distributing the benefits of nature's bounty: a social justice perspective

Distributing Benefits:

A Timeless Challenge

Services and raw materials from natural

heritage scarce

Prone to shifts in social and cultural norms

Common pool resources require some special

attention

Lots of issues

Why Benefit Distribution is Challenging

Global debate about conservation

Growing population with changing

consumption patterns

Global level processes stress natural heritage

Political and moral ideologies in flux

Knowledge is expanding

Community Level

Access is important for vulnerable populations

Dependency on access to natural resources

Access to Nature’s Bounty

It is a matter of justice or fair treatment

Framing the Challenge

Framing natural resource problems is difficult

Wicked and messy character

Scientific disagreement on cause-effect

relationships

Lack of social agreement on goals

Inter-connected problems

Can’t solve one problem without affecting others

Don’t solve problems, but resolve them

Benefit Sharing and Benefit Distribution:

Different Decisions, Similar Questions

Literature often unclear

Convention on Biological Diversity unclear on

what it means

Moral approach sees sharing as an act of

beneficence

Policy arena sees sharing as a non-voluntary

act

How terms will be used in this presentation

Benefit sharing – A fair exchange of value

between a willing seller (collective) and

willing buyer

Benefit distribution – apportionment of

benefits received by a collective to members of

that collective

Social Justice Framing

Social justice – objective is the basic structure

of society … way in which major social

institutions distribute fundamental rights and

duties … – Rawls 1971

Institutions lose their legitimacy when

decisions are not just in the eyes of citizens

and residents

Three Types of JusticeUnderpin Benefit Sharing and Distribution

Commutative – fair exchange of value

Distributive – apportionment of benefits and

burdens

Procedural – the rules by which society makes

decisions

Commutative Justice

Seeking a fair exchange – trades of equivalent

value

The heart of benefit sharing

Implemented through

Prior informed consent

Mutually agreed terms

Policy

Distributive Justice

How benefits and burdens are apportioned to

members of a collective

The focus of benefit distribution

Implemented through policy decisions

Goal is fairness

But what is fair?

Procedural Justice

The rules by which society makes decisions

Underlies both distributive and commutative justice

Implemented through good governance principles, e.g.

Transparency

Inclusiveness

Responsibility

Accountability

Commutative

Justice

Distributive

Justice

Procedural Justice

Major Benefit Distribution Decisions

1. Current members or future members

2. Community or individual (household) scale

3. Goals of distribution

4. Capacity to make decisions

1. Benefits distributed to current

or future members

Provision of opportunities

An issue of intergenerational equity

2. Community or individual scale

Community scale – basic services needed by

all members

Clinic, school, library, police, fire

Individual scale – individuals decide what to

do with benefits

Raise income

People spend income on their

sense of need

3. Determining Distributive Justice Goals

Equality – every member receives the same

apportionment

Treats everyone the same regardless of

circumstances

3. Determining Distributive Justice Goals

Equity – benefits apportioned according to

merit or some other measure

Favors those who engage collective activities or

who hold promise for improving collective quality

of life

3. Determining Distributive Justice Goals

Need – benefits apportioned to those most

vulnerable

Poor

Sick

Dependency

4. What Governance Capacities are

Needed

Decision making – identifying who should get

what amount from whom

Focus on procedural justice

Understanding consequences

Explicitness in policy development

Administration – good business practices

Accounting

Paper trails

Audits

Lessons Learned

Ambiguous definitions of benefit sharing and

distribution stifle research and thwart effective

social discourse, creating confusion and

conflict

Lessons Learned

Any benefit distribution mechanism will

discriminate against some group

What is fair?

Lessons Learned

What is “fair” is highly situational specific,

often contested, and depends on the interest

dominating discourse

Lessons Learned

Building capacity to negotiate is critical to

creating opportunities for commutative justice.

Lessons Learned

Building capacity to decide is critical to

distributive justice

Lessons Learned

How benefits are created remains an important

question for science and policy and needs

debate for progress to be made

Conclusions

Benefit distribution occurs within a complex

social-ecological system defying simplistic

solutions

Research can help policy understand choices

and consequences

Using a social justice perspective clarifies

goals and processes used in benefit distribution

policy

Thanks to:

Wayne Freimund, UM

Patrick Graz, Polytechnic

Selma Lendelvo, UNAM

Maxi Louis, NACSO

Alfons Mosimane, UNAM

Bimo Nkhata, Monash

Karine Nuulimba, IRDNC

Oliver Pierson, MCC

Tyron Venn, UM

Chris Weaver WWF-Namibia

Convention on Biological Diversity

Third objective:

“the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits

arising out of the utilization of genetic resources …”

Bonn Guidelines

Nagoya Protocol

Requires that “benefits arising from the utilization of

genetic resources … shall be shared in a fair and

equitable way with the Party providing such

resources …”

Definition Goal Benefit Shared Citation

Charitable

Giving

Care for Human

Beings

Aid, Technical

Assistance

Fair Exchange

of Value

Commutative Justice Money,

Technology,

Training,

Knowledge

Artuso 2002

Moran 2000

Schroeder 2007

Mitigation Payment for Costs

Incurred by Local

Residents

Money Mogera and

Tsioumani 2010

Baldus, et al. 2003

Incentive Encourage

Conservation Practice

Money, Meat Johannesen and

Skonhoft 2005

Compensation Restitution for Past

Injustice

Money, Shared

Decision Making

Magome 2003

Kepe et al. 2005

IUCN 2003

Benefit Sharing

Raw material may be a plant product, mineral, energy or

ecosystem-based service

Benefit Distribution

Natural

HeritageRaw Material

Saleable

Product

Buy-Sell

Agreement

Distribution of

Revenues

Investment in

Conservation

Administration

Collective

Members

Revenues to

Collective