Search

International audience; The French law for the reconquest of biodiversity aims to transpose the Nagoya Protocol into national law. Rather than supporting the notion of an autochthonous and local community or even taking into account the autochthonous character of the concept of a local community, the legislature has chosen to use the notion of a community of inhabitants. The notion of local community, which is specific to environmental law, nevertheless satisfies the requirements of constitutional jurisprudence, as it does not consist of a community of origin, culture, language or belief. Beyond the logic inherent in the Law of 8 August 2016, the recognition of local communities, which is at the heart of the mechanism for sharing access and benefits, could make it possible to correct the multiple shortcomings, in terms of access to both genetic resources and traditional knowledge, associated with the sharing of the benefits that result from their use.

International audience; Despite the incremental development of the heritage dimension of local urban planning plans, as well as an ever-more substantial relationship between immovable cultural heritage law and urban planning law, these two elements remain susceptible to raising confusion, occasionally contradicting one another frontally. The French Act of 7 July 2016 on Freedom of Creation, Architecture, and Heritage had the initial ambition of harmonizing and simplifying the mechanisms for the protection and enhancement of immovable cultural heritage, including under urban planning law. Yet the Act of 23 November 2018 on Housing Development, Urban Planning, and Digital Technology has further contributed to weakening the heritage protection mechanisms and bestowed a priority on the construction of new buildings over the conservation and enhancement of old neighbourhoods and buildings.

Le titre V de la loi pour la reconquête de la biodiversité promulguée le 08 août 2016 vise à transposer en droit interne le protocole de Nagoya et le règlement n° 511/2014 du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 16 avril 2014. Plutôt que de s’appuyer sur la notion de communauté autochtone et locale voire de prendre en considération le caractère autonome de la notion de communauté locale, le législateur a fait le choix d’user de la notion de communauté d’habitants. La notion de communauté locale, propre au droit de l’environnement, est pourtant susceptible de satisfaire aux exigences de la jurisprudence constitutionnelle puisqu’elle ne consiste pas en une communauté d’origine, de culture, de langue ou de croyance. Au-delà de la logique inhérente à la loi du 8 août 2016, la reconnaissance de communautés locales au coeur du dispositif d’accès et de partage des avantages doit permettre d’en corriger les multiples insuffisances tant en matière d’accès aux ressources génétiques et aux connaissances traditionnelles qu’en ce qui concerne le partage des avantages résultant de leur utilisation., Title V of the law for the reconquest of biodiversity promulgated on 08 August 2016 aims to transpose into national law the Nagoya Protocol and the Regulation 511/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council of 16 April 2014. Rather than 'to support the notion of indigenous and local community or even to take into account the autonomous character of the notion of local community, the legislator has made the choice to use the notion of community of inhabitants. The notion of local community, which is specific to environmental law, is nevertheless able of satisfying the requirements of constitutional jurisprudence since it does not consist of a community of origin, culture, language or belief. Beyond the logic inherent in the law of 08 August 2016, the recognition of local communities at the heart of the access and benefit-sharing mechanism must make it possible to correct the multiple shortcomings both in terms of access to genetic resources and traditional knowledge with regard to the sharing of benefits arising from their use.

International audience