordance with Article 16 of the said Convention and in compliance with the principles and rules of
protection of intellectual property, in particular multilateral and bilateral agreements signed or
negotiated by the Contracting Parties to this Convention.
The European Community and its Member States will encourage the use of the financial
mechanism established by the Convention to promote the voluntary transfer of intellectual property
rights held by European operators, in particular as regards the granting of licences, through normal
commercial mechanisms and decisions, while ensuring adequate and effective protection of property
rights."
FRANCE
Upon signature:
Declaration:
With reference to Article 3, that it interprets th at Article as a guiding principle to be taken into
account in the implementation of the Convention;
With reference to Article 21, paragraph 1, that the decision taken periodically by the
Conference of the Parties concerns the "amount of resources needed" and that no provision of the
Convention authorizes the Conference of the Partie s to take decisions concerning the amount, nature
or frequency of the contributions from Parties to the Convention.
Upon ratification:WT/CTE/W/116
Page 17
Declaration:
With reference to Article 3, that it interprets th at Article as a guiding principle to be taken into
account in the implementation of the Convention;
The French Republic reaffirms its belief in the importance of the transfer of technology and
biotechnology in guaranteeing the protection and long-term utilization of biological diversity.
Respect for intellectual property rights is an essential element of the implementation of policies for
technology transfer and co-investment.
The French Republic affirms that the transfer of technology and access to biotechnology, as
defined in the Convention on Biological Diversity, will be implemented according to Article 16 of
that Convention and with respect for the principles and rules concerning the protection of intellectual
property, including multilateral agreements signed or negotiated by the Contracting parties to the
present Convention.
The French Republic will encourage recourse to the financial mechanism established by the
Convention for the purpose of promoting the voluntary transfer of intellectual property rights under
French ownership, inter alia, as regards the granting of licences, by traditional commercial decisions
and mechanisms while ensuring the appropriate and effective protection of property rights.
With reference to Article 21, paragraph 1, the French Republic considers that the decision
taken periodically by the Conference of the Parties concerns the "amount of resources needed" and
that no provision of the Convention authorizes the Conference of the Parties to take decisions
concerning the amount, nature or frequency of the contributions from Parties to the Convention.
GEORGIA
Declaration:
"The Republic of Georgia will use both means for dispute settlement referred to in the
Convention:
1. Arbitral consideration in accordance with the procedure given in the enclosure II, Part I.
2. Submitting of disputes to the International Court."
IRELAND
Declaration:
"Ireland wishes to reaffirm the importance it attaches to transfers of technology and to
biotechnology in order to ensure the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.  The
compliance with intellectual property rights constitutes an essential element for the implementation of
policies for technology transfer and co-investment.
For Ireland, transfers of technology and access to biotechnology, as defined in the text of the
Convention on Biological Diversity and in compliance with the principles and rules of protection of
intellectual property, in particular multilateral and bilateral agreements signed or negotiated by the
contracting parties to this Convention.
Ireland will encourage the use of the financial mechanism established by the Convention to
promote the voluntary transfer of intellectual propert y rights held by Irish operators, in particular asWT/CTE/W/116
Page 18
regards the granting of licences, through normal commercial mechanisms and decisions, while
ensuring adequate and effective protection of property rights."
ITALY
Declaration made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification:
"The Italian Government [. . .] declares its understanding that the decision to be taken by the
Conference of the Parties under Article 21.1 of the Convention refers to the `amount of resources
needed' by the financial mechanism, not to the extent  or nature and form of the contributions of the
Contracting Parties."
LATVIA
Declaration:
"The Republic of Latvia declares in accordance with Article 27 paragraph 3 of the
Convention that it accepts both the means of dispute settlement mentioned in this paragraph as
compulsory."
LIECHTENSTEIN
Declaration:
"The Principality of Liechtenstein wishes to reaffirm the importance it attaches to transfers of
technology and to biotechnology in order to ensure the conservation and sustainable use of biological
diversity.  The compliance with intellectual proper ty rights constitutes an essential element for the
implementation of policies for technology transfer and co-investment.
For the Principality of Liechtenstein, transfers of technology and access to biotechnology, as
defined in the text of the [said] Convention, will be carried out in accordance with Article 16 of the
said Convention and in compliance with the principles and rules of protection of intellectual property,
in particular multilateral and bilateral agreements signed or negotiated by the Contracting Parties to
this Convention.
The Principality of Liechtenstein will encourage the use of the financial mechanism
established by the Convention to promote the voluntary transfer of intellectual property rights held by
Liechtenstein operators, in particular as regard s the granting of licenses, through normal commercial
mechanisms and decisions, which ensuring adequate and effective protection of property rights."
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
Declaration:
"The Government of the Independent State of  Papua New Guinea declares its understanding
that ratification of the Convention shall in no way constitute a renunciation of any rights under
International Law concerning State responsibility for the adverse effects of Biological Diversity as
derogating from the principles of general International Law."WT/CTE/W/116
Page 19
SUDAN
Understanding:
"With respect to the principle stipulated in Article 3, the Government of the Sudan agrees
with the spirit of the Article and interprets it to mean that no state is responsible for acts that take
place outside its control event if they fall within its judicial jurisdiction and may cause damage to the
environment of other states or of areas bey ond the limits of national judicial jurisdiction."
"The Sudan also sees as regards Article 14 (2), that the issue of liability and redress for
damage to biological diversity should not form a priority to be tackled by the Agreement as there is
ambiguity regarding the essence and scope of the st udies to be carried out, in accordance with the
above-mentioned Article. The Sudan further believes that any such studies on liability and redress
should shift towards effects of areas such as biotechnology products, environmental impacts,
genetically modified organisms and acid rains."
SWITZERLAND
Upon signature:
Declaration:
The Swiss Government wishes to emphasize particularly the progress made in establishing
standard terms for cooperation between States in a very important field: research activities and
activities for the transfer of technology relevant to resources from third countries.
The important provisions in question create a platform for even closer cooperation with public
research bodies or institutions in Switzerland and for the transfer of technologies available to
governmental or public bodies, particularly universities and various publicly-funded research and
development centres.
It is our understanding that genetic resources acquired under the procedure specified in
Article 15 and developed by private research institutions will be the subject of programmes of
cooperation, joint research and the transfer of technology which will respect the principles and rulesfor the protection of intellectual property.
These principles and rules are essential for research and private investment, in particular in
the latest technologies, such as modern biotechnology which requires substantial financial outlays. On
the basis of this interpretation, the Swiss Government wishes to indicate that it is ready, at theopportune time, to take the appropriate general policy measures, particularly under Articles 16 and 19,
with a view to promoting and encouraging coopera tion, on a contractual basis, between Swiss firms
and the private firms and governmental bodies of other Contracting Parties.
With regard to financial cooperation, Switzerland interprets the provisions of Articles 20 and
21 as follows: the resources to be committed and the management system will have regard, in an
equitable manner, to the needs and interests of the developing countries and to the possibilities and
interests of the developed countries.
Upon ratification:Declaration:
Switzerland wishes to reaffirm the importance it attaches to transfers of technology and to
biotechnology in order to ensure the conservation a nd sustainable use of biological diversity.  TheWT/CTE/W/116
Page 20
compliance with intellectual property rights constitutes and essential element for the implementation
of policies for technology transfer and co-investment.
For Switzerland, transfers of technology and access to biotechnology, as defined in the text of
the Convention on Biological Diversity, will be carried out in accordance with Article 16 of the saidConvention and in compliance with the principles and rules of protection of intellectual property, in
particular multilateral and bilateral agreements signed or negotiated by the Contracting Parties to this
Convention.
Switzerland will encourage the use of the financial mechanism established by the Convention
to promote the voluntary transfer of intellectual property rights held by Swiss operators, in particular
as regards the granting of licences, through normal commercial mechanisms and decisions, whileensuring adequate and effective protection of property rights.
SYRIAN ARAB REPUBLIC
Upon signature:
Declaration:
It is being understood that the signing of this Convention shall not constitute recognition of
Israel or leading to any intercourse with it.
UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND
Declaration made upon signature and confirmed upon ratification:
The Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland declare their
understanding that Article 3 of the Convention sets out a guiding principle to be taken into account in
the implementation of the Convention.
The Government of the United Kingdom of Grea t Britain and Northern Ireland also declare
their understanding that the decisions to be taken by the Conference of the Parties under paragraph 1
of Article 21 concern "the amount of resources needed" by the financial mechanism, and that nothingin Article 20 or 21 authorises the Conference of the Parties to take decisions concerning the amount,
nature, frequency or size of the contributions of the Parties under the Convention.
Notes:
In respect of the United Kingdom of Great Br itain and Northern Ireland, the Bailiwick of
Jersey, the British Virgin Islands, the Cayman Islands, Gibraltar, St. Helena and St. Helena
Dependencies.
__________