ABSTRACT

The Biological Diversity Act in India is implemented under a three-tier mechanism of the NBA, SBB and the BMC. Each of the authorities has their individual powers and functions. There are areas of cooperation between the three authorities pertaining to the objectives of the Act. In the first part of this article, the substantive provisions and the procedural aspects relevant to TMK are discussed. In the second part of the article, the status of the implementation of TMK by the NBA, SBBs and the BMC are discussed.
Keywords: Traditional Medicinal Knowledge, Biodiversity, National Biodiversity Authority, State Biodiversity Board, Biodiversity Management Committee

1.1. Regulation of TMK access under the Biological Diversity Act

Traditional Medicinal Knowledge forms are either held individually by traditional medicinal healers or may be shared among few members in the community or held collectively. Many communities greatly benefit from traditional medicine. Due to various anthropogenic activities and unsustainable harvesting from wild, many medicinal species in India have become endangered and have been included in Red Data Book of threatened species. Thus, there is an urgent need to have measures taken to protect/conserve the natural habitats of these Medicinal Plants wealth of the Country . Traditional Medicinal Knowledge is recognised under the Biological Diversity Act 2002. The People Biodiversity Register (PBR) has two columns called 'Associated TK and 'TK use' where TMK information is catalogued. It also provides for aspects related to traditional knowledge under the umbrella of associated knowledge within various provisions of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002, and Rules, 2004. The regulation of access to bioresources and associated knowledge comes under the purview of Sections 3, 4 and 6 which come under the ambit of the NBA primarily. NBA consults with the SBB which in turn consults with the BMC in relation to the approval mechanism. Prior authorisation is mandatory for foreign nationals, non-resident Indians and firms with significant non-Indian participation in their management. Commercial utilisation, biosurvey, bioutilisation and research are the activities covered under Section 3 of the Act. The procedure for access involves the submission of Form I and compliance under Rule 14 of the Biological Diversity Rules 2004. Companies who engage in the activities described above but are not covered by Section 3 must notify the State Biodiversity Board (SBB) in advance, as required by Section 7. If the biological resources used in the research are found in or generated from India, an approval is required under Section 4 read with Rule 17 for the transfer of research results and compliance with Form II application. The BMC's major function, according to Rule 22(6) is to develop the People's Biodiversity Register (PBRs). These registers are used to identify BMCs that use biological resources and deliver benefits to BMCmanaged Local Biodiversity Funds (LBFs)7 . Exemptions for use of medicinal plants by vaids and hakims and for traditional practices are provided under Section 7 of the Act . To check misappropriation of Indian biological resources, the Act provides that access to Indian biological resources and associated knowledge are subject to terms and conditions, which secure equitable sharing of benefits. Further, it would be required to obtain the approval of the National Biodiversity Authority before seeking any IPR based on biological material and associated knowledge obtained from India under Section 6 of the Act.

The Biological Diversity Act, 2002 mandates the implementation of the Act through a decentralized system, with the NBA focusing on advising the Central Government on matters relating to conservation of biodiversity, sustainable use of its components and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of the utilization of biological resource. NBA also advises the State Governments in the selection of areas of biodiversity importance to be notified under Sub-Section (1) of Section 37 as heritage sites and measures for the management of such heritage sites. Functions of NBA under Section 18 include regulating activities and issue guidelines for access to biological resources and/or associated knowledge and fair and equitable sharing in accordance with Sections 3, 4 and 6 of the BD Act 2002. It takes necessary measures to oppose the grant of Intellectual Property Rights in any country outside India on any biological resource obtained from India or knowledge associated with such biological resources derived from India illegally. It also advise State Governments in the selection of areas of biodiversity importance to be notified as heritage sites and suggest measure for their management and provide guidance and technical support to Biodiversity Management Committees through State Biodiversity Boards for preparing People’s Biodiversity Registers.

Table 1.1 indicates category of applications for access under the Biological diversity Act 2002. Since its inception, the NBA has received 4789 applications from different stakeholders under Forms I, II and III.

In cases where the approval for access is allowed the applicant will need to sign an ABS agreement which is a requirement prior to access. The criteria for access and benefit sharing is provided under Section 21 of the Act. As per Section 21 (1) equitable benefit sharing arising out of the use of accessed bioresources or knowledge should be in accordance with mutually agreed terms. Section 21 (2) provides the various modes of benefit sharing. The benefit sharing may be involve grant of joint ownership of IP, transfer of technology, improving living standards of local people, start R &D activities in activities as mentioned in the Act, setting up of venture capital fund to help benefit claimers, payment of monetary compensation or non-monetary benefits. Any of these modes or all of these modes may be applicable in case of ABS agreements.

1.2 Recent Legal Developments

The protection of traditional medical knowledge has grown in importance as the usage of traditional medicines across the globe has significantly increased. The urgent need for access and benefit sharing regulation has emerged as a result of the surge in demand for medicinal plants, the exploitation of resources by multinational corporations, and the lack of an effective system of protection. India is the world's most significant repository for natural resources and traditional medical systems including Ayurveda, Siddha, and Unani. It is possible to create legislation while taking into account regional variations, local groups' customary rules, etc. Furthermore, rather than prioritising individual rights, we ought to prioritise communal or community rights. In this way, the communities' efforts to commercialise their expertise will be more financially successful. Traditional medical knowledge that has not yet been made available to the general public can be shielded by trade secrets. But consistency between the law and customary law is the most important need. The recent legal developments in this area are discussed below

1.2.1 Draft Guidelines on Access to Biological Resources and Associated Knowledge and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Regulations, 2019

The draft ABS Regulations, 2019, may replace the ABS Regulations, 2014. The regulations are proposed, among other things, under Section 21(4) of the Act which authorises the NBA to define "Guidelines" for the purpose of determining equitable benefit sharing through regulations. The National Biodiversity Authority has the authority to make "Regulations" under Section 64 of the Act. This power is distinct from the Central Government's and State Government's powers to make "Rules" under Sections 62 and 63. When executing powers granted under Sections 23 (b) and 24, the State Biodiversity Board (SBB) is required to observe benefit-sharing procedures. Section 63 empowers each state government to adopt rules prescribing how the SBBs should carry out the responsibilities described in Sections 24 and 23. The Draft Regulation 12 exempts access to biological resources for "conventional breeding or traditional practises in use in any agriculture, horticulture, poultry, dairy farming, animal husbandry, or beekeeping". This exception may be traced back to the Section 2(f) of the Act identifies exclusion of the aforementioned activities. The regulations now specify that such activities are only exempt if they are carried out "in India." Section 2(f) of the Act does not have this territorial restriction.

Traditional breeding and traditional practises in agriculture, horticulture, aquaculture, animal husbandry, dairy farming, sericulture, poultry, beekeeping, and other related fields shall be used to increase genetic variability or improve animal and plant species by allowing genetic manipulation. However, when employed for commercial purposes, it will not be considered traditional breeding or traditional practise. Table 1.1 provides the benefit sharing mechanism for various activities and purpose of bio-resources.

Table 1.1: Benefit sharing mechanism for various activities and purpose of bioresources

1.2.2 Biodiversity Amendment Bill, 2021

In December 2021, the Biological Diversity (Amendment) Bill, 2021 was introduced in Lok Sabha, and was subsequently referred to a Joint Parliamentary Committee. The Bill seeks to amend the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 to: (i) encourage the Indian system of medicine and cultivation of wild medicinal plants, (ii) facilitate fast-tracking of processes for research, patent application and transfer of research results, (iii) decriminalise offences, and (iv) encourage foreign investment in the sector. The Bill also amends the Act to include references to the Nagoya Protocol. The Act requires prior approval or intimation to the regulatory authority based on the origin of the entity for obtaining biological resources occurring in India or associated knowledge. The regulatory authorities under the Act for these purposes are National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) and State Biodiversity Boards (SBB).

The Biodiversity Amendment Bill, 2021 encourages farmers to increase the cultivation of medicinal plants. It seeks to empower local communities to be able to utilize resources, particularly of medicinal value. The bill aims to exclude individuals from having to notify state biodiversity boards prior to exploiting biological resources for specific purposes, including registered AYUSH medical practitioners and those who have access to codified traditional knowledge. The proposed modifications give state biodiversity boards the ability to represent BMCs when deciding how benefits will be shared. Additionally, the law exempts cultivated medical plants from the Act's scope. The distinction between farmed and wild plants is not always clear. Concerns were also expressed about the Bill's emphasis on commercial trade and intellectual property at the expense of the Act's primary goal of conservation. The exclusion of AYUSH practitioners from notifying state biodiversity bodies in advance is presumed to encourage "bio piracy."

Under this Bill the direct role of local bodies and benefit claimers in determining mutually agreed terms is removed. The Act states that while granting approvals for various activities, National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) will determine terms for benefit sharing. Such approval should be in accordance with the mutually agreed terms between the applicant, concerned local bodies, and benefit claimers. Benefit claimers are persons who are conservers of biological resources, or creators or holders of associated traditional knowledge. The Bill amends this to require that approvals should be in accordance with mutually agreed terms between the applicant and the concerned Biodiversity Management Committee represented by NBA. Thus, benefit claimers and local people will not be directly involved in setting the terms and conditions. Clause 9 of the Bill amends Section 7 of the Act. It provides that certain entities are required to intimate State Biodiversity Board (SBB) before accessing any biological resource or associated knowledge for commercial utilisation subject to Sections 23(b) and Section 24(2). However, Section 23(b) (as amended by Clause 21 of the Bill) provides that functions of SBB will include regulating the above activities by granting or rejecting approvals. Also, Section 24(2) of the Act requires SBB to prohibit or restrict activities intimated under Section 7. This raises the question whether the Bill only requires prior intimation or approval of SBB is required for undertaking the specified activities under Section 7.

1.2.3 Protection of Traditional Knowledge, Bill 2022

The latest Bill on Protection of Traditional Knowledge, 2022 seeks to provide protection, promotion, preservation and development of India’s TK. It encourages the system of registration that identifies the TK with its rightful custodians. As a result of being acknowledged as the custodian, the knowledge society will be considered to have a perpetual non-exclusive license for both commercial and non-commercial use of traditional knowledge, and all of its members will collectively benefit from the rights. This Bill is a great step toward preserving India's rich tradition of traditional knowledge and dispelling any ideas of exclusive control of it.

The Bill does not intend to create any rights but recognises traditional knowledge holders/communities as custodians of TK, while the ownership is attributed to the States/Union Territories (deemed ownership). Joint ownership may exist between states which would have an equal and undivided share in any claim or interests in that traditional knowledge. TK holders/communities will be recognised as custodians only after they register a ‘knowledge society’ according to the laws of the country. They should also apply for recognition by the appropriate Government, the ‘deemed owner’ of the TK. A knowledge society is defined in the Bill as a group of people or family, whether indigenous, tribal or otherwise, residing within the boundaries of the national territory, who may be identified as a separate group from other groups or other members of the society by reason of their exclusive association with one or more forms of traditional knowledge13. Such groups of people or family shall constitute itself as a legal entity such as trust, society or company other than large enterprise but including a company under sub-section (62) of section 2 of the Companies Act, 2013 and is constituted specifically and exclusively for managing commercial and non-commercial use of one or more forms of TK. The Bill also proposes administrative frameworks such as the National Authority on Traditional Knowledge and State Boards to manage traditional knowledge.

Even today, the traditional medicinal knowledge and wellness practices of our nation, including Ayurveda, Siddha, Unani, Sowa Rigpa, and Yoga, meet the needs of both Indians and people from other countries. Indian traditional treatments have been widely used during the recent COVID-19 pandemic, and their benefits range from immune system stimulation to symptom relief to antiviral action. These examples show how traditional medicinal knowledge continues to be relevant in addressing current and future global needs.

Research Question II (b) What is the role of National Biodiversity Authority, State biodiversity Boards and Biodiversity Management Committees in ensuring conservation and protection of Traditional Medicine under the Act?

1.3 Role of Authorities

The National Biodiversity Authority (NBA), with its headquarters in Chennai, was established in 2003 under Section 8 of the Act to implement the Act at the national level. A three-tier institutional structure was created in 2002 for the implementation of the Act. The State Biodiversity Boards (SBB) at the state level and the Biodiversity Management Committees (BMC) at the local level, respectively, make up the second and third tiers. The NBA regulates the activities envisioned by the Act, establishes rules for access to biological resources, and provides guidance to the Indian government on problems pertaining to biodiversity preservation, sustainable use, and fair distribution of biological resources.

On matters pertaining to the preservation of biodiversity, sustainable exploitation, and equitable distribution, the NBA provides advice to the Central Government. Additionally, it sets rules for activities and provides access to biological resources. Similarly, SBB offers guidance to state governments on matters pertaining to biodiversity. The BMCs are in charge of encouraging the preservation of ecosystems, landraces, folk variations and cultivars, domesticated stocks, and breeds of animals and microorganisms, as well as their sustainable usage and recording. State Biodiversity Boards have been established in each State with a role conserving biological resources and regulating access subject to equitable sharing of benefits resulting from their use. Union Territory Biodiversity Councils (UTBCs) have been established in the seven union territories.

1.3.1 Initiatives taken by National Biodiversity Authority

The NBA has established expert committees to identify potential changes that should be made to the Biological Diversity Act and Rules. It includes the Expert Committee on Access and Benefit Sharing, the Expert Committee to Examine Biological Diversity Rules, User Country Measures under the Nagoya Protocol, and the Development of Sector Specific Standard Operating Procedures.

Expert Committees (EC) on various subjects constituted by NBA met several times during the year 2015-16 and suggested recommendations. The EC on Biodiversity Management Committees (BMC) has met in order to revise the guidelines on operationalization of BMC in consultation with various stakeholders including NGOs. The EC on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) met six times during the year 2015-16 and evaluated 300 applications on ABS and also provided techno-legal inputs on various generic issues such as accessing non-Indian biological resources, applicability of BD Act on the claim of improved design without using biological resources and modalities for levying upfront payments.

During the year 2020-21, the ABS committee met three times viz., 59th meeting on 5th and 6th March 2020, 60th meeting on 3rd November 2020 and 61st meeting on 18th March 2021 and evaluated 379 applications on access and benefit sharing and provided recommendations to the Authority. 952 applications were submitted for the use of biological resources for research or commercial purposes, the transfer of research findings, the transfer of intellectual property rights, and the transfer to third parties. During this time, 2592 agreements were made in total. The expert committee also provided techno-legal inputs on generic issue regarding the consideration of draft formula for determination of benefit sharing component on Form-III applications under various categories.

NBA received Rs 8,40,98,477 as a benefit-sharing element for 2020–2021, which includes, among other things, an advance payment, commercial utilisation, and royalty. Parties are required to issue a permit or its equivalent at the time of access as evidence that access to genetic resources was based on prior informed consent and that mutually agreed terms were established, according to Article 17 of the Nagoya Protocol on access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their utilisation15.NBA has posted information on the 1787 approvals it has received on the ABS CH platform, resulting in Internationally recognised certificates of compliance in 2020 and 2021..

The EC on medicinal plants which was reconstituted deliberated on threat assessment strategies, negative list of species for exports issued by the DGFT and safeguarding of traditional knowledge relating to medicinal plants documented through People Biodiversity Registers. The 34th Meeting of the Authority held on 29 June 2015 under agenda item no. 34.11 decided to reconstitute the Expert Committee (EC) on Medicinal Plants. The EC in particular was mandated to review and render advice to National Biodiversity Authority on the gazette notifications issued under Section 38 of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. Sec 38 empowers the Central Government in consultation with the concerned State Governments to notify the species of plants and animals which are on the verge of extinction or likely to become extinct in the near future as threatened species with a view to prohibit or regulate collection thereof for any purpose and take appropriate steps to rehabilitate and preserve those species. So far 18 States and 2 Union Territories namely, Assam, Bihar, Goa, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Orissa, Punjab, Tamil Nadu, Tripura, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, West Bengal, Andaman and Nicobar Islands and Diu and Dam islands have notified threatened species under Section 38 of the BD Act, enlisting a total of 159 Plants and 175 Animal species.

NBA has extended financial support to the SBBs towards strengthening the institutional mechanism such as components of outsourcing, training and capacity building, peer-topeer learning exchange visits, printing and dissemination of knowledge materials, formation of Thematic Expert Committee and website maintenance for the respective States during 2020-21. Monthly Review meetings of SBBs were convened to interact and understand the problems and challenges faced at the state and local body level.

The 56th meeting of the Governing Body of NBA was held on 23rd and 30th June 2020. The Authority directed NBA to convene separate meetings with the officials of the AYUSH Ministry and the scientific community to examine their proposals for ease of doing business and research respectively.

Two meetings of the Working Group for developing methodology for assessing the Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) potential have been organized by NBA on 14 October, 2020 and 09 July, 2021. These meetings have deliberated and prepared draft guidelines for the identification of the interventions for conservation, assessment of the potential, and the use of ABS funds by the NBA, SBB and the local level BMCs Biodiversity Management Committees. Draft guidance document was prepared to establish of Local Biodiversity Fund (LBF) as per the provisions of the Act to invest ABS funds in the restoration of ecosystems from where the resources are accessed is under the vetting process.

1.3.2 Initiatives taken by the State Biodiversity Board

The SBBs are established by the State Governments by notification in the official gazette in accordance with Section 22 of the Act. The SBBs focus on advising the State Governments, subject to any guidelines issued by the Central Government, on matters relating to the conservation of biodiversity, sustainable use of its components and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of biological resources. They also regulate, by granting approvals or otherwise requests for commercial utilization or bio-survey and bio-utilization of any biological resource by Indians. The NBA exercises the powers and functions of an SBB in Union Territories. The NBA may delegate all or any of its powers or functions to such persons or group of persons as specified by the Central Government. The SBBs comprise of a Chairperson, five exofficio members representing the concerned departments and five experts having experience related to conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of biological resources; and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising out of their use.

Functions of SBB include advising the State Governments, subject to guidelines issued by the Central Government, on the objectives of the Act., regulate by granting approvals on request for commercial utilization or bio-survey and bio-utilization of any biological resources by Indians and perform other functions necessary to carry out the provisions of the Act or as prescribed by the State Governments. 26 out of the 29 SBBs have so far informed the state rules.

The e-PBR software currently under development called BIOMIS (Biodiversity Management Information System) was developed by National Informatics Centre (NIC). A meeting of the representatives of the National Biodiversity Authority (NBA) and the (NIC) was held on 9th January 2020 at NBA, Chennai to review the progress of the e-PBR pilot project. Subsequently, a meeting was held at the NIC Kerala State Centre to review and rescoping of e-PBR pilot phase project. Nine review meetings were held during the year 2020-21 to review the progress of the development on e-PBR applications. The NIC team has developed the software and pilot testing is being undertaken in Tripura, Tamil Nadu, Goa and Kerala SBBs. The SBBs have started entering their data into the e-PBR platform.

Activities have been undertaken by the various SBBs for cataloguing, conservation of medicinal plants and information associated with their use. For instance, the Rajasthan State Biodiversity Board has published information on more than 2412 flowering plants with special emphasis to their ecological, medicinal and economic importance. Punjab State Biodiversity Board has collaborated with Ministry of AYUSH, National Medicinal Plant Board, State drug and Licensing Authority and other concerned departments for collecting details of herbal products manufacturers and traders functioning in the State. The Madhya Pradesh Biodiversity Board has published brochures on threatened medicinal trees during the year 2015-16. Maharashtra Biodiversity Board has published brochures on “Introduction of Medicinal Plants & their utilization at home” in English and Marathi during the year 2015-16. Telangana State Biodiversity Board has conducted training programmes for selected agencies by experts from FRLHT, Bengaluru on preparation of PBRs at BMC level and documentation of tradable bioresources at the district level.

In the Divya Pharmacy v Union of India case of 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court reiterated the very purpose of ABS and the premise of the biodiversity legislation in India17. The case involved the issuance of notice of compliance by the Uttarakhand Biodiversity Board to Baba Ramdev’s companies to seek prior approval from the State Biodiversity Board or share a part of its revenue with the local communities as fees. The Court held that all Indian companies which are extracting biological resources are liable to seek prior approval as well as share part of their revenue with the local communities that are responsible for conserving and protecting such resources. It emphasized that the rights of indigenous and local communities “have to be protected, equally from outside as well as from within”. The Court held that the State Biodiversity Boards do have the jurisdiction to demand “fair and equitable sharing of benefits” from Divya Pharmacy. This case has implications for Indian companies.

In the next chapter, efforts of the SBBs selected in the field study are discussed in detail.

1.3.3 Implementation by Biodiversity Management Committees

In accordance with Section 41 of the BD Act, local bodies within their areas of jurisdiction can constitute BMCs to promote conservation, sustainable use and documentation of biological diversity which includes preservation of habitats. conservation of landraces, folk varieties and cultivars, domesticated stocks and breeds of animals and microorganisms, and chronicling of knowledge related to biological diversity. Each BMC consists of a Chairperson and six persons nominated by the local body of which one-third is women and 18% belong to the Scheduled Castes/Tribes category. As on 15th July 2022, there are 2,76,895 BMCs across India. The function of BMC includes preparing, maintaining and validating People’s Biodiversity Registers (PBR) in consultation with the local people, provide advice on any matter referred to it by the State Biodiversity Board or NBA for granting approval and maintain data about local vaids and medical practitioners using biological resources. Local people and communities, including biodiversity cultivators and producers, as well as vaids and hakims, have been given an express exemption in section 7. Furthermore, section 2 defines commercial use, which clearly excludes traditional agricultural, horticultural, poultry, dairy farming, and animal husbandry practises. Under Rule 22(6) of the Biological Diversity Rules, 2004 the BMCs main function is to prepare the People’s Biodiversity Register (PBRs). It is a legal document that contains information and data regarding biological resources discovered in a BMC. These registers are used, where available, to identify the BMCs where from the biological resources are accessed and benefits will be provided to the Local Biodiversity Funds (LBFs) maintained by BMCs. The PBR acts as a source of biological resources and a knowledge inventory for benefit-sharing reasons. The National Biodiversity Authority published a set of rules for building a PBR in 2009 after extensive consultations. These guidelines were modified in 2013. On a case-by-case basis, the Authority shall formulate guidelines and declare the particulars of the benefit sharing formula in an official gazette18. The monetary benefits will be donated to the National Biodiversity Fund if no such persons or organisations can be discovered. 5% of the benefits will be set aside for the Authority or the State Biodiversity Board to meet administrative costs. For the establishment and execution of BMCs, the NBA has released a set of guidelines. It also makes a financial contribution to the formation of BMCs. On April 10, 2013, NBA issued a directive (Ref No: N–11011/9/2013–POL–II) in favour of the Ministry of Panchayat Raj, suggesting that all local bodies create BMCs in partnership with the Ministry of Panchayat Raj. Awareness Programmes, Capacitybuilding, and Orientation for BMCs are held on a regular basis by the NBA and SBBs. India has lot to contribute with its rich and diverse resources of TK especially in the domain of ethnomedicines. The tribes of India are main custodians of this wealth of knowledge owing to the livelihood basis. The Siddi healing system, from the Siddi community in Gujrat, has been recognised internationally and India has recently submitted this traditional medicinal healing practice information for the benefit of the world. The role of music, including dancing and drumming is in the healing system of Siddis. This practise of ethnomedicine represents an interface of medicine and religion. It is pertinent to note that implementation of the objectives of the Act has been facilitated also by the help of other administrative authorities which are not under the Biodiversity legislation. The analysis of the role of administrative agencies, NGOs and academic institutes in furthering the objectives of the Act is also necessary. In the section below, some of these aspects are discussed. The National Medicinal Plants Board (NMPB), Ministry of AYUSH has been implementing schemes to encourage farming/cultivation, conservation, processing and promotion of medicinal plants throughout the country. They are the Centrally Sponsored Scheme of National AYUSH Mission (NAM) and the Central Sector Scheme on “Conservation, Development and Sustainable Management of Medicinal Plants. The second scheme has particular relevance to the implementation of TMK.Under this scheme, the project based support is provided for in-situ conservation through development of Medicinal Plants Conservation and Development Areas (MPCDAs), ex-situ conservation through establishment of herbal gardens and promotion of marketing and trade of medicinal plants produce. The support is provided for setting of local cluster for value addition, drying, warehousing and augmenting marketing infrastructure, etc. with the objective to channelize production and promote sustainable harvesting and supply of medicinal plants through capacity building of JFMCs/Van Panchayats /local SHGs/BMCs etc. So far fiftyseven SHGs have been supported through State Forest Department in case of Maharashtra, Punjab and Uttarakhand. The National Medicinal Plants Board (NMPB), in collaboration with the Quality Council of India (QCI) has launched a Voluntary Certification Scheme for Medicinal Plants Produce (VCSMPP), which aims to encourage Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs) and Good Field Collection Practices (GFCPs) has been introduce for medicinal plants to enhance quality and safety of their produce. This allows certification of intermediaries like traders who may source certified medicinal plant material and supply further.

The setting up biodiversity parks in several states helps to strengthen the capacity of local communities in protecting TMK. The establishment of medicinal plants parks leads to the documentation of indigenous knowledge related to medicinal plants and increase commitment of local people to conserve medicinal plants. For instance, the Aravalli Biodiversity Park is Delhi has been created out of degraded land. It has specialized parks such as Butterfly Park, Sacred Groves, Medicinal and Herbal Garden. The Yamuna Biodiversity Park nurtures native flora and fauna that existed hundred years ago. In Assam, efforts have been taken up for collection and preservation of indigenous and medicinal fruit trees. National Medicinal Plants Board (NMPB), GOI and NBA have taken several initiatives to support in-situ conservation of Medicinal Plants through establishment of Medicinal Plants conservation and Development Areas (MPCDAs) throughout the country. For in-situ conservation, the State Forest Departments are playing a vital role in establishing the MPCDAs.

There are around five hundred AYUSH undergraduate colleges. National Institute of Naturopathy (Pune), National Institute of Ayurveda (Jaipur), National Institute of Unani Medicine (Bengaluru), Institute of Post Graduate Teaching and Research in Ayurveda (Jamnagar), National Institute of Siddha (Chennai) and University of TransDisciplinary Health Sciences and Technology are some of India's most prestigious traditional medicine educational institutions. There are collaborative activities of these institutes with Biodiversity Boards for protecting Traditional Medicinal Knowledge. There are several organisations and institutes in India are also contributing to the larger effort of protection of traditional medicines and their knowledge. These are complementary to that under the Biologicla Diversity Act and help in augmenting the overall effort to protect traditional medicinal knowledge. While discussing all of the work would be very extensive, a representative set of efforts undertaken is illustrated in Table 1.2.

Table 1.2. Efforts of individual organisations/institutes in protection of traditional medicinal knowledge

In summary, analysis of the substantive and procedural aspects of the Act are necessary to understand the applicability of the different provisions in relation to TMK and instances where the respective authorities can regulate its access. The activities undertaken by the NBA, SBBs and the BMC in general help in understanding the various implementation measures. The analysis reveals that while there are individual efforts there are also integrated efforts between the functionaries under the law