NEW DELHI — In a move that cements its position as a global leader in biodiversity governance, the Government of India has released its first-ever national report on the Nagoya Protocol. Submitted to the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) on February 27, 2025, the comprehensive document provides an exhaustive look at how the nation manages its vast biological wealth and ensures that the commercial utilization of traditional knowledge translates into tangible benefits for local communities.
The report serves as a critical audit of India’s Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) framework—a legal mechanism designed to prevent "biopiracy" by ensuring that when a company or researcher uses a biological resource (such as a medicinal plant or a soil microbe), a portion of the resulting profits flows back to the custodians of that resource.
Main Facts: A Milestone in Bio-Governance
The submission of this report marks a significant milestone in India’s journey as a signatory to the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization. While India has been a party to the CBD since 1992, the Nagoya Protocol, which provides a transparent legal framework for the implementation of one of the three objectives of the CBD, has been the cornerstone of India’s domestic biological policy since 2014.
Key highlights from the report include:
- Approval Volume: Between 2017 and 2025, India granted a total of 12,830 approvals under the ABS framework.
- Financial Inflow: The National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) collected ₹216.31 crores in ABS funds.
- Community Disbursement: Of the collected funds, ₹139.69 crores have been disbursed to "benefit claimers"—primarily local communities and tribal groups who serve as the primary custodians of biodiversity.
- Administrative Reach: The report underscores the decentralized nature of India’s biodiversity management, involving the NBA at the national level and various State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs) at the regional level.
The report arrives at a pivotal time when the global community is increasingly focused on the "Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework," which seeks to protect 30% of the planet’s land and oceans by 2030. India’s success in operationalizing ABS is seen as a blueprint for other megadiverse nations in the Global South.
Chronology: From Rio to the 2025 Amendments
To understand the significance of this report, one must look at the evolution of India’s biodiversity laws over the last three decades.
- 1992 – The Rio Earth Summit: India signs the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), recognizing the sovereign rights of states over their biological resources.
- 2002 – The Biological Diversity Act: India becomes one of the first countries to enact a comprehensive national law to implement the CBD. This Act established the three-tier structure: The National Biodiversity Authority (NBA), State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs), and local Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs).
- 2010/2014 – The Nagoya Protocol: The protocol is adopted globally in 2010. India ratifies it and subsequently introduces the 2014 ABS Guidelines, which provided a formula for calculating the percentage of revenue companies must share.
- 2017–2024 – Operational Expansion: This period saw a massive scaling up of People’s Biodiversity Registers (PBRs), which document local flora, fauna, and traditional knowledge.
- 2025 – Legislative Revision: The government implemented significant amendments to the ABS framework. These changes were aimed at streamlining the application process and "de-cluttering" the regulatory environment to foster the growth of the AYUSH (Ayurveda, Yoga, Unani, Siddha, and Homeopathy) industry and startup ecosystem.
Supporting Data: The Mechanics of ABS Approvals
The report provides a granular breakdown of how the 12,830 approvals were distributed. The National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) handled 5,913 of these cases, which typically involve international entities, intellectual property rights (IPR) applications, and the transfer of research results.
The activities covered by these approvals include:
- Bio-utilization and Research: Investigations into the genetic or biochemical makeup of biological resources.
- Commercial Utilization: The large-scale use of resources for manufacturing drugs, cosmetics, or industrial enzymes.
- Intellectual Property Rights: Ensuring that any patent filed using Indian bio-resources acknowledges the source and agrees to benefit-sharing.
On the regional front, State and Union Territory Biodiversity Boards granted 6,917 approvals. These were primarily for domestic Indian entities engaged in commercial utilization. The report notes that the states of Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Kerala have been particularly active in implementing these protocols, owing to their rich biodiversity and established pharmaceutical hubs.
The financial data reveals a "disbursement gap" that the government is currently addressing. While ₹216.31 crores were collected, only about 65% (₹139.69 crores) reached the communities. Officials attribute this to the logistical challenges of identifying specific "benefit claimers" in cases where a biological resource is found across multiple districts or states.
Case Study: The Dapur Village Microbe Success
The report highlights the village of Dapur in Maharashtra as a "global front-runner" example of ABS in action. In this instance, Advanced Enzyme Technologies Limited, a research-driven company, identified microbes in the local soil with significant probiotic potential.
Under the ABS framework, a formal agreement was reached:
- The Resource: Soil microbes with probiotic properties.
- The Agreement: The company agreed to pay 0.5% of the annual gross ex-factory sale price of any products derived from these microbes.
- The Result: The agreement generated ₹71 lakhs in benefits for the local community.
This case is cited to demonstrate that ABS is not merely a theoretical concept but a functional financial tool that incentivizes local communities to preserve their environment, knowing that their conservation efforts can lead to direct economic rewards.
Official Responses and Challenges
In the report’s foreword and concluding remarks, the government acknowledges that while India is a pioneer, the path forward is fraught with technical and administrative hurdles.
"Effective ABS implementation requires clear traceability of bioresources and a direct linkage between utilization and benefit-sharing obligations," the report states. This acknowledges a long-standing criticism from environmentalists: that it is often difficult to track exactly where a company sourced its raw materials once they enter a complex global supply chain.
The report identifies three primary challenges:
- Digital Integration: The need to strengthen digital systems for improved monitoring. The government aims to create a "single-window" clearing system to track an application from the initial bio-prospecting stage to the final commercial sale.
- Valuation Methodologies: There is currently no standardized global methodology for valuing a "genetic sequence" or a "traditional practice." India is working on developing scientific valuation models to ensure communities are not underpaid.
- Local Capacity Building: While there are thousands of Biodiversity Management Committees (BMCs) at the village level, many lack the legal and financial literacy to negotiate fair deals with multi-billion-dollar corporations.
Implications: The 2025 "Ease of Doing Business" Pivot
Perhaps the most debated aspect of the report is the mention of the 2025 revisions to the ABS framework. In a bid to improve the "ease of doing business," the government introduced two major exemptions:
- The Turnover Threshold: Companies with an annual turnover of less than ₹5 crores are now exempt from ABS obligations. The government argues this supports MSMEs (Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises) and startups.
- Codified Traditional Knowledge: Users of "codified traditional knowledge"—knowledge already documented in ancient texts like those listed under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940—are no longer required to share benefits with local custodians.
The Policy Debate
These changes have sparked a divide in the environmental community. Proponents argue that the AYUSH industry, which relies on ancient texts, should not be bogged down by "inspector raj" and complex paperwork for knowledge that is already in the public domain. They suggest that these reforms will make Indian traditional medicine more competitive on the global stage.
However, critics and indigenous rights activists express concern. They argue that "codified knowledge" often originated from specific tribal communities who are now being cut out of the financial loop. By exempting large sectors of the herbal and pharmaceutical industry, critics fear that the total pool of funds available for conservation and community development will shrink significantly.
Conclusion: Setting the Global Agenda
India’s first Nagoya Protocol report is more than a data summary; it is a statement of intent. By documenting its successes and being transparent about its challenges, India is positioning itself as the "voice of the Global South" in biodiversity negotiations.
The report makes it clear that India views its biological resources not just as a national heritage, but as a strategic economic asset. The balance between "ease of doing business" and "fair sharing of benefits" remains delicate. As India moves toward its goal of becoming a developed nation by 2047, the management of its "green gold" through the Nagoya Protocol will be a litmus test for its commitment to sustainable and inclusive growth.
For the international community, the Indian experience suggests that while legal frameworks are essential, the real success of the Nagoya Protocol lies in the ability to bridge the gap between high-tech laboratories in cities and the soil-stained hands of villagers in places like Dapur.
