| | english | español | français |
Go to record ID

  Home|Finding Information|Record details   Printer-friendly version

Second Regular National Report on the Implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
Record information and status
Record ID
102472
Status
Published
Date of creation
2011-10-06 14:13 UTC (g.catacora@gmail.com)
Date of last update
2012-02-02 16:39 UTC (stephane.bilodeau@cbd.int)
Date of publication
2012-02-02 16:39 UTC (stephane.bilodeau@cbd.int)

This document is also available in the following languages:
Origin of report
Country
  • Bolivia (Plurinational State of)
Contact officer for report
Coordinates
Lic. Cynthia Silva Maturana
Viceministra de Medio Ambiente, Biodiversidad, Cambio Climático y Gestión y Desarrollo Forestal
Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Agua (MMAyA)
Av. Camacho No. 1471 Piso 2
La Paz, La Paz
Bolivia (Plurinational State of)
Phone:+591-2 - 2146382 – 2146383 – 2146385 – 2146374
Fax:+591-2- 2146371-2146369
Email:silvacynthiavm@gmail.com,cynthia.silva@mmaya.gob.bo
Consulted stakeholders
9. Organizations/stakeholders who were consulted or participated in the preparation of this report
ES
Movimientos sociales del Pacto de Unidad
SENASAG (Servicio Nacional de Sanidad Agropecuaria e Inocuidad Alimentaria)
INIAF (Instituto Nacional de Innovación Agropecuaria y Forestal)
MDRyT (Ministerio de Desarrollo Rural y Tierras)
Submission
10. Date of submission
2011-09-30
11. Time period covered by this report
Start date
2001-11-22
Time period covered by this report
End date
2011-09-30
Party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
12. Is your country a Party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB)?
  • Yes
Article 2 – General provisions
15. Has your country introduced the necessary legal, administrative and other measures for the implementation of the Protocol?
  • A domestic regulatory framework is partially in place
16. Which specific instruments are in place for the implementation of your national biosafety framework?
  • One or more national biosafety regulations
  • Other laws, regulations or guidelines that indirectly apply to biosafety
17. Has your country established a mechanism for the budgetary allocations of funds for the operation of its national biosafety framework?
  • Yes
18. Does your country have permanent staff to administer functions directly related to the national biosafety framework?
  • Yes
19. If you answered Yes to question 18, how many permanent staff members are in place whose functions are directly related to the national biosafety framework?
  • Less than 5
20. Has your country’s biosafety framework / laws / regulations / guidelines been submitted to the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH)?
  • Partially
21. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 2 in your country:
ES
Bolivia ha adoptado la Decisión 391 de la Comisión del Acuerdo de Cartagena del cual deriva el actual reglamento de bioseguridad (denominado Reglamento de la Decisión 391 de la Comisión del Acuerdo de Cartagena y el de Bioseguridad) aprobado mediante Decreto Supremo No. 24676 en fecha 21 de junio del año 1997.

Por otro lado, el Protocolo de Cartagena sobre Seguridad de la Biotecnología, fue ratificado en Bolivia mediante Ley de la República No. 2274 en fecha 22 de noviembre de 2001.
Article 5 – Pharmaceuticals
22. Does your country regulate the transboundary movement, handling and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) which are pharmaceuticals?
  • No
24. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 5 in your country:
ES
Por el momento no existe una regulación específica de los OVMs que son productos farmacéuticos; sin embargo, el nuevo reglamento de bioseguridad (en proceso de elaboración) incluirá provisiones al respecto.
Article 6 – Transit and Contained use
25. Does your country regulate the transit of LMOs?
  • Yes
26. Does your country regulate the contained use of LMOs?
  • Yes
27. If you answered Yes to questions 25 or 26, has this information been submitted to the BCH?
  • No
28. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 6 in your country:
ES
El Decreto Supremo 24676 Reglamento de la Decision 391 de la Comisión del Acuerdo de Cartagena y el de Bioseguridad, en su Art. 5 describe lo que se entiende por confinamiento y utilización  confinada. Por su parte el Art.16 numeral 2 hace mención a la evaluación de los riesgos según la utilización prevista para el OVM, es decir, utilización confinada, introducción intencional en el medio ambiente o incorporación al mercado, tomando en cuenta la escala prevista y los procedimientos de gestión y tratamiento de desechos, entre otros.
Articles 7 to 10 – Advance Informed Agreement (AIA) and intentional introduction of LMOs into the environment
29. Has your country adopted law(s) / regulations / administrative measures for the operation of the AIA procedure of the Protocol?
  • Yes
30. Has your country adopted a domestic regulatory framework consistent with the Protocol regarding the transboundary movement of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes
31. Has your country established a mechanism for taking decisions regarding first intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes
32. If you answered Yes to question 31, does the mechanism also apply to cases of intentional introduction of LMOs into the environment that were not subject to transboundary movement?
  • Yes
33. Has your country established a mechanism for monitoring potential effects of LMOs that are released into the environment?
  • No
34. Does your country have the capacity to detect and identify LMOs?
  • Yes, to some extent
35. Has your country established legal requirements for exporters under its jurisdiction to notify in writing the competent national authority of the Party of import prior to the intentional transboundary movement of an LMO that falls within the scope of the AIA procedure?
  • Yes
36. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information contained in the notification?
  • Yes
37. Has your country ever received an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes
38. Has your country ever taken a decision on an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes
39. If you answered Yes to question 38, how many LMOs has your country approved to date for import for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Less than 5
40. If you answered Yes to question 38, how many LMOs, not imported, has your country approved to date for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • None
41. In the current reporting period, how many applications/notifications has your country received regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Less than 5
42. In the current reporting period, how many decisions has your country taken regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Less than 5
43. With reference to the decisions taken on intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment, has your country received a notification from the Party(ies) of export or from the exporter(s) prior to the transboundary movement?
  • In some cases only
44. Did the notifications contain complete information (at a minimum the information specified in Annex I of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety)?
  • In some cases only
45. Has your country acknowledged receipt of the notifications to the notifier within ninety days of receipt?
  • In some cases only
46. Has your country informed the notifier(s) and the BCH of its decision(s)?
  • In some cases only the notifier
47. Has your country informed the notifier(s) and the BCH of its decision(s) in due time (within 270 days or the period specified in your communication to the notifier)?
  • Yes, always
48. What percentage of your country’s decisions fall into the following categories?
  • Approval of the import/use of the LMO(s) with conditions
10%
  • Approval of the import/use of the LMO(s) without conditions
5%
  • Prohibition of the import/use of the LMO(s)
85%
49. In cases where your country approved an import with conditions or prohibited an import, did it provide reasons on which its decisions were based to the notifier and the BCH?
  • Yes, always
50. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Articles 7-10 in your country, including measures in case of lack of scientific certainty on potential adverse effects of LMOs for intentional introduction to the environment:
ES
Con relación a la pregunta 33 sobre el mecanismo de monitoreo, este se encuentra en la actualidad bajo elaboración a fin de realizar un monitoreo de posibles efectos post-introducción y de largo plazo.

En las preguntas 44, la respuesta más adecuada sería "Sí, hasta cierto punto", ya que en todos los casos se ha siguido el Anexo I del Protocolo pero no con exactitud.

Con relación a la pregunta 48, en el período de reporte se han autorizado con condiciones pruebas de campo algodón Bt tolerante a lepidópteros (MON 531), algodón Bollgard/CryX tolerante al herbicida glifosato y lepidópteros (MON15893 x MON 351) y soya RR tolerante al herbicida glifosato (Evento 40-3-2). El 2002 fueron las últimas probaciones otorgadas para estudios de campo de algodón. Sólo la soya RR ha sido aprobada para introducción en el medio ambiente sin condiciones en el 2005.

En cuanto a las prohibiciones, las solicitudes de pruebas de campo, siembra y producción comercial de maíz tolerante al gusano cogollero y herbicida Glufosinato de amonio (Evento TC1507) y otras solicitudes de papa genéticamente modificada fueron rechazadas por la alta probabilidad de contaminación genética de las variedades criollas y nativas. Esto tomando en cuenta que Bolivia es un centro importante de diversidad genética de maíz y centro de origen de la papa. Sobre este punto, la Ley No. 144 de Revolución Productiva Comunitaria Agrícola recientemene aprobada (junio 2011), prohibe la introducción de OVMs de los cuales Bolivia es centro de origen o diversidad genética, entre otras prohibiciones.

Article 11 – Procedure for living modified organisms intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (LMOs-FFP)
51. Has your country adopted specific law(s) or regulation(s) for decision-making regarding domestic use, including placing on the market, of LMOs-FFP?
  • Yes
52. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information to be provided by the applicant?
  • Yes
53. Has your country established a mechanism to ensure that decisions regarding LMOs-FFP that may be subject to transboundary movement will be communicated to the Parties through the BCH?
  • No
54. Has your country established a mechanism for taking decisions on the import of LMOs-FFP?
  • Yes
55. Has your country declared through the BCH that in the absence of a regulatory framework its decisions prior to the first import of an LMO-FFP will be taken according to Article 11.6 of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety?
  • No
56. Has your country indicated its needs for financial and technical assistance and capacity building in respect of LMOs-FFP?
  • No
57. Has your country ever taken a decision on LMOs-FFP (either on import or domestic use)?
  • Yes
58. How many LMOs-FFP has your country approved to date?
  • Less than 5
59. In the current reporting period, how many decisions has your country taken regarding the import of LMOs-FFP?
  • Less than 5
60. In the current reporting period, how many decisions has your country taken regarding domestic use, including placing on the market, of LMOs-FFP?
  • Less than 5
61. Has your country informed the Parties through the BCH of its decision(s) regarding import, of LMOs-FFP?
  • In some cases only
62. Has your country informed the Parties through the BCH of its decision(s) regarding domestic use, including placing on the market, of LMOs-FFP within 15 days?
  • No
63. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 11 in your country, including measures in case of lack of scientific certainty on potential adverse effects of LMOs-FFP:
ES
El único OVM-AHAP aprobado para uso doméstico es la soya RR Evento 40-3-2 según: i) Resolución Administrativa No. 16/2005 del entonces Ministerio de Desarrollo Sostenible y ii) Resolución Administrativa No. 44/2005 del entonces Ministerio de Asuntos Campesinos y Agropecuarios mediante el Servicion Nacional de Sanidad Agropecuaria e Inocuidad Alimentaria (SENASAG). Otros OVM-AHAP se introducen al país vía donación de alimentos, para los cuales aun no se tiene implementado ningún mecanismo de control.

Con relación a la pregunta 56, la respuesta es "No" porque esta necesidad no fue mencionada en el cuestionario de "Necesidades y Prioridades en la Generación de Capacidades" presentado a mediados del presente año (2011). Sin embargo, Bolivia sí tiene necesidades técnicas ni financieras relativas a OVM-AHAP.
Article 12 – Review of decision
64. Has your country established a mechanism for the review and change of a decision regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • No
65. Has your country ever received a request for a review of a decision?
  • No
66. Has your country ever reviewed / changed a decision regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • No
67. In the current reporting period, how many decisions were reviewed and/or changed regarding an intentional transboundary movement of an LMO?
  • None
Article 13 – Simplified procedure
72. Has your country established a system for the application of the simplified procedure regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • No
73. Has your country ever applied the simplified procedure?
  • No
75. In the current reporting period, how many LMOs has your country applied the simplified procedure to?
  • None
Article 14 – Bilateral, regional and multilateral agreements and arrangements
77. Has your country entered into any bilateral, regional or multilateral agreements or arrangements?
  • Yes
78. If you answered Yes to question 77, has your country informed the Parties through the BCH of the agreements or arrangements?
  • Yes, always
79. If you answered Yes to question 77, please provide a brief description of the scope and objective of the agreements or arrangements entered into:
ES
El acuerdo regional del que Bolivia es Parte y tiene provisiones relevantes en bioseguridad y biosiversidad es de la Decisión 391 de la Comisión del Acuerdo de Cartagena de la Comunidad Andina de Naciones (CAN).
Article 15 – Risk assessment
81. Has your country established a mechanism for conducting risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?
  • Yes
82. If you answered Yes to question 81, does this mechanism include procedures for identifying experts to conduct the risk assessments?
  • Yes
83. Has your country established guidelines for how to conduct risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?
  • Yes
84. Has your country acquired the necessary domestic capacity to conduct risk assessment?
  • Yes
85. Has your country established a mechanism for training national experts to conduct risk assessments?
  • No
86. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes
87. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing?
  • No
88. If your country has taken decision(s) on LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment or on domestic use of LMOs-FFP, were risk assessments conducted for all decisions taken?
  • In some cases only
89. Has your country submitted summary reports of the risk assessments to the BCH?
  • No
90. In the current reporting period, if your country has taken decisions regarding LMOs, how many risk assessments were conducted in the context of these decisions?
  • Less than 5
91. Has your country ever required the exporter to conduct the risk assessment(s)?
  • In some cases only
92. Has your country ever required the notifier to bear the cost of the risk assessment(s) of LMOs?
  • In some cases only
93. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 15 in your country:
ES
Únicamente en el caso de la soya RR Evento 40-3-2 se realizó un asesoramiento de riesgo que incluye - hasta cierto punto - las orientaciones dadas por el Anexo III del Protocolo de Cartagena sobre Seguridad de la Biotecnología. Esto debido a que fue el único OVM solicitad para introducción en el medio ambiente y como OVM-AHAP. Si bien su aprobación incluye AHAP, no se realizaron los estudios respectivos de alimentación humana o animal. 

Con relación a la pregunta 84, la respuesta más adecuada es "Sí, hasta cierto punto", ya que se han mejorado las competencias nacionales para el asesoramiento de riesgo; sin embargo estas aun son insuficientes.

Con relación a la pregunta 87, la respuesta es "No" ya que no se han realizado las estudios de alimentación necesarios y la aprobación de la soya RR Evento 40-3-2 para consumo humano y animal se ha realizado básicamente con base a los reportes presentados por el aplicante de pruebas realizadas  en otros contextos de introducción.
Article 16 – Risk management
94. Has your country established and maintained appropriate and operational mechanisms, measures and strategies to regulate, manage and control risks identified in risk assessments for:
94.1) LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes, to some extent
94.2) LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing?
  • Yes, to some extent
95. Has your country established and maintained appropriate measures to prevent unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • Yes, to some extent
96. Has your country taken measures to ensure that any LMO, whether imported or locally developed, undergoes an appropriate period of observation that is commensurate with its life-cycle or generation time before it is put to its intended use?
  • Yes
97. Has your country cooperated with other Parties with a view to identifying LMOs or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity?
  • No
98. Has your country cooperated with other Parties with a view to taking measures regarding the treatment of LMOs or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity?
  • No
99. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 16 in your country, including any details regarding risk management strategies, also in case of lack of scientific certainty on potential adverse effects of LMOs:
ES
Con relación a las preguntas 94.b, la implementación de mecanismos de control de riesgos de OVM-AHAP ha sido muy limitada por falta de personal e infraestructura necesaria para tal efecto.

Con relación a la pregunta 96, la respuesta más adcuada sería "Sí, Hasta cierto punto".
Article 17 – Unintentional transboundary movements and emergency measures
100. Has your country made available to the BCH the relevant details setting out its point of contact for the purposes of receiving notifications under Article 17?
  • Yes
101. Has your country established a mechanism for addressing emergency measures in case of unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs that are likely to have significant adverse effect on biological diversity?
  • Yes
102. Has your country implemented emergency measures in response to information about releases that led, or may have led, to unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • Yes
103. In the current reporting period, how many times has your country received information concerning occurrences that led, or may have led, to unintentional transboundary movement(s) of one or more LMOs to or from territories under its jurisdiction?
  • Never
107. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 17 in your country:
ES
Con relación a las preguntas 101 y 102, las respuestas más adecuadas serían "Sí, Hasta cierto punto".
Article 18 – Handling, transport, packaging and identification
108. Has your country taken measures to require that LMOs that are subject to transboundary movement are handled, packaged and transported under conditions of safety, taking into account relevant international rules and standards?
  • Yes
109. Has your country taken measures to require that documentation accompanying LMOs-FFP clearly identifies that, in cases where the identity of the LMOs is not known through means such as identity preservation systems, they may contain living modified organisms and are not intended for intentional introduction into the environment, as well as a contact point for further information?
  • No
110. Has your country taken measures to require that documentation accompanying LMOs-FFP clearly identifies that, in cases where the identity of the LMOs is known through means such as identity preservation systems, they contain living modified organisms and are not intended for intentional introduction into the environment, as well as a contact point for further information?
  • Yes, to some extent
111. Has your country taken measures to require that documentation accompanying LMOs that are destined for contained use clearly identifies them as living modified organisms and specifies any requirements for the safe handling, storage, transport and use, the contact point for further information, including the name and address of the individual and institution to whom the LMO are consigned?
  • Yes, to some extent
112. Has your country taken measures to require that documentation accompanying LMOs that are intended for intentional introduction into the environment of the Party of import, clearly identifies them as living modified organisms; specifies the identity and relevant traits and/or characteristics, any requirements for the safe handling, storage, transport and use, the contact point for further information and, as appropriate, the name and address of the importer and exporter; and contains a declaration that the movement is in conformity with the requirements of this Protocol applicable to the exporter?
  • Yes, to some extent
113. Does your country have the capacity to enforce the requirements of identification and documentation of LMOs?
  • Yes, to some extent
114. Has your country established procedures for the sampling and detection of LMOs?
  • Yes, to some extent
115. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 18 in your country:
ES
La Ley No. 144 de Revolución Productiva Comunitaria Agrícola aprobada recientemente (junio 2011), en el Art. 15 numeral 3 especifica una provisión relativa a la identificación y etiquetado que dice: "Todo producto destinado al consumo humano de manera directa o indirecta, que sea, contenga o derive de organismos genéticamente modificados, obligatoriamente deberá estar debidamente identificado e indicar esta condición." Con base a esta disposición se ajustarán los actuales mecanismos de manipulación, transporte, envasado e identificación de OVM y OVM-AHAP.
Article 19 – Competent National Authorities and National Focal Points
116. Has your country designated one national focal point for the Cartagena Protocol to be responsible for liaison with the Secretariat?
  • Yes
117. Has your country designated one national focal point for the Biosafety Clearing-House to liaise with the Secretariat regarding issues of relevance to the development and implementation of the BCH?
  • Yes
118. Has your country designated one or more competent national authorities, which are responsible for performing the administrative functions required by the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and are authorized to act on your country’s behalf with respect to those functions?
  • Yes, one
120. Has your country made available the required information referred in questions 116-119 to the BCH?
  • Yes, all information
122. Has your country established adequate institutional capacity to enable the competent national authority(ies) to perform the administrative functions required by the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety?
  • Yes, to some extent
Article 20 – Information Sharing and the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH)
124. Please provide an overview of the status of the information provided by your country to the BCH by specifying for each category of information whether it is available and whether it has been submitted to the BCH.
124.a) Existing national legislation, regulations and guidelines for implementing the Protocol, as well as information required by Parties for the advance informed agreement procedure (Article 20, paragraph 3 (a))
  • Information available but only partially available in the BCH
124.b) National laws, regulations and guidelines applicable to the import of LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (Article 11, paragraph 5)
  • Information available but only partially available in the BCH
124.c) Bilateral, multilateral and regional agreements and arrangements (Articles 14, paragraph 2 and 20, paragraph 3 (b))
  • Information available and in the BCH
124.d) Contact details for competent national authorities (Article 19, paragraphs 2 and 3), national focal points (Article 19, paragraphs 1 and 3), and emergency contacts (Article 17, paragraph 3 (e))
  • Information available but only partially available in the BCH
124.e) Reports submitted by the Parties on the operation of the Protocol (Article 20, paragraph 3 (e))
  • Information not available
124.f) Decisions by a Party on regulating the transit of specific living modified organisms (LMOs) (Article 6, paragraph 1)
  • Information available but only partially available in the BCH
124.g) Occurrence of unintentional transboundary movements that are likely to have significant adverse effects on biological diversity (Article 17, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.h) Illegal transboundary movements of LMOs (Article 25, paragraph 3)
  • Information available but not in the BCH
124.i) Final decisions regarding the importation or release of LMOs (i.e. approval or prohibition, any conditions, requests for further information, extensions granted, reasons for decision) (Articles 10, paragraph 3 and 20, paragraph 3(d))
  • Information available but only partially available in the BCH
124.j) Information on the application of domestic regulations to specific imports of LMOs (Article 14, paragraph 4)
  • Information available but only partially available in the BCH
124.k) Final decisions regarding the domestic use of LMOs that may be subject to transboundary movement for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (Article 11, paragraph 1)
  • Information available but only partially available in the BCH
124.l) Final decisions regarding the import of LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing that are taken under domestic regulatory frameworks (Article 11, paragraph 4) or in accordance with annex III (Article 11, paragraph 6) (requirement of Article 20, paragraph 3(d))
  • Information available but only partially available in the BCH
124.m) Declarations regarding the framework to be used for LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (Article 11, paragraph 6)
  • Information available but only partially available in the BCH
124.n) Review and change of decisions regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs (Article 12, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.o) LMOs granted exemption status by each Party (Article 13, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.p) Cases where intentional transboundary movement may take place at the same time as the movement is notified to the Party of import (Article 13, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.q) Summaries of risk assessments or environmental reviews of LMOs generated by regulatory processes and relevant information regarding products thereof (Article 20, paragraph 3 (c))
  • Information available but only partially available in the BCH
125. Has your country established a mechanism for strengthening the capacity of the BCH National Focal Point to perform its administrative functions?
  • No
126. Has your country established a mechanism for the coordination among the BCH National Focal Point, the Cartagena Protocol focal point, and the competent national authority(ies) for making information available to the BCH?
  • Yes
127. Does your country use the information available in the BCH in its decision making processes on LMOs?
  • Yes, in some cases
128. Has your country experienced difficulties accessing or using the BCH?
  • No
129. If you answered Yes to question 128, has your country reported these problems to the BCH or the Secretariat?
  • Not applicable
130. Is the information submitted by your country to the BCH complete and up-to date?
  • No
131. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 20 in your country:
ES
Con relación a la pregunta 124.d, la respuesta dada se debe a que no se ha provisto los detalles de contacto en caso de emergencia.

Con relación a las preguntas 124.n, 124.o y 124.p, las respuestas más adecuadas serían "No aplicable" ya que no se han dado los casos mencionados en Bolivia (re: ocurrencia de movimiento transfronterizos no intencionales, revisión y cambio de decisión, exenciones, etc.).

Con relación a la pregunta 126, la respuesta más correcta es "Sí, hasta cierto punto".
Article 21 – Confidential information
132. Has your country established procedures to protect confidential information received under the Protocol?
  • Yes
133. Does your country allow the notifier to identify information that is to be treated as confidential?
  • In some cases only
Article 22 – Capacity-building
135. Has your country received external support or benefited from collaborative activities with other Parties in the development and/or strengthening of human resources and institutional capacities in biosafety?
  • Yes
136. If you answered Yes to question 135, how were these resources made available?
  • Regional channels
137. Has your country provided support to other Parties in the development and/or strengthening of human resources and institutional capacities in biosafety?
  • No
139. Is your country eligible to receive funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF)?
  • Yes
140. Has your country ever initiated a process to access GEF funds for building capacity in biosafety?
  • Yes
141. If you answered Yes to question 140, how would you characterize the process?
Please add further details about your experience in accessing GEF funds under question 150.
  • Average
143. During the current reporting period, has your country undertaken activities for the development and/or strengthening of human resources and institutional capacities in biosafety?
  • Yes
144. If you answered Yes to question 143, in which of the following areas were these activities undertaken?
  • Institutional capacity
  • Scientific, technical and institutional collaboration at subregional, regional and international levels
  • Identification of LMOs, including their detection
  • Marcos de regulación en bioseguridad
145. During the current reporting period, has your country carried out a capacity-building needs assessment?
  • Yes
146. Does your country still have capacity-building needs?
  • Yes
147. If you answered Yes to question 146, indicate which of the following areas still need capacity-building.
  • Human resources capacity development and training
  • Risk assessment and other scientific and technical expertise
  • Risk management
  • Public awareness, participation and education in biosafety
  • Identification of LMOs, including their detection
  • Socio-economic considerations
  • Implementation of the documentation requirements under Article 18.2 of the Protocol
  • Measures to address unintentional and/or illegal transboundary movements of LMOs
  • Scientific biosafety research relating to LMOs
  • Taking into account risks to human health
  • Asesoramiento de riesgo específico para centros de origen y diversidad genética
  • Asesoramiento de riesgo y consideraciones socioeconomicas relevantes para comunidades indigenas
148. Has your country developed a capacity-building strategy or action plan?
  • No
149. Has your country submitted the details of national biosafety experts to the Roster of Experts in the BCH?
  • No
150. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 22 in your country, including further details about your experience in accessing GEF funds:
ES
Con relación a las preguntas 135 y 136, se llevó a cabo el proyecto de "Fortalecimiento Institucional para la gestión de la seguridad de la biotecnología" (Oct 2003 - Sep 2005), financiado por la FAO.

Por otro lado, durante el 2010, personal del Viceministerio de Medio Ambiente participó en cursos de bioseguridad financiados por el Reino de Noruega; sin embargo, la participación en dichos cursos se dió fuera de acuerdos bilaterales.

Con relación a la pregunta 140, el apoyo financiero recibo por UNEP/FMAM no corresponde al presente período de reporte. Dichos fondos fueron ejecutados de 1996 al 2000 para el "Apoyo para el establecimiento de un marco nacional en bioseguridad".

Las respuestas más adecuadas para las preguntas 143 y 145 sería "Sí, hasta cierto punto", ya que algunas actividades en generación de capacidades y elaboración de una estrategia para la generación de capacidades han sido llevadas a cabo.
Article 23 – Public awareness and participation
151. Has your country established a strategy or put in place legislation for promoting and facilitating public awareness, education and participation concerning the safe transfer, handling and use of LMOs?
  • Yes, to some extent
152. Has your country established a biosafety website?
  • No
153. Has your country established a mechanism to ensure public access to information on living modified organisms that may be imported?
  • Yes, to a limited extent
154. Has your country established a mechanism to consult the public in the decision-making process regarding LMOs?
  • Yes, to a limited extent
155. Has your country established a mechanism to make available to the public the results of decisions taken on LMOs?
  • Yes
156. Has your country taken any initiative to inform its public about the means of public access to the Biosafety Clearing-House?
  • No
157. In the current reporting period, has your country promoted and facilitated public awareness, education and participation concerning the safe transfer, handling and use of LMOs?
  • Yes, to a limited extent
158. If you answered Yes to question 157, has your country cooperated with other States and international bodies?
  • Yes
159. In the current reporting period, how many times has your country consulted the public in the decision-making process regarding LMOs and made the results of such decisions available to the public?
  • Less than 5
160. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 23 in your country:
ES
La participación pública en Bolivia ha sido constante debido a la cultura de participación que es intrínsica de la sociedad civil y movimientos sociales bolivianos. Por tanto, se puede decir que la consulta pública sucede muchas veces de manera espontánea; sin embargo, el mecanismo de consulta pública actualmente utilizado no se encuentra detallado aun en el reglamento de bioseguridad (empero, sí está siendo incluido y fortalecido en el nuevo reglamento). Esto es importante tomar en cuenta con relación a las preguntas 151 y 154.

Con relación a la pregunta 155, las decisiones sobre OVMs se publican en la Gaceta Oficial de Bolivia.

Con relación a la pregunta 157, la promoción de actividades de información, educación y participación pública han sido limitadas por falta de recursos financieros.

Article 24 – Non-Parties
161. Has your country entered into any bilateral, regional, or multilateral agreement with non-Parties regarding transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • No
162. Has your country ever imported LMOs from a non-Party?
  • Yes
163. Has your country ever exported LMOs to a non-Party?
  • No
164. If you answered Yes to questions 162 or 163, were the transboundary movements of LMOs consistent with the objective of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety?
  • In some cases only
165. If you answered Yes to questions 162 or 163, was information about these transboundary movements submitted to the BCH?
  • No
166. If your country is not a Party to the Cartagena Protocol, has it contributed information to the BCH on LMOs released in, or moved into, or out of, areas within its national jurisdiction?
  • Not applicable
167. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 24 in your country:
ES
La importación de OVMs de países no Parte consistió en la importación de soya RR como material para pruebas de campo. Actualmente se importan de países no Parte algunos OVM-AHAP como donación de alimentos.

Con relación a la pregunta 164, la respuesta más correcta sería "Sí, hasta cierto punto"
Article 25 – Illegal transboundary movements
168. Has your country adopted domestic measures aimed at preventing and/or penalizing transboundary movements of LMOs carried out in contravention of its domestic measures to implement this Protocol?
  • Yes
169. Has your country established a strategy for detecting illegal transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • Yes
170. In the current reporting period, how many times has your country received information concerning cases of illegal transboundary movements of an LMO to or from territories under its jurisdiction?
  • Less than 5
171. Has your country informed the BCH and the other Party(ies) involved?
  • No
172. Has your country established the origin of the LMO(s)?
  • Yes, some cases
173. Has your country established the nature of the LMO(s)?
  • Yes, some cases
174. Has your country established the circumstances of the illegal transboundary movement(s)?
  • Yes, some cases
175. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 25 in your country:
ES
Con relación a la pregunta 169, la respuesta más adecuada es "Sí, hasta cierto punto".
Article 26 – Socio-economic considerations
176. If your country has taken a decision on import, has it ever taken into account socio-economic considerations arising from the impact of the LMO on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity?
  • Yes
177. Has your country cooperated with other Parties on research and information exchange on any socio-economic impacts of LMOs?
  • No
178. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 26 in your country:
ES
La inclusión de aspectos socioeconómicos en los procesos de toma de decisiones relativos a OVMs se establece mediante leyes de alta jerarquía, como ser la Ley de Derechos de la Madre Tierra. Esta Ley - entre otros - reconoce el "bienestar colectivo" y la "interculturalidad" como principios básicos para la adecuada protección de los sistemas de vida (que incluye a las comundadades humanas).

Por otro lado, Bolivia ha adoptado el Convenio No. 169 de la OIT Sobre Pueblos Indígenas y Tribales, el cuál es se reconoce en el reglamento de bioseguridad vigente. Dicho Convenio especifica el respeto de los derechos de los pueblos indígenas con relacción al acceso, uso y protección de la biodiversidad y conocimiento relacionado, además del respeto de otros derechos humanos.
Article 27 – Liability and Redress
179. Has your country signed the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress?
  • No
180. Has your country initiated steps towards ratification, acceptance or approval of the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol?
  • Yes
181. Here you may provide further details on any activities undertaken in your country towards the implementation of the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress:
ES
La respuesta más adecuada en la pregunta 180 sería "Sí, hasta cierto punto", ya que actividades de información de los movimientos sociales que forman parte del Pacto de Unidad han sido llevadas a cabo. Esto, como parte del proceso de consulta requerido para la firma del Protocolo Nagoya - KL sobre la Responsabilidad y Compensación Suplementario al Protocolo de Cartagena sobre Bioseguridad de la Biotecnología.
Article 33 – Monitoring and reporting
182. Has your country submitted the previous national reports (Interim and First National Reports)?
  • Yes, Interim report only
183. If your country did not submit previous reports, indicate the main challenges that hindered the submission
  • Lack of financial resources to gather the necessary information
  • Difficulty in compiling the information from various sectors
  • Falta de recursos humanos disponibles para dar seguimiento a la elaboración del reporte Interino y Primer Reporte Nacional
Comments on reporting format
185. Please use this field to provide any other information on difficulties that you have encountered in filling in this report.
ES
El formato de reporte es bastante sencillo y detallado. Sin embargo,  algunas opciones para responder a las preguntas resultan insuficientes, por ejemplo:

- En las preguntas 43, 44, 84, 96, 101, 102, 143, 145, 148, 156, 164, 168, 169 y 180 sería muy útil contar con la opción "Sí, Hasta cierto punto / To some extent" (que es diferente a "Sólo en algunos casos / In some cases only").

- Con relación a las preguntas 46 y 47 es aconsejable desglosarlas en preguntas específicas sobre la información hacia el notificador y preguntas específicas sobre la información publicada en el BCH. Esto porque la información otorgada al notificador y la publicada en el BCH no siempre suceden simultáneamente. 

- En las preguntas 124, 142 y 148 sería muy adecuado tener la opción "No aplicable" (Nota que esta opción está disponible en la pregunta 142 del formato de Word, pero no en el cuestionario del BCH).

Por otro lado, en las preguntas relativas al Art. 14, sería bueno incluir una pregunta sobre el objetivo y/o área de trabajo de los arreglos y acuerdos bilaterales, regionales y multilaterales. Esta información será útil para visibilizar las áreas de trabajo más "demandadas" en el ámbito de los acuerdos internacionales. Con esta información también será posible identificar las áreas en bioseguridad de los OVMs que recibien mayor antención en dichos acuerdos, y las áreas que por el contrario no están siendo atentidas por éstos.

Finalmente, las preguntas de asesoramiento de implementación del Art. 26 sobre consideraciones socioeconómicas son muy escasas. Con base a lo que dispone el Art. 26, sería también bueno asesorar:

- Si es que las Partes están prestando especial atención al valor de la biodiversidad para las comunidades locales e indígenas al momento de tomar en cuenta las consideraciones socioeconómicas en los procesos de toma de decisiones sobre OVMs;

- Si las Partes cuentan con un mecanismo de inclusión de las consideraciones socioeconómicas en los procesos de toma de decisiones;

- Si las Partes han llevado a cabo actividades de generación de capacidades en las consideraciones socioeconómicas; y

- Qué modalidades de cooperación en investigación e intercambio de información se han establecido para tomar en cuenta las consideraciones socioeconómicas en los procesos de toma de decisiones sobre OVMs.
Survey on indicators of the Strategic Plan (2014)
In decision BS-VI/15, Parties requested the Executive Secretary to conduct a dedicated survey to gather information corresponding to indicators in the Strategic Plan that could not be obtained from the second national reports or through other existing mechanisms.

The answers to the survey are displayed below.
Survey 4. How many biosafety short-term training programmes and/or academic courses are offered annually in your country?
indicator 1.2.3
  • Less than 1 per year
Here you may provide further details
ES
We are searching opportunities to build more technical capacity inside our country regarding Biosafety that could help us also to generate the biosafety national framework.
Survey 5. Does your country have in place a functional national mechanism for coordinating biosafety capacity-building initiatives?
indicator 1.2.4
  • No
Survey 6. How much additional funding (in the equivalent of US dollars) has your country mobilized in the last four years to support implementation of the Biosafety Protocol, beyond the regular national budgetary allocation?
indicator 1.2.5
  • Less than 5,000 USD
Survey 7. Does your country have predictable and reliable funding for building capacity for the effective implementation of the Protocol?
indicator 1.2.6
  • No
Survey 8. How many LMO-related collaborative bilateral/multilateral arrangements has your country established with other Parties/non-Parties?
indicator 1.2.8
  • None
Survey 9. Has your country adopted or used any guidance documents for the purpose of conducting risk assessment and/or risk management?
indicator 1.3.1.1
Survey 9.a) Risk assessment
  • Yes
Survey 9.b) Risk management
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
ES
Both procedures are under review as our national regulation on biosafety is under a new context that is being discussed.
Survey 10. Has your country adopted or used any guidance documents for the purpose of evaluating risk assessment reports submitted by notifiers?
indicator 1.3.1.2
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
ES
This process took place in 2005 when Bolivia accepted RR soy to be introduced.
Survey 11. Has your country adopted any common approaches to risk assessment with other countries?
indicator 1.3.2
  • No
Survey 12. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO?
indicator 1.3.3
  • No
Survey 13. Does your country have the capacity to identify, assess and/or monitor living modified organisms or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking into account risks to human health?
indicator 1.4.2
Survey 13.a) Identify
  • Yes
Survey 13.b) Assess
  • No
Survey 13.c) Monitor
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
ES
Protocols are being tested, and so far we have done one pilot test to identify the presence of LMO. This protocol would become a tool to monitor in future campaings.
Survey 14. Does your country have available any guidance for the purpose of ensuring the safe handling, transport, and packaging of living modified organisms?
indicator 1.6.4
  • No
Survey 15. Does your country have any specific approaches or requirements that facilitate how socio-economic considerations should be taken into account in LMO decision making?
indicator 1.7.2
  • No
Survey 16. How many peer-reviewed published materials has your country used for the purpose of elaborating or determining national actions with regard to socio-economic considerations?
indicator 1.7.1
  • None
Survey 17. What is your country's experience, if any, in taking socio-economic considerations into account in LMO decision making?
indicator 1.7.3
ES
This is the first year Bolivia is working to build socio-economic indicators. A document will be ready by November 2013.
Survey 18. Does your country have the capacity to take appropriate measures in the event that an LMO is unintentionally released?
indicator 1.8.3
  • No
Survey 19. How many people in your country have been trained in risk assessment, monitoring, management and control of LMOs?
indicator 2.2.3
Survey 19.a) Risk assessment
  • 10 or more
Survey 19.b) Monitoring
  • 10 or more
Survey 19.c) Management / Control
  • None
Survey 20. Does your country have the infrastructure (e.g. laboratory facilities) for monitoring or managing LMOs?
indicator 2.2.4
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
ES
We still need to expand and build a more solid infrastructure to perform these activities.
Survey 21. Is your country using training material and/or technical guidance for training in risk assessment and risk management of LMOs?
indicator 2.2.5
  • No
Survey 22. Are the available training materials and technical guidance on risk assessment and risk management of LMOs sufficient and effective?
indicator 2.2.6
Survey 22.a) Sufficient
  • No
Survey 22.b) Effective
  • No
Survey 23. How many customs officers in your country have received training in the identification of LMOs?
indicator 2.3.1
  • None
Survey 24. How many laboratory personnel in your country have received training in detection of LMOs?
indicator 2.3.1
  • 10 or more
Survey 25. Does your country have reliable access to laboratory facilities for the detection of LMOs?
indicator 2.3.2
  • No
Here you may provide further details
ES
We have laboratories facilities, but they haven't been specifically targeted for LMOs detection.
Survey 26. How many laboratories in your country are certified for LMO detection?
indicator 2.3.3
  • None
Survey 27. How many of the certified laboratories in the previous question are operational?
indicator 2.3.4
  • None
Survey 28. Has your country received any financial and/or technical assistance for capacity-building in the area of liability and redress relating to living modified organisms?
indicator 2.4.1
  • No
Survey 29. Does your country have administrative or legal instrument that provide for response measures for damage to biodiversity resulting from living modified organisms?
indicator 2.4.2
  • No
Survey 30. Has your country informed the public about existing modalities for public participation in the decision-making process regarding living modified organisms?
indicator 2.5.2
  • No
Here you may provide further details
ES
The whole Risk Assesment process has not been well understood and the public participation has not taken any role yet into being a part of the decision process.
Survey 31. If you answered yes to the previous question, please indicate the modalities used to inform the public?
indicator 2.5.2
  • does not apply
Survey 33. How many academic institutions in your country are offering biosafety education and training courses and programmes?
indicator 2.7.1
  • None
Survey 34. How many biosafety training materials and/or online modules are available in your country?
indicator 2.7.2
  • None
Survey 35. Does your country have in place a monitoring and/or an enforcement system?
indicator 3.1.6
Survey 35.a) Monitoring system
  • Yes
Survey 35.b) Enforcement system
  • No
Here you may provide further details
ES
Starting 2014 a monitoring plan will be developed so it can be a regular activity.
Survey 36. Please indicate the number of regional, national and international events organized in relation to biosafety (e.g. seminars, workshops, press conferences, educational events, etc.,) in the last 2 years.
indicator 4.3.1
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
ES
We had an oficial workshop to build socio-economic indicators in one of our cities.
Survey 37. Please indicate the number of biosafety related publications that has been made available in your country in the last year.
indicator 4.3.2
  • None
Here you may provide further details
ES
We have scheduled for 2014 an official manual about what is biotechnology and biosafety according to our own reality.
Survey 38. If biosafety related publications were made available (see question above), please indicate which modalities were preferred.
indicator 4.3.2
  • It will be a print format
Survey 39. How many collaborative initiatives (including joint activities) on the Cartagena Protocol and other Conventions and processes has your government established in the last 4 years?
indicator 5.2.1
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
ES
We will host at least 2 meetings during 2013 that will discuss specific topics of the CBD and we will host the first ad hoc meeting on socio-economic considerations.
Survey 40. Does your country have any awareness and outreach programmes on biosafety?
indicator 5.3.1
  • No
Survey 42. Has your country designed and/or implemented an outreach/communication strategy on biosafety?
indicator 5.3.2
  • No
Survey 43. Please indicate the number of educational materials on biosafety that are available and accessible to the public.
indicator 5.3.4
  • None
Here you may provide further details
ES
The manual that is being elaborated would be our first educational material developed for our own context.