Yemen has an established institutional framework for biodiversity conservation led by the Environment Protection Authority, with the participation of a number of government institutions responsible for agriculture, forestry, fisheries, scientific research and other sectors relevant to the conservation and sustainable use of biological resources. These institutions have accumulated practical experience through the implementation of the Convention on Biological Diversity and related national legislation.
Although institutional arrangements specifically addressing access and benefit-sharing have not yet been fully developed, the existing legal and institutional framework provides a useful basis for future progress in this area. In particular, the Environment Protection Law No. (26) of 1995 and its Executive Regulations include provisions related to the conservation and management of biological resources that may support the future development of a national ABS framework.

Progress has been constrained by the absence of dedicated ABS legislation, limited technical and financial resources, and the need for stronger coordination among the institutions concerned with genetic resources. Addressing these issues will be an important step towards establishing the institutional arrangements necessary for the effective implementation of access and benefit-sharing measures.

The existing legal and institutional framework provides a basis for regulating certain activities involving biological resources, particularly those undertaken for scientific research and biodiversity conservation. Over the years, the competent institutions have gained practical experience in applying these measures within their respective mandates.
At the same time, experience has shown that the current arrangements do not fully address the broader requirements of access and benefit-sharing. Developing a more comprehensive framework will require stronger coordination among the institutions concerned, clearer administrative procedures, and continued efforts to strengthen technical and institutional capacity. Building on the existing legislation and institutional experience will support future progress in this area. 

The existing legislation provides a useful basis for addressing benefit-sharing in scientific research involving biological resources. In particular, requiring written agreements, including provisions on benefit-sharing, and involving local communities in relevant cases provides some practical safeguards.

At the same time, the current provisions are limited in scope and were not developed as a comprehensive ABS framework. There is no detailed mechanism for determining, administering and monitoring benefit-sharing in different situations, including the utilization of genetic resources for commercial purposes. Further work is therefore needed to develop a clear national ABS framework, clarify institutional responsibilities and strengthen the participation of local communities in matters concerning genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge.

The existing legislation provides some practical experience in controlling research activities involving biological resources. Prior approval, written agreements, licensing, reporting requirements and controls on the movement and export of biological resources provide a basis for preventing unauthorized activities.
However, these measures were developed before the Nagoya Protocol and were not designed as a system for monitoring the utilization of genetic resources obtained from other countries or for verifying compliance with their ABS requirements. Yemen also has not yet established designated checkpoints or a dedicated information system for ABS monitoring and transparency.

A key challenge is therefore to build on the existing administrative arrangements and develop a national ABS framework that clearly defines institutional responsibilities, monitoring arrangements and information-sharing mechanisms.

The use of written agreements for scientific research has provided some experience in setting out the responsibilities and conditions agreed between the parties, including provisions concerning applicable law and dispute resolution.

At the same time, these arrangements are limited to the activities covered by the existing environmental regulations and were not developed as a specific ABS framework. There is no standard national model for ABS agreements or specific mechanism for the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards in ABS matters. Developing a clearer national framework would help provide greater certainty for parties and strengthen the implementation of contractual arrangements related to access and benefit-sharing.

The existing environmental legislation provides a general framework for the protection and sustainable use of biological resources, which may serve as a foundation for future development of ABS-related measures. However, these provisions were not designed as a comprehensive ABS system and do not address the specific requirements of the Nagoya Protocol.
A key lesson learned is that while the current legal framework offers a basis for environmental governance, it lacks specific mechanisms for access and benefit-sharing, particularly in relation to non-commercial research, emergency situations, and genetic resources for food and agriculture. Strengthening the national legal and institutional framework for ABS would be necessary to address these gaps in a systematic and coherent manner.

The existing environmental regulations provide some recognition of the role and interests of local communities in scientific research and the use of biological resources. In particular, Articles 12, 13, 14 and 15 of Annex (8) to Prime Minister Decision No. (148) of 2000 provide a useful basis for local participation, consultation, protection of community rights and consideration of local customs and traditional information.

However, these provisions were developed before the Nagoya Protocol and are not part of a dedicated ABS framework. They do not clearly establish the rights of local communities in relation to genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge, or provide specific procedures for PIC, approval and involvement, MAT, community protocols or customary use.

Further development of the national ABS legal and institutional framework would therefore be needed to clarify these matters and provide a more consistent basis for the participation and protection of local communities.

No monetary benefits from granting access to genetic resources for their utilization were recorded during the reporting period. The existing regulatory provisions concerning scientific research and benefit-sharing have not resulted in recorded monetary benefit-sharing under a national ABS system.

No non-monetary benefits specifically arising from the granting of access to genetic resources were recorded during the reporting period. While scientific cooperation, research activities and capacity-building may have taken place in the country, these cannot be reported as ABS benefits without a documented link to access to genetic resources.

No monetary benefits were recorded during the reporting period from granting access to traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources. The existing legislation contains some provisions concerning local communities and traditional information, but there is no established system for granting access to such knowledge and sharing monetary benefits.

No non-monetary benefits were recorded during the reporting period as arising specifically from access to traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources. The existing legal provisions concerning traditional information and local communities do not establish a mechanism for recording or reporting such benefits.

The existing legal framework provides some basis for benefit-sharing, particularly through Article 7 of Annex (8) to Prime Minister Decision No. (148) of 2000, which requires benefit-sharing provisions to be included in agreements for scientific research on biological resources. However, these provisions are limited to the existing research procedures and do not constitute a comprehensive ABS system.
During the reporting period, no monetary or non-monetary benefits could be identified and reported as arising specifically from granting access to genetic resources or associated traditional knowledge. A main challenge is therefore the absence of a dedicated national ABS framework and mechanisms for documenting, monitoring and reporting benefits.

Developing a clear national ABS framework would help clarify the applicable procedures, types of benefits, beneficiaries and mechanisms for directing benefits towards biodiversity conservation and sustainable use.

The main limitation is the absence of a national ABS framework addressing transboundary cooperation. The existing environmental legislation provides some provisions concerning access to biological resources, scientific research and local communities, but it does not establish mechanisms for cooperation with other countries where genetic resources or associated traditional knowledge may be shared.

Developing a national ABS framework would provide an opportunity to clarify responsibilities and procedures for cooperation with neighboring and other countries, including in relation to shared genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge.

The existing regulatory framework provides some practical requirements for scientific research and agreements with applicants, but it does not include model contractual clauses or specific ABS guidelines and standards.

A main challenge is the absence of a dedicated national ABS framework. Developing such a framework would provide an opportunity to prepare model contractual clauses, guidelines and practical standards that could be used consistently by government authorities, researchers, local communities and other relevant users and providers.

The existing environmental framework provides a basis for raising awareness and developing institutional capacity related to biodiversity and biological resources, and some initial steps have been taken to introduce the concept of access and benefit-sharing (ABS) and the Nagoya Protocol within relevant institutions. However, awareness and capacity-building specifically related to ABS and the Nagoya Protocol remain limited and not yet systematically developed.

The main challenge is the absence of a dedicated national ABS framework and a structured capacity-building programme for implementing the Nagoya Protocol. There is a need to further strengthen the capacity of relevant government institutions, researchers, and local communities on ABS procedures, prior informed consent, mutually agreed terms, benefit-sharing, and compliance. Developing a national ABS framework would provide a clearer basis for identifying capacity needs and organizing targeted training and awareness activities in a more coordinated and sustained manner.

Existing cooperation in biodiversity-related research provides a useful basis for developing future work on ABS. However, cooperation specifically addressing access and benefit-sharing remains limited.

The main challenge is the absence of a dedicated national ABS framework and clear institutional arrangements for coordinating technical and scientific cooperation on ABS. Further development of the national ABS framework would help identify research priorities, clarify institutional responsibilities and create opportunities for cooperation, technology transfer and joint research related to genetic resources and their sustainable use.

Yemen, as a developing country currently affected by conflict and facing significant institutional and financial constraints, has not yet been able to establish a dedicated resource mobilization mechanism for the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol. Some capacity-building and biodiversity-related activities have been supported through broader environmental and biodiversity programmes, often relying on limited external assistance. Further international financial and technical support will be essential to develop a national ABS framework, strengthen institutional capacities, and establish the necessary systems and procedures for effective implementation.

No dedicated funds have been mobilized specifically for the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol during the reporting period. Yemen continues to face significant humanitarian and economic challenges due to ongoing conflict, which limits the availability of resources for specialized environmental initiatives such as Access and Benefit-Sharing (ABS). In this context, the establishment and operationalization of a national ABS framework would require substantial financial and technical support to ensure effective implementation and capacity building.

The main experience during the reporting period has been that existing biodiversity and environmental programmes can provide a basis for addressing some ABS-related needs, even in the absence of a dedicated ABS budget or any funds specifically mobilized for the implementation of the Nagoya Protocol. However, the lack of a specific national ABS framework, dedicated financial resources, and specialized human resources remains a key constraint. Moving forward, Yemen would require financial, technical, and capacity-building support to establish a clear national ABS framework and to enable its effective implementation.

Yemen signed the Nagoya Protocol on 2 February 2011 but has not yet ratified it. The country does not currently have a dedicated national ABS law or comprehensive framework. However, some relevant provisions are already contained in the Environmental Protection Law No. (26) of 1995 and its Executive Regulations issued by Prime Minister Decision No. (148) of 2000, particularly Annex 8 on the Regulation of the Exploitation of Biological Resources.

These provisions address, among other matters, prior approval for biodiversity research, agreements with researchers, benefit-sharing, involvement of local communities, conditions for subsequent commercial use, and control over the collection and export of biological resources. The existing provisions were developed before the Nagoya Protocol and are mainly focused on research activities. They therefore provide a useful basis for further development, but do not yet constitute a comprehensive ABS framework.

Yemen considers the development of a clear national ABS framework, together with appropriate institutional arrangements, capacity-building and financial and technical support, to be important steps towards strengthening the country's implementation of ABS-related measures and supporting the possible future ratification and implementation of the Nagoya Protocol.

The reporting format is generally useful for reviewing national measures on access and benefit-sharing. However, for countries that have signed but not yet ratified the Nagoya Protocol, it would be helpful if the format clearly shows the difference between measures taken before ratification and those taken to implement the Protocol.

It would also be useful to allow countries to clearly indicate when national measures are only partly applicable or still being developed, especially when existing laws were adopted before the Nagoya Protocol and do not form a full ABS system.