生物多样性 ›› 2021, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (2): 193-199.DOI: 10.17520/biods.2020477

• • 上一篇    下一篇

《生物多样性公约》中“土著和地方社区”术语在中国的适用性和评价指标体系

李保平1,2, 薛达元1,*()   

  1. 1.中央民族大学生命与环境科学学院, 北京 100081
    2.桂林电子科技大学法学院, 广西桂林 541004
  • 收稿日期:2020-12-24 接受日期:2021-02-18 出版日期:2021-02-20 发布日期:2021-02-23
  • 通讯作者: 薛达元
  • 作者简介:* E-mail: xuedayuan@hotmail.com
  • 基金资助:
    生态环境部生物多样性调查、观测和评估项目

Applicability and evaluation index system of the term “indigenous and local communities” of the Convention on Biological Diversity in China

Baoping Li1,2, Dayuan Xue1,*()   

  1. 1 College of Life and Environmental Sciences, Minzu University of China, Beijing 100081
    2 Law School of Guilin University of Electronic Technology, Guilin, Guangxi 541004
  • Received:2020-12-24 Accepted:2021-02-18 Online:2021-02-20 Published:2021-02-23
  • Contact: Dayuan Xue

摘要:

《生物多样性公约》第8(j)条提出了术语“土著和地方社区”, 《名古屋议定书》关于遗传资源特别是传统知识获取与惠益分享的很多重要条款中都涉及该术语。然而, 二者均未对该术语予以定义, 国际社会对该术语的适用范围至今尚未达成一致, 缔约方只能根据公约文本内涵和各国具体国情予以推断和解读。当前的普遍理解包括殖民主义特征的“狭义土著和地方社区”和仅具有原住民特征的“广义土著和地方社区”两种情况。对于中国而言, “土著和地方社区”是否与中国少数民族社区概念上等同或完全不同, 对于全面履行《生物多样性公约》和《名古屋议定书》具有重要意义。本文通过词源分析、定性和定量化等理论和实证研究, 构建了以少数民族具体地方社区为评估单元的“土著和地方社区特征”评价指标体系, 进而对部分少数民族具体地方社区进行了实际评估。结果表明, 一些至今仍然维持传统生产和生活方式及保留传统文化的少数民族地方社区具有明显的“土著和地方社区”特征, 适用于国际公约的相关规定。这为理解国际上的“土著和地方社区”和中国“少数民族”提供了思路, 为中国履行《生物多样性公约》《名古屋议定书》中涉及“土著和地方社区”的条款提供了技术支持, 也为维护中国少数民族地方社区在遗传资源及相关传统知识获取与公平惠益分享中的应有权益提供了理论基础。

关键词: 生物多样性公约, 名古屋议定书, 土著和地方社区, 中国少数民族

Abstract

Background: The term “indigenous and local communities” is introduced in Article 8(j) of the Convention on Biological Diversity and is used in many important provisions of the Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit sharing of genetic resources, particularly traditional knowledge. However, neither of the two legal instruments has defined the term, and the international community has not reached a consensus on the scope of application of the term. The Parties can only infer and interpret the term according to the connotation of the text of the Convention and the specific national conditions of each country. The current general understanding is that the “narrow sense of indigenous and local communities” with colonial characteristics and the “broad sense of indigenous and local communities” with indigenous characteristics only. For China, it is of great significance to clarify whether “indigenous and local communities” are conceptually equivalent to or different from Chinese ethnic minorities and their communities for the implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the formation of the Nagoya Protocol.
Aims: This article, through the analysis of the origin, the qualitative and quantitative theory and empirical research, selects the important indices for evaluation “indigenous and local communities”, and constructs the assessment indicator system of “characteristics of indigenous and local communities” for Chinese ethnic minorities based on the unit evaluation of specific local community. Then, by use of the system, the actual evaluation is made to the local communities of some ethnic minorities in Southwest China.
Results & Conclusions: The results show that some local ethnic minority communities that still maintain traditional production and life style and retain traditional culture have obvious “indigenous and local community” characteristics, which are applicable to the relevant provisions of international conventions. This article provides the ideas for understanding the international “indigenous and local communities” and domestic “ethnic minorities” in China. Also it provides technical support for China's implementation of the “indigenous and local communities” provisions of the Nagoya Protocol to the Convention on Biological Diversity, and furtherly provides a theoretical basis for safeguarding the rights and interests of local ethnic minority communities in the access to and equitable benefit sharing of genetic resources and related traditional knowledge.

Key words: Convention on Biological Diversity, Nagoya Protocol, indigenous and local community, Chinese ethnic minorities