US pressured on saving biodiversity

When world leaders gathered virtually for a UN conference on biodiversity last month in the Chinese city of Kunming, one country was conspicuously missing from the event.

While the first part of the 15th United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity, or COP 15, passed without US representation, the country wasn't always so reticent.

In the 1980s, the US was significantly involved in drafting one of the most important multilateral treaties on biodiversity conservation. However, three decades later, it remains the only UN member country that has yet to ratify the accord, due to concerns that it would undermine US sovereign interests.

Some 195 countries and the European Union have signed the pact. China became a signatory to the treaty on June 11, 1992, and ratified it on Jan 1, 1993, making it one of the first countries to join after the agreement was opened for signing at the Earth Summit in Brazil in 1992.

The treaty, which entered into force on Dec 29, 1993, calls for the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components, and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources.

As a nonmember, the US has sent a delegation of "observers" to every conference since the first COP in 1994, but it doesn't have an official say in decision-making and could not cast a vote.

Experts said the country was extensively involved in the treaty's drafting and negotiation process.

Domestic pushback

But due to domestic pushback from some senators in the Republican Party and the giants of the pharmaceutical industry, then-US president George H.W. Bush never signed the treaty.

Biopharmaceutical industry leaders were concerned that the US would have to share with others their intellectual property related to genetic research. Industry leaders also wanted to maintain control over the resources from developing countries.

In an article for the Golden Gate University Law Review, environmental lawyer Robert Blomquist quoted a speech by US senator Don Nickles of Oklahoma on the Senate floor in June 1992.

"The Biological Diversity Treaty would essentially coerce the transfer of technology by the United States and other developed countries to the developing countries," Nickles said. An article of the treaty "would obligate the United States to transfer not only the commercially available products of technology but also the technology itself to developing countries, without regard to intellectual property rights".

Blomquist also recalled that corporate groups sent letters to Bush in opposition to the US signing the Convention of Biodiversity.

Under the treaty, biotechnology companies in the US would have to compensate nations of origins for the use of their genetic material to create treatments.

Two-and-a-half decades later, no president has sought to have the treaty ratified.

Sarah Saunders, a researcher at the National Audubon Society, and Mariah Meek, an assistant professor at Michigan State University, co-authors of an opinion article in The Hill news site on Jan 8, urged US President Joe Biden to immediately work with the Senate to ratify the convention.

"Global biodiversity policy is at a pivotal crossroads, and the US needs to have a seat at the table before it is too late," they said.