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

  Home|Finding Information|Record details   Printer-friendly version

Third National Report on the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
Record information and status
Record ID
109494
Status
Published
Date of creation
2015-12-07 18:25 UTC (alexmay@sfe.go.cr)
Date of publication
2015-12-07 18:25 UTC (alexmay@sfe.go.cr)

This document is also available in the following languages:
Origin of report
1. Country
  • Costa Rica
Contact officer for report
Coordinates
Ingeniero Alex May
Punto Focal Nacional del Protocolo de Cartagena sibre Seguridad de la Biotecnologia
Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganaderia
Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería, Servicio Fitosanitario del Estado, Sabana Sur, Antiguo Edificio de la Salle. ]
San Jose, San Jose
Costa Rica
Phone:506-2549-3552 ]
Fax:506-2549-3598 ]
Email:alexmay@sfe.go.cr
Consulted stakeholders
9. Organizations/stakeholders who were consulted or participated in the preparation of this report
ES
Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería (MAG), Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía (MINAE), Comisión Nacional para la Gestión de la Biodiversidad (CONAGEBio),  Ministerio de Economía, Industria y Comercio (MEIC), Oficina Nacional de Semillas, Departamento de Biotecnología SFE/MAG, Unidad de Organismos Geneticamente Modificados SFE/MAG, Servicio Fitosanitario del Estado/MAG,  Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura, Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica, Universidad Latina,  CropLife, Cámara Americana de Agroinsumos, Cámara Costarricense de la Industria Alimenticia, Cámara Nacional de Agricultura y Agroindustria, Cámara de Industriales de Alimentos Balanceados,  Center for Environment and Peace Conservation International, LM-21, Semillas Olson, DPL Semillas, Policia de Tránsito, Aduana Paso Canoas, Municipalidad de Corredores, Servicio Nacional de Salud Animal del Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería, Direccion General de Ingeniería de Transito, Policia de Fronteras, Ministerio de Seguridad Pública, Ministerio de Salud de Corredores
Submission
10. Date of submission
2015-12-07
11. Time period covered by this report
Start date
2011-10-01
11. Time period covered by this report
End date
2015-10-31
Party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
Is your country a Party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB)?
  • Yes
Article 2 – General provisions
14. Has your country introduced the necessary legal, administrative and other measures for the implementation of the Protocol?
This question is relevant to indicators 1.1.1, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, and 3.1.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • A domestic regulatory framework is partially in place
15. If you indicated that a national biosafety framework exists in the above question, when did it become operational?
This question is relevant to the indicator 1.1.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • 2001 or earlier
16. Which specific instruments are in place for the implementation of your national biosafety framework?
  • One or more national biosafety regulations
  • One or more sets of biosafety guidelines
17. Has your country established a mechanism for the budgetary allocations of funds for the operation of its national biosafety framework?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
ES
No existe financiamiento explícito ,  ya que se da como parte de la asignación específica de cada institución relacionada con la aplicación del tema y el cual es limitado
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?
  • More than 10
20. Has your country’s biosafety framework / laws / regulations / guidelines been submitted to the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH)?
  • Yes
21. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 2 in your country
ES
  Se ejecutó exitosamente un proyecto UNEP-GEF de Implementación de un Marco Nacional sobre Seguridad de la Biotecnología GLF/2328-2716-4B61 (Duración 36 meses, Octubre 2010 a marzo 2014), así como el Proyecto LAC Biosafety: América Latina: Construcción de Capacidad multipaís para el cumplimiento del Protocolo de Cartagena en Bioseguridad.
En cumplimiento con los instrumentos jurídicos establecidos hay un conjunto de leyes, las cuáles son: Ley de Protección Fitosanitaria N° 7664 y su reglamento N° 26921-MAG, Ley de Biodiversidad N°7788, Ley SENASA N°8495, Reglamento de Auditores en Bioseguridad N. °32486-MAG, el Protocolo de Cartagena, Ley No. 8537 y el decreto ejecutivo 36801-MAG sobre el uso del sistema digital: http://www.ovm.go.cr, publicado en la Gaceta 113 del 2013.

En recurso humano disponible y permanente, en el país existe una participación Interministerial, por medio de la integración de la Comisión Técnica Nacional de Bioseguridad, creada por ley y ratificada su constitución y funciones por la Ley de Servicio Nacional de Salud Animal (SENASA) y la Ley de Biodiversidad, además de Organizaciones N° Gubernamentales y de empresa privada en las actividades relacionadas en materia de OVM´s, por tanto se contabilizan mas de 10 personas en funciones relacionadas con la materia
La Ley de Protección Fitosanitaria Nº 7664 y sus posteriores modificaciones, en su articulo 40 crea la Comisión Técnica Nacional de Bioseguridad y en su Reglamento Nº26921 articulo 112 indica su conformación de la siguiente manera:

1. Un representante del Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología.
2. un  representantes del Servicio Fitosanitario del Estado y un representante del Servicio Nacional de Salud Animal
3. Dos representantes del Ministerio del Ambiente y Energía.
4. Un representante de la Oficina Nacional de Semillas.
5. Dos representantes designados por la Academia Nacional de Ciencias.
6. Dos representantes de la Sociedad Civil.
7. Dos representantes del Ministerio de Salud

  7. Dos representantes del Ministerio de Salud



 










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
La Legislación Costarricense no excluye a los OVM de uso farmacéutico en su Legislación local, (Ley de Proteccion Fitosanitaria 7664 artículo 41 y Zoosanitaria 8495 artículo 6h).
  Sin embargo, no ha existido la necesidad de aplicar el articulado en lo competente al Protocolo de Cartagena, dado que solamente se han registrado productos y no organismos vivos. El Servicio Nacional de Salud Animal y el Ministerio de Salud registran productos derivados de ADN recombinante como vacunas, utilizando parámetros  de evaluación y registro distintos al del Protocolo de Cartagena.
Article 6 – Transit and Contained use
25. Does your country regulate the transit of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.8.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
26. Does your country regulate the contained use of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicators 1.1.2 and 1.8.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
27. If you answered Yes to questions 25 or 26, has this information been submitted to the BCH?
  • Partially
28. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 6 in your country:
ES
Se regula el transito de OVMs, que son semillas destinadas a la reproducción  e investigación en el país.
En materia del uso confinado de OVM´s en Costa Rica si hay existencia de regulación en materia de OVM's de uso agrícola y pecuario, como son los articulados de la Ley de Protección Fitosanitaria N° 7664 y su reglamento N° 26921-MAG, Ley de Biodiversidad N°7788, Ley SENASA N°8495 y el Reglamento de Auditores en Bioseguridad N°32486-MAG.

La información que se debe publicar en el CIISB relativa a uso confinado de OVM´s se realiza parcialmente, porque sólo lo relativo a OVM´s de uso agrícola se ha publicado en el CIISB, ya que solamente existe regulación en esa  materia.                                                                                                  
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 OR a domestic regulatory framework consistent with the Protocol regarding the transboundary movement of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
This question is relevant to indicators 1.1.2 and 3.1.4 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
30. Has your country established a mechanism for taking decisions regarding first intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes
31. If you answered Yes to question 30, does the mechanism also apply to cases of intentional introduction of LMOs into the environment that were not subject to transboundary movement?
  • Yes
32. 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, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
ES
Existe la norma legal, pero no esta reglamentada. (Ley Nacional No. 8537)
33. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information contained in the notification?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
ES
Para la importación de productos de uso agrícola si se han establecido los requisitos legales, pero no para la exportación.
34. Has your country ever received an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.1.4 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
35. Has your country ever taken a decision on an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
36. If you answered Yes to question 35, how many LMOs has your country approved to date for import for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Less than 10
37. If you answered Yes to question 35, how many LMOs, not imported, has your country approved to date for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Less than 5
38. 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
39. 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
40. 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?
  • Yes
41. Did the notifications contain complete information (at a minimum the information specified in Annex I of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety)?
  • Yes
42. Has your country acknowledged receipt of the notifications to the notifier within ninety days of receipt?
  • Yes
43. Has your country informed the notifier(s) and the BCH of its decision(s)?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes, always
44. What percentage of your country’s decisions fall into the following categories?
  • Approval of the import/use of the LMO(s) with conditions
99%
  • Prohibition of the import/use of the LMO(s)
1%
45. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes, always
46. 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 al procedimiento de acuerdo fundamentado previo e introducción deliberada de OVM´s en el medio ambiente, las respuestas que se consignan en esta sección son respuestas basadas estrictamente en el cumplimiento e implementación del Protocolo de Cartagena (PCSB), sin embargo, la legislación nacional en algunos aspectos es concordante con el PCSB principalmente en materia agrícola, según artículos 117 y 118 del Reglamento a la Ley de Fitoprotección N°26921.
Costa Rica ha desarrollado una estrategia para fortalecer el monitoreo y la vigilancia postliberación y para ello ha diseñado e implementado regulación contenida en el Reglamento en Auditorias en Bioseguridad Agrícola N° 32486-MAG.                                                                                           ]
Article 11 – Procedure for living modified organisms intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (LMOs-FFP)
47. Has your country adopted specific law(s) or regulation(s) for decision-making regarding domestic use, including placing on the market, of LMOs-FFP?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.1.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
48. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information to be provided by the applicant?
  • No
49. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
50. Has your country established a mechanism for taking decisions on the import of LMOs-FFP?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.1.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
51. Has your country indicated its needs for financial and technical assistance and capacity-building in respect of LMOs-FFP?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
52. Has your country ever taken a decision on LMOs-FFP (either on import or domestic use)?
  • No
58. 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
En estos momentos existe una Ley (Protocolo de Cartagena), pero no se ha implementado su artículo 11. Costa Rica facilitó la elaboracion de normativas y  procedimientos de coordinacion e implementacion del articulo 11 por medio del Proyecto UNEP-GEF(Implementación de un Marco de Bioseguridad para Costa Rica), para establecer mecanismos de coordinación en el área legal, técnica y administrativa para implementar el artículo 11 de la Ley Nacional N°8537. Dentro de las actividades de creación de capacidades se solicitó y recibió   colaboración de agencias regulatorias internacionales para entrenar personal de las Autoridades Nacionales Competentes y demás instituciones relacionadas con la aplicación de este artículo, sin embargo  el gobierno de Costa Rica por medio de sus autoridades nacionales competentes (Ministerio de Salud y Servicio Nacional de Salud Animal) ha sometido a consulta las propuestas, sin tener a la fecha un texto final consensuado.




Article 12 – Review of decision
59. Has your country established a mechanism for the review and change of a decision regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • Yes
60. Has your country ever received a request for a review of a decision?
  • Yes
61. Has your country ever reviewed / changed a decision regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • Yes, decision reviewed
62. In the current reporting period, how many decisions were reviewed and/or changed regarding an intentional transboundary movement of an LMO?
  • Less than 5
63. Has your country informed both the notifier and the BCH of the review and/or changes in the decision?
This question is relevant to indicators 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • In some cases only
64. Has your country informed both the notifier and the BCH of the review and changes in the decision within thirty days?
  • Yes, to some extent
65. Has your country provided reasons to both the notifier and the BCH for the review and/or changes in the decision?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • In some cases only
66. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 12 in your country
ES
Las revisiones y cambios en los expedientes sobre los cuales se toman las decisiones han sido de forma y no de fondo.

Las decisiones se mantienen sin cambios por lo que no se han realizado modificaciones a las decisiones publicada en el CIISB.]
Article 13 – Simplified procedure
67. Has your country established a system for the application of the simplified procedure regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • No
68. Has your country ever applied the simplified procedure?
  • No
70. In the current reporting period, how many LMOs has your country applied the simplified procedure to?
  • None
71. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 13 in your country
ES
Costa Rica no ha tomado acuerdos sobre la utilización de un mecanismo de procedimiento simplificado
Article 14 – Bilateral, regional and multilateral agreements and arrangements
72. Has your country entered into any bilateral, regional or multilateral agreements or arrangements?
  • Yes
73. If you answered Yes to question 72, how many LMO-related collaborative bilateral/multilateral arrangements has your country established with other Parties/non-Parties?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.8 of the Strategic Plan
  • One or more
74. If you answered Yes to question 72, has your country informed the Parties through the BCH of the agreements or arrangements?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes, always
75. If you answered Yes to question 72, please provide a brief description of the scope and objective of the agreements or arrangements entered into
ES
La Iniciativa Centroamericana de Biotecnología y Bioseguridad (ICABB), es un mecanismo adscrito a voluntad por Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panamá y República Dominicana, y que no significa un compromiso vinculante, político o legal entre ellos,  y su permanencia y relevancia es alimentada directamente por el trabajo en grupo, el compromiso de sus participantes y la voluntad política de sus autoridades. El ICABB tiene como objetivo formalizar y fortalecer las acciones en Biotecnología en los ámbitos nacional y regional, procurando el acceso a la biotecnología, la utilización segura de sus productos, la optimización y armonización en la gestión de los marcos legales y las políticas en Bioseguridad, procurando el beneficio de los sistemas agroalimentarios, la calidad de la vida rural, la protección del ambiente y el fortalecimiento de la economía.                                                                                        
76. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 14 in your country
ES
El proyecto UNEP/GEF exploró la posibilidad de establecer acuerdos comerciales bilaterales entre estados parte y no parte con los cuales Costa Rica es socio comercial, y realiza movimientos transfronterizos de OVM`s,  para validar la información  proveniente de los análisis del riesgo, e incorporarla en decisiones según el artículo 11, sin embargo, no se logró consolidar el acuerdo por falta de voluntad política.
Articles 15 & 16 – Risk Assessment and Risk Management
77. Has your country established a national framework for conducting risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
ES
Solamente para OVMs de uso agrícola. Actualmente se usa solamente a los destinados a la liberación intencional al medio ambiente, con el objetivo  de reproducir  semillas y para investigación.
78. If you answered Yes to question 77, does this framework include procedures for identifying and/or training national experts to conduct risk assessments?
  • No
79. How many people in your country have been trained in risk assessment, monitoring, management and control of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.3 of the Strategic Plan
a) Risk assessment:
  • 10 or more
b) Management / Control:
  • 10 or more
c) Monitoring:
  • 10 or more
80. Is your country using training material and/or technical guidance for training in risk assessment and risk management of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
81. Is your country using the "Manual on Risk Assessment of LMOs" (developed by CBD Secretariat) for training in risk assessment?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
82. Is your country using the "Guidance on Risk Assessment of LMOs" (developed by the Online Forum and the AHTEG on Risk Assessment and Risk Management) for training in risk assessment?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
83. Are the currently available training materials or technical guidance on risk assessment and/or risk management of LMOs sufficient?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.6 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
84. Does your country have the capacity to detect, 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?
This question is relevant to indicators 1.4.2 and 1.6.3 of the Strategic Plan
a) Detect:
  • No
b) Identify:
  • No
c) Assess:
  • Yes
d) Monitor:
  • Yes
85. Has your country adopted or used any guidance documents for the purpose of conducting risk assessment or risk management, or for evaluating risk assessment reports submitted by notifiers?
This question is relevant to indicators 1.3.1 of the Strategic Plan
a) Risk assessment:
  • Yes
b) Risk management:
  • Yes
86. Is your country using the "Guidance on Risk Assessment of LMOs" (developed by the Online Forum and the AHTEG on Risk Assessment and Risk Management) for conducting risk assessment or risk management, or for evaluating risk assessment reports submitted by notifiers?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
87. Has your country adopted any common approaches to risk assessment with other countries?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.3.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
88. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.4.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
89. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO including any type of risk assessment of LMOs, e.g. for contained use, field trials, commercial purposes, direct use as food, feed, or for processing?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.3.3 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
90. If you answered Yes to question 89, please indicate the scope of the risk assessments (select all that apply):
  • Commercial production
  • Field trial
91. If you answered Yes to question 89, were the summary reports of the risk assessments submitted to the BCH?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes, always
92. If you answered Yes to question 89, were risk assessments conducted for all decisions taken on LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment or on domestic use of LMOs for direct use as food, feed, or for processing?
  • Yes, always
93. If you answered Yes to question 89, how many risk assessments were conducted in the current reporting period?
  • 5 or less
94. 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, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
ES
Solamente se aplica en el campo agrícola y para la reproducción de semillas e investigación, por lo que no involucra todas las etapas.
95. Has your country established a mechanism for monitoring potential effects of LMOs that are released into the environment?
  • Yes
96. Does your country have the infrastructure (e.g. laboratory facilities) for monitoring or managing LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.2.4 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
97. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Articles 15 and 16 in your country
ES
El país tiene desarrollo en detección e identificación de OVMs de uso agrícola, pero está limitado al sector académico. Además, no posee laboratorios ni metodologías acreditadas para la detección e identificación de OVMs.
Por otra parte, El Manual  y la guía de evaluación del riesgo se utilizan exclusivamente como material de estudio, referencia y orientación. Costa Rica por medio del Proyecto UNEP-GEF de Implementación de un Marco Nacional de Bioseguridad, elaboró  y aprobó guías nacionales para el análisis del riesgo de arboles, artrópodos y animales. Asimismo, colaboró activamente en la elaboración de una guía "tropicalizada" de análisis del riesgo ambiental  para uso en nuestras condiciones. Tambien usó los insumos producidos a través del proyecto multipaís Banco Mundial-GEF  y utiliza una combinación de guías nacionales e internacionales para la toma de decisiones.    Costa Rica participó en la discusión on-line del grupo de expertos de Análisis del riesgo, y reiteradamente ha señalado que el Manual y la Guía de evaluación del riesgo elaborados por la Secretaría de la CBD es muy útil para los países que ya hacen análisis del riesgo, pero es sumamente compleja para las partes que podrían iniciarse en el mismo.                                        ]
.
Article 17 – Unintentional transboundary movements and emergency measures
98. Has your country established and maintained appropriate measures to prevent unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • Yes
99. 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
100. Does your country have the capacity to take appropriate measures in the event that an LMO is unintentionally released?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.8.3 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
101. 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
105. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 17 in your country
ES
Costa Rica cuenta con el mecanismo legal  (Ley Fito y Zoosanitaria) para generar respuesta, siempre que exista una emergencia que resulte de un daño comprobable por los Departamentos de Gobierno. En este momento no existen emergencias, ni daños comprobados como resultado de movimientos transfronterizos de Organismos Genéticamente Modificados.
Article 18 – Handling, transport, packaging and identification
106. 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, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
ES
Solamente para OVMs de uso agricola e investigación.
107. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.6.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
108. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.6.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
110. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.6.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
111. If you answered Yes or Yes, to some extent to question 110, what type of documentation does your country require for the identification of LMOs that are destined for contained?
  • Existing types of documentation
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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.6.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes, to some extent
ES
Solamente para OVMs de uso agrícola o con fines de investigación.
113. If you answered Yes or Yes, to some extent to question 112, what type of documentation does your country require for the identification of LMOs that are intended for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Existing types of documentation
114. Does your country have available any guidance for the purpose of ensuring the safe handling, transport, and packaging of living modified organisms?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.6.4 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
115. Does your country have the capacity to enforce the requirements of identification and documentation of LMOs?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
ES
Solamente para el caso de reproducción de semillas e investigación agrícola.
116. How many customs officers in your country have received training in the identification of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.3.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • 10 or more
117. Has your country established procedures for the sampling and detection of LMOs?
  • No
118. How many laboratory personnel in your country have received training in detection of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.3.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • One or more
119. Does your country have reliable access to laboratory facilities for the detection of LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.3.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
120. How many laboratories in your country are certified for LMO detection?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.3.3 of the Strategic Plan
  • None
122. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 18 in your country:
ES
A nivel nacional se han establecido guías, protocolos y procedimientos denominados BIOs, para el etiquetado, el transporte, la movilización, la identificación y la comercialización de OVM´s para uso agrícola, pero no para OVM´s para consumo humano, animal y procesamiento, los cuales se indican en los artículos 117, 118, 121, 122, 127, 128, 129, 131, entre otros, del reglamento a la Ley de Protección Fitosanitaria N° 7664 .  Con el proyecto UNEP-GEF, se realizaron capacitaciones y discusiones acerca de protocolos con personal de Aduanas y de Proteccion Fitosanitaria, concluyendo que la identificación debe ser incluida en la factura comercial, pero principalmente mediante  una nota técnica
.
Article 19 – Competent National Authorities and National Focal Points
123. In case your country has designated more than one competent national authority, has your country established a mechanism for the coordination of their actions prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?
  • Yes
124. 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
125. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 19 in your country
ES
  Costa Rica ha comunicado la designación de un Punto Focal del Protocolo de Cartagena y el CIISB; asimismo, se ha designado e informado al CIISB las Autoridades Nacionales Competentes y ha establecido, mediante la creación de la Comisión Técnica Nacional de Bioseguridad, mecanismos y procedimientos para antes y a la hora de tomar decisiones. Bajo el Marco del proyecto UNEP-GEF, se facilitó la discusión para la creación de Comisiones Institucionales de Bioseguridad para acompañar a las diferentes Autoridades Nacionales Competentes en la toma de decisiones; a la fecha solamente se formó la del Servicio Nacional de Salud Animal,







Article 20 – Information Sharing and the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH)
126. Please provide an overview of the status of the mandatory 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.
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.5 of the Strategic Plan
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 and in the BCH
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 not available
c) Bilateral, multilateral and regional agreements and arrangements (Articles 14, paragraph 2 and 20, paragraph 3 (b))
  • Information available and in the BCH
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 and in the BCH
e) Reports submitted by the Parties on the operation of the Protocol (Article 20, paragraph 3 (e))
  • Information available and in the BCH
f) Decisions by a Party on regulating the transit of specific living modified organisms (LMOs) (Article 6, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
g) Occurrence of unintentional transboundary movements that are likely to have significant adverse effects on biological diversity (Article 17, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
h) Illegal transboundary movements of LMOs (Article 25, paragraph 3)
  • Information not available
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 and in the BCH
j) Information on the application of domestic regulations to specific imports of LMOs (Article 14, paragraph 4)
  • Information available and in the BCH
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 not available
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 not available
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 not available
n) Review and change of decisions regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs (Article 12, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
o) LMOs granted exemption status by each Party (Article 13, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
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
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 and in the BCH
127. Has your country established a mechanism for strengthening the capacity of the BCH National Focal Point to perform its administrative functions?
  • Yes
128. 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
129. Does your country use the information available in the BCH in its decision making processes on LMOs?
  • Yes, always
130. Has your country experienced difficulties accessing or using the BCH?
This question is relevant to indicator 4.1.8 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
131. Is the information submitted by your country to the BCH complete and up-to date?
  • Yes
132. 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:
This question is relevant to indicator 4.3.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • 25 or more
133. Please indicate the number of biosafety related publications that has been made available in your country in the last year:
This question is relevant to indicator 4.3.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • 10 or more
134. If biosafety related publications were made available (see question above), please indicate which modalities were preferred:
This question is relevant to indicator 4.3.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • National website
  • National Libraries
  • [Por medio del proyecto UNEP-GEF se produjeron una serie de materiales impresos relacionados con biotecnología y bioseguridad para ser distribuidos entre las Autoridades Nacionales Competentes, Stakeholders y público en general]
135. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 20 in your country
ES
  El CIISB para Costa Rica tiene un grupo de trabajo integrado por representantes de Servicio Nacional de Salud Animal, Servicio Fitosanitario del Estado, Ministerio de Salud y Ministerio de Ambiente y Energía.
Article 21 – Confidential information
136. Has your country established procedures to protect confidential information received under the Protocol?
  • Yes
137. Does your country allow the notifier to identify information that is to be treated as confidential?
  • Yes, always
138. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 21 in your country
ES
   Costa Rica tiene procedimientos administrativos para la protección de datos de registro tipificados en la Ley No. 7975, Reglamentos 34927-J-COMEX-S-MAG según lo declare el registrante. Estos van en concordancia con el Artículo 21 del Protocolo de Cartagena                                                 ]
Article 22 – Capacity-building
139. Does your country have predictable and reliable funding for building capacity for the effective implementation of the Protocol?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.6 and 3.1.8 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
140. 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
141. If you answered Yes to question 140, how were these resources made available?
  • Multilateral channels
142. Has your country provided support to other Parties in the development and/or strengthening of human resources and institutional capacities in biosafety?
  • Yes
143. If you answered Yes to question 142, how were these resources made available?
  • Multilateral channels
144. Has your country ever initiated a process to access GEF funds for building capacity in biosafety?
  • Yes
145. If you answered Yes to question 144, how would you characterize the process?
Please add further details about your experience in accessing GEF funds under question 157.
  • Very difficult
146. Has your country ever received funding from the GEF for building capacity in biosafety?
  • Pilot Biosafety Enabling Activity
  • Development of national biosafety frameworks
  • Implementation of national biosafety frameworks
  • Building Capacity for Effective Participation in the BCH (Phase I)
  • Building Capacity for Effective Participation in the BCH (Phase II)
147. 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
148. If you answered Yes to question 147, in which of the following areas were these activities undertaken?
  • Institutional capacity
  • Human resources capacity development and training
  • Risk assessment and other scientific and technical expertise
  • Risk management
  • Public awareness, participation and education in biosafety
  • Information exchange and data management including participation in the Biosafety Clearing-House
  • Scientific, technical and institutional collaboration at subregional, regional and international levels
  • 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
149. During the current reporting period, has your country carried out a capacity-building needs assessment?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
150. If you answered Yes to question 149, has this information been submitted to the BCH?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
151. Does your country still have capacity-building needs?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.7 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
152. If you answered Yes to question 151, indicate which of the following areas still need capacity-building.
  • Risk assessment and other scientific and technical expertise
  • Risk management
  • Public awareness, participation and education in biosafety
  • Information exchange and data management including participation in the Biosafety Clearing-House
  • Scientific, technical and institutional collaboration at subregional, regional and international levels
  • Technology transfer
  • Identification of LMOs, including their detection
  • Socio-economic considerations
  • Implementation of the documentation requirements under Article 18.2 of the Protocol
  • Handling of confidential information
  • Scientific biosafety research relating to LMOs
  • Taking into account risks to human health
153. Has your country developed a capacity-building strategy or action plan?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
154. Does your country have in place a functional national mechanism for coordinating biosafety capacity-building initiatives?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.4 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
155. How many biosafety short-term training programmes and/or academic courses are offered annually in your country?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.3 of the Strategic Plan
  • 1 per year or more
156. Has your country submitted the details of national biosafety experts to the Roster of Experts in the BCH?
  • Yes
157. 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
El proceso de obtención de fondos por medio del FMAM, es lento y complicado  en la temática de biotecnología y bioseguridad, principalmente porque el FMAM no tiene fondos específicos para Bioseguridad, y por tanto depende de las prioridades país si se asignan fondos a bioseguridad. Si se asignan fondos, el proceso de acceso a esos fondos es muy lento, y que finalmente cuando el proyecto es finalmente aprobado, muchos de los productos a obtener son obsoletos o ya no son útiles y el proceso de redireccionar fondos es complicado. En todo ese proceso, la posibilidad de creación de capacidades en diferentes áreas son cambiantes o no es posible aprovechar las posibilidades de entrenamiento y capacitación que se presentan en el tiempo, y esto influye en la toma de decisiones.

Article 23 – Public awareness and participation
158. 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
Here you may provide further details
ES
[se diseñó una estrategia de educación en biotecnología y bioseguridad. Hay diferentes leyes que permiten la participación ciudadana en la toma de decisiones
159. Has your country designed and/or implemented an outreach/communication strategy on biosafety?
This question is relevant to indicator 5.3.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
160. Does your country have any awareness and outreach programmes on biosafety?
This question is relevant to indicator 5.3.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
162. Has your country established a biosafety website searchable archives, national resource centres or sections in existing national libraries dedicated to biosafety educational materials?
This question is relevant to indicators 2.5.3 and 5.3.3 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
163. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 5.2.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • One or more
164. Has your country established a mechanism to ensure public access to information on living modified organisms that may be imported?
  • Yes
165. Has your country established a mechanism to consult the public in the decision-making process regarding LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.5.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
166. Has your country established a mechanism to make available to the public the results of decisions taken on LMOs?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.5.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
167. Has your country informed the public about existing modalities for public participation in the decision-making process regarding living modified organisms?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.5.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
168. If you answered Yes to question 167, please indicate the modalities used to inform the public:
This question is relevant to indicator 2.5.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • National website
  • Newspaper
  • Forums
  • Public hearings
  • ONGs y sesiones municipales Introduzca su texto aquí.]
169. If you indicated more than one modality for public participation in question 168, which one was most used?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.5.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • National website
170. Has your country taken any initiative to inform its public about the means of public access to the Biosafety Clearing-House?
  • Yes
171. How many academic institutions in your country are offering biosafety education and training courses and programmes?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.7.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • One or more
172. Please indicate the number of educational materials and/or online modules on biosafety that are available and accessible to the public in your country:
This question is relevant to indicators 2.7.2 and 5.3.4 of the Strategic Plan
  • 10 or more
173. 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 some extent
Here you may provide further details
ES
de acuerdo con los recursos disponibles ]
174. If you answered Yes to question 173, has your country cooperated with other States and international bodies?
  • Yes
175. 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
176. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 23 in your country
ES
El Proyecto LAC Biosafety (Construcción de capacidad multipaís para el Protocolo de Cartagena sobre Bioseguridad), financiado por el GEF y administrado por el Banco Mundial,  desarrolló un componente en esta materia, el cuál intentó promover  una mayor participación  e información de la sociedad civil .Esto contrasta con la gran cantidad de información  basada en datos no validados por personas no calificadas que se han presentado durante el período de presentación del informe.    la presentación de la información científica presentada, contrasta con la ligereza de los datos proveniente de fuentes  no calificadas, lo que demuestra que es necesario aunar esfuerzos para diseminar  información con base científica entre el público en general, para que así pueda emitir opiniones y tomar decisiones debidamente fundamentadas 
     Costa Rica ha implementado mecanismos para la consulta al público en el proceso de adopción de decisiones, los cuáles están tipificados en el Reglamento de la Ley de Protección Fitosanitaria Nº 26921 articulo 133, la cual consiste en  una consulta pública que se hace mediante publicaciones en periódicos de circulación nacional tanto durante el proceso, como en la decisión final en el Diario oficial de Gobierno.                            ]
Article 24 – Non-Parties
177. Has your country entered into any bilateral, regional, or multilateral agreement with non-Parties regarding transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • No
178. Has your country ever imported LMOs from a non-Party?
  • Yes
179. Has your country ever exported LMOs to a non-Party?
  • Yes
180. If you answered Yes to questions 178 or 179, were the transboundary movements of LMOs consistent with the objective of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety?
  • No
181. If you answered Yes to questions 178 or 179, was information about these transboundary movements submitted to the BCH?
  • No
183. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 24 in your country:
ES
Actualmente, la principal actividad en Costa Rica de OVM´s es la investigación y el incremento de semilla que son exportadas a un Estado que no es parte. Asimismo, los movimientos transfronterizos principales que vienen a Costa Rica se importan de un Estado no Parte. Sin embargo, se realizan ambos movimientos transfronterizos en concordancia con los procedimientos generales establecidos en el Protocolo Cartagena y la leyes nacionales vigentes
Article 25 – Illegal transboundary movements
184. 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
185. Has your country established a strategy for detecting illegal transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • No
186. 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?
If you replied Never to question 186 please go to question 191
  • Never
191. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 25 in your country
ES
[Costa Rica no ha recibido comunicación sobre movimientos transfronterizos ilícitos por conducto del CIISB, ni por ningún otro mecanismo nacional o regional existente  
Article 26 – Socio-economic considerations
192. Does your country have any specific approaches or requirements that facilitate how socio-economic considerations should be taken into account in LMO decision making?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.7.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
193. 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?
  • No
194. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.7.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • None
195. What is your country's experience, if any, in taking socio-economic considerations into account in LMO decision making? Please give details:
This question is relevant to indicator 1.7.3 of the Strategic Plan
ES
  La Comisión Técnica Nacional de Bioseguridad de Costa Rica, basado en su legislación nacional,  emite recomendaciones sustentadas exclusivamente en criterios técnico-científicos.                                                    ]
196. Has your country cooperated with other Parties on research and information exchange on any socio-economic impacts of LMOs?
  • Yes, to some extent
Here you may provide further details
ES
[como resultado de la implementación del proyecto LAC-Biosafety y en eventos de discusión nacionales y regionales.
197. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 26 in your country
ES
La Comisión Técnica Nacional de Bioseguridad de Costa Rica basado en su legislación nacional,  emite dictámenes Técnicos vinculantes al Servicio Fitosanitario del Estado como  Autoridad Nacional Competente en materia de OVMs de uso agrícola, sustentado exclusivamente en criterios técnico-científicos  .                                                    ]
Article 27 – Liability and Redress
198. Has your country ratified or acceded to the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress?
  • No
199. If you answered No to question 198, is there any national process in place towards becoming a Party?
  • No
200. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 2.4.1 of the Strategic Plan
  • No
201. Does your country have administrative or legal instrument that provide for response measures for damage to biodiversity resulting from living modified organisms?
This question is relevant to indicators 1.5.2 and 2.4.2 of the Strategic Plan
  • Yes
202. 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
Por medio del proyecto UNEP-GEF, se realizaron algunas sesiones de trabajo, donde se concluyó que el país necesita asistencia financiera para poder socializar el contenido del Protocolo Suplementario, para así decidir si lo ratifica o no. .                                                    ]
Article 28 – Financial Mechanism and Resources
203. 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?
This question is relevant to indicator 1.2.5 of the Strategic Plan
  • 500,000 USD or more
Article 33 – Monitoring and reporting
204. Does your country have in place a monitoring and/or an enforcement system for the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol?
This question is relevant to indicator 3.1.6 of the Strategic Plan
a) Monitoring system:
  • No
b) Enforcement system:
  • No
205. Has your country submitted all the previous due National Reports?
  • Yes
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
En algunos casos la redacción de las preguntas dan lugar a diferentes interpretaciones, por consiguiente fue difícil brindar una respuesta concreta en algunas de ellas, por lo que fue necesario la utilización de los espacios al final de cada artículo, para aclarar el contenido de cada uno y particularmente en las preguntas relacionadas con la aplicación de la legislación nacional y el Protocolo de Cartagena.                                                                                                   ]