Greens fume at Kerala State Biodiversity Board post
Environmentalists call this a classic example of the perils of ignorance of benefit sharing.
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: Environmentalists say S.C. Joshi’s appointment as Kerala State Biodiversity Board (KSBB) chief is against the letter and spirit of Biodiversity Act as they believe his knowledge is questionable on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS).The rules which Kerala government notified in 2008, reads, “The chairperson shall be an eminent person having adequate knowledge and experience in the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and in matters relating to equitable sharing of the benefits.”
Even if one argues that he has experience in conservation as he was part of the forest department, if he has no experience in equitable sharing of benefits, he is not qualified, according to Kerala Sastra Sahitya Parishad environment sub-committee member George D’Cruz.“ABS is an important aspect of the Act. The Board should be chaired by a person who understands it, who would ensure that the benefits are shared with indigenous communities, the real custodians of our biodiversity,” he says.
The National Biodiversity Authority had decided not to appoint forest department officials, as they do not take strong stances for conservation in the face of opposition from the government, according to former KSBB chair V. S. Vijayan. “But that doesn’t mean that all forest officials are the same,” he adds. National Alliance of People’s Movements state coordinator Kusumam Joseph says that there is a fear that Mr Joshi could be the government’s rubber stamp: “We are deeply disappointed at the choice, especially at a time when environmental politics should not be on the sidelines. Moreover, his efforts as a conservationist are not known. Forests are depleting, not increasing.”
The appointment of Oommen V., Oommen, his predecessor, was also opposed. After he took charge, the State Expert Appraisal Committee had decided that a share of profits from quarrying be given to Biodiversity Management Committee. Then the Board had called it ‘benefit sharing’. Environmentalists call this a classic example of the perils of ignorance of benefit sharing.