Bio-resource value slipping in Namibia

Namibia’s approach to access and benefit-sharing (ABS) of biological resources must be treated as a matter of national sovereignty and resilience, particularly in an era marked by pandemics, climate shocks and growing global competition for genetic materials, according to Dr Taime Sylvester, a researcher and senior lecturer in Clinical Health Sciences at the Namibia University of Science and Technology.
She was speaking ahead of a national workshop on Environmental Stewardship and Gender Mainstreaming for State Resilience to Shocks and Disasters, to be hosted by the Ministry of Environment, Forestry and Tourism from 26 to 27 January 2026 at the Windhoek Country Club and Resort.
Speaking on the governance of biological materials, Dr Sylvester said Namibia’s ABS framework is anchored in the Nagoya Protocol. This international agreement regulates access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their use. While the protocol has traditionally focused on biodiversity and associated traditional knowledge, Namibia has deliberately expanded its scope to include human biological samples, pathogens and genomic data.
This, she said, reflects an important recognition that strategic biological resources are not confined to forests and ecosystems but are also found in hospitals, laboratories and disease surveillance systems. During pandemics and health emergencies, these materials become critical national assets. Effective ABS governance, therefore, ensures that emergency response does not become unchecked extraction, but rather a coordinated process that protects sovereignty while enabling international cooperation.
Dr Sylvester warned that Namibia continues to lose significant value in biological resource value chains linked to pathogens, human samples and the data derived from them. These materials often leave the country through research collaborations or emergency responses, while long-term benefits, such as technology development, knowledge production, and commercial products, are realised elsewhere. This, she said, represents not only an economic loss but a systemic one that weakens national resilience by externalising expertise and capacity.
She said current interventions are aimed at keeping value connected to people by strengthening local analytical capacity, embedding explicit benefit-sharing obligations into access agreements, and ensuring that development outcomes form part of all biological resource transactions. These measures align with Namibia’s National Development Plan 6 and Article 95 of the Constitution, which commits the State to actively promoting the welfare of all citizens.
On ensuring that communities and the country become direct beneficiaries, Dr Sylvester said the issue is not a lack of legal frameworks but how stewardship is practised. She noted that communities and patients have contributed biological samples and data in good faith, particularly during COVID-19 and tuberculosis research. Stewardship, she argued, requires that these contributions translate into lasting benefits, such as skills development, infrastructure, and improved access to health services, that remain within the country.
She emphasised that ownership of biological resources in this context is collective, centred on strengthening national systems, reducing dependency and improving preparedness for future shocks. This, she said, is the practical expression of the State’s constitutional responsibility under Article 67 to promote and maintain the welfare of the people.
Dr Sylvester also highlighted the need for precise coordination and accountability in ABS governance, particularly regarding pathogens. While responsibility is shared across health, environment, research and policy sectors, she said effective stewardship requires a dedicated coordinating mechanism, such as an ABS directorate, to provide oversight, negotiation capacity and accountability. Such a structure would not replace stakeholder responsibility but would strengthen it by moving Namibia from reactive crisis management to proactive stewardship.
Dr Sylvester said traditional environmental stewardship indicators are no longer sufficient. In the context of shocks and disasters, success must be measured by preparedness, equity and continuity. This includes in-country capacity to analyse pathogens, benefit-sharing mechanisms that activate during emergencies, and scientific systems that remain functional under pressure without excessive reliance on external sources.
She said the ultimate test of ABS governance is whether Namibia emerges from shocks more resilient than before, with stronger institutions and more equitable sharing of benefits. In an era of recurring global uncertainty, she argued, ABS is no longer a peripheral policy issue but a core instrument of environmental stewardship, national resilience and collective accountability.