Biodiversity use generates benefit-sharing funds

One line

The National Biodiversity Authority distributed Rs 5.68 crore collected from commercial use of biological resources to State and Union Territory bodies and a research repository.

Summary

Access and Benefit Sharing gives practical effect to a core biodiversity principle. Users of biological resources should share benefits with conservers, local institutions, or biodiversity funds.

This case also shows a hard design problem. Commercial seed material bought through markets may not be traceable to one farmer, community, or place.

PYQ pattern

UPSC repeatedly tests biodiversity institutions, access to biological resources, traditional knowledge, community rights, and in-situ versus ex-situ conservation. See the official UPSC question-paper archive.

Core notes

The disbursement covered okra, cucumber, watermelon, and specified microbial and agricultural resources.
Rs 3.51 crore arose from access to 139 okra varieties and 28 hybrids.
The total went mainly to 32 State Biodiversity Boards and Union Territory Biodiversity Councils. A share also went to the National Chemical Laboratory's microbial culture repository.
Where market purchases made the original provider untraceable, the Authority distributed the beneficiary share among States and Union Territories where the crop is cultivated.
Section 32 of the Biological Diversity Act governs use of State Biodiversity Fund money.
Permitted work includes People's Biodiversity Registers, ecosystem restoration, protection of crop wild relatives, Biodiversity Heritage Sites, databases, research, conservation, and community livelihoods.
PIB reported that cumulative National Biodiversity Authority disbursement had crossed Rs 191 crore. This is a financial output, not proof of ecological recovery.

Prelims lens

The Biological Diversity Act pursues conservation, sustainable use, and fair and equitable benefit sharing.
The National Biodiversity Authority works at Union level, State Biodiversity Boards at State level, and Biodiversity Management Committees at local-body level.
People's Biodiversity Registers are prepared through local Biodiversity Management Committees.
Benefit sharing may be monetary or non-monetary, subject to the legal framework.
In-situ conservation protects biodiversity in its natural setting. Ex-situ conservation occurs outside that setting.

MCQ 1

Match the institution with its main level of operation:

National Biodiversity Authority, Union level
State Biodiversity Board, State level
Biodiversity Management Committee, local-body level

Which of the pairs given above are correctly matched?

A. 1 only
B. 1 and 2 only
C. 2 and 3 only
D. 1, 2 and 3

Reveal answer

D

The Act creates a three-level institutional structure. Each pair is correctly matched.

MCQ 2

Why were some benefit-sharing proceeds distributed across crop-growing States in the August 2026 case?

A. The Act prohibits payments to local institutions
B. Market access made one original provider or location hard to identify
C. Every biological resource belongs to the Union government
D. Benefit sharing applies only to imported species

Reveal answer

B

The resources had been accessed through markets and traders. The approved method used cultivation geography when a single provider could not be traced.

Mains

Question, 10 marks, 150 words: Access and Benefit Sharing must reward conservation even when a biological resource cannot be traced to one provider. Discuss.

Approach:

Explain the purpose of benefit sharing under biodiversity law.
Describe national, State, and local institutions and the role of biodiversity funds.
Examine traceability, market purchases, community identification, transaction cost, and weak outcome measurement.
Suggest transparent allocation rules, stronger registers, community participation, public accounts, and ecological monitoring.