Biodiversity underpins ecosystem services. The UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has adopted an ecosystem services approach as a framework for biodiversity management at the national level. Protection of ecosystem services requires far more than traditional nature conservation measures like the designation and management of protected areas. The economic sectors that affect biodiversity and ecosystem services must be involved, to address not merely the symptoms but the root causes of the degradation of biodiversity and ecosystem services. Achieving coherence in policies and actions across economic sectors and the changes involved in values, decision-making and practices, requires legal approaches to ensure buy-in and accountability. Ideally, such approaches should be included in National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs), the key instrument for translating the CBD into national action. A review of 20 revised NBSAPs shows that such measures have been introduced only to a very limited extent with many countries still in the earliest stages of preparing measures to protect ecosystem services. Thus, there is a need for further research and practical guidance regarding legal approaches to ecosystem services.

In May 2015, the European Commission withdrew its proposal for a new Regulation on Plant Reproductive Material. For decades, the European Union (EU) has struggled to strike a balance between seed legislation and the rights of farmers to save and exchange seed. The shelving of the draft Regulation was a major setback, given the need for legislative action in the aftermath of the Kokopelli judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU. This article discusses EU seed legislation in light of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. It analyses possible options and dilemmas for Norway in reconciling commitments to promote effective and high‐quality food production in a well‐functioning market, and securing long‐term crop genetic diversity. Norway's association with the internal market through the European Economic Area Agreement, as well as the fact that the Norwegian seed market is small and of scant interest to major seed companies, indicate that Norway enjoys flexibility in policy design. The article finds that EU seed legislation does not allow effective regimes for exchange and use of conservation varieties, possibly at odds with the two treaties and the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.

A global process is underway towards an international legally binding instrument (ILBI) under the Law of Sea Convention (LOSC) on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction This global instrument may influence the governance of the Arctic Ocean of which a large part is beyond national jurisdiction. The Ocean remains one of the last great oceanic wilderness areas of the planet while at the same time being highly vulnerable to climate change and the increased human activity that may follow from the retreating sea ice. The physical changes of the Arctic Ocean have led to growing international attention and perception of the Arctic Ocean as a global common with calls for its increased protection. Alongside with the process towards an ILBI, various initiatives have been taken and discussions conducted within the Arctic region on a mechanism for Arctic marine governance including on the role of the Arctic Council. The current legal framework for governance of the Arctic Ocean is fragmented and incomplete in terms of protecting biodiversity. The article discusses the relevance of a future global instrument for the protection of biodiversity in the Arctic Ocean and its relationship with regional initiatives and existing instruments governing the Ocean. It suggests that Arctic states should use the ongoing global negotiation process as an incentive to take responsibility and be proactive in creating a comprehensive protection regime for the Ocean rather than waiting for the global instrument to serve as the platform. 2. The BBNJ process The obligations of LOSC Part XII on environmental protection are

Contestations about the way in which digital sequence information is used and regulated have created stumbling blocks across multiple international policy processes. Such schisms have profound implications for the way in which we manage and conceptualize agrobiodiversity and its benefits. This paper explores the relationship between farmers’ rights, as recognized in the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, and the dematerialization of genetic resources. Using concepts of “stewardship” and “ownership” we emphasize the need to move away from viewing agrobiodiversity as a commodity that can be owned, toward a strengthened, proactive and expansive stewardship approach that recognizes plant genetic resources for food and agriculture as a public good which should be governed as such. Through this lens we analyze the relationship between digital sequence information and different elements of farmers’ rights to compare and contrast implications for the governance of digital sequence information. Two possible parallel pathways are presented, the first envisaging an enhanced multilateral system that includes digital sequence information and which promotes and enhances the realization of farmers’ rights; and the second a more radical approach that folds together concepts of stewardship, farmers’ rights, and open source science. Farmers’ rights, we suggest, may well be the linchpin for finding fair and equitable solutions for digital sequence information beyond the bilateral and transactional approach that has come to characterize access and benefit sharing under the Convention on Biological Diversity. Existing policy uncertainties could be seized as an unexpected but serendipitous opportunity to chart an alternative and visionary pathway for the rights of farmers and other custodians of plant genetic resources.

Det som ofte har manglet i forskningslitteraturen om miljø-og klimautfordringer i Arktis, er undersøkelser av hva som betinger innflytelsen av vitenskapelig kunnskap i reguleringer av relevans for Arktis. I denne artikkelen er målet å analysere forholdet mellom arktisk kunnskapsproduksjon (inkludert policyanbefalinger) og norsk forvaltning (herunder Miljødirektoratet og Klima-og miljødepartementet). I artikkelen ser vi naermere på tre av arbeidsgruppene i Arktisk råd: 1) Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), 2) Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) og 3) Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME). Fokus er på kunnskapsstatus, grad av økonomisk og politisk kontrovers innenfor de gitte feltene, betydningen av offentlig og politisk oppmerksomhet og forvaltningsdesign.