Pages

“Many people praise and acknowledge the healing power of plants, but few people actually take action to prevent their extension by planting and conserving them for future generations.” (Ernest Rukangira )

Saturday, 21 December 2013

Bioprospecting info

Subject: Re: Bioprospecting info?

Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 10:53:07 -0500

From: "Goodman, Kenneth J" <goodmanj@BATTELLE.ORG>

Reply-To: Ecol/Env Anthropology <EANTH-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>

To: EANTH-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU

 

Sean,

Here are some references you might find useful.  (I hope I'm not overloading

you). The International Cooperative Biodiversity Groups (ICBG) program,

sponsored by NIH, NSF, and others is a bioprospecting program in about a

dozen countries that you should look into.  The programs in Suriname and the

African countries of Nigeria and Cameroon have interesting

bioprospecting/benefit sharing agreements.  Conservation International

developed the agreements for Suriname and Shaman Pharmaceuticals helped to

develop the agreements for Africa.  Good luck.

 

Artuso, Anthony.  (1997).  Capturing the Chemical Value of Biodiversity:

Economic Perspectives and Policy Prescriptions.  IN Biodiversity and Human

Health.  (Francesca Grifo and Joshua Rosenthal, eds.)  Washington, DC:

Island Press.  Pp. 184-204.

 

Asebey, Edgar J.  (1996)  Indigenous Knowledge and Intellectual Property:

Towards Equitable Compensation.  Pan American Health Organization

560:191-199.

 

Axt, Josephine R., M. Lynne Corn, Margaret Lee, and David M. Ackerman.

(1993).  Biotechnology, Indigenous Peoples, and Intellectual Property

Rights.  Congressional Research Service Report, April 16.

 

Baker, J., Borris, R., Carte, B., Cordell, G., Soejarto, D., Cragg, G.,

Gupta, M., Iwu, M., Madulid, D. and Tyler, V.  (1995).  Natural Product Drug

Discovery and Development: New Perspectives on International Collaboration.

Journal of Natural Products 58(9), 1325-1357.

 

Balick, Michael J., Elaine Elisabetsky, and Sarah A. Laird (eds).  (1996).

Medicinal Resources of the Tropical Forest: Biodiversity and its Importance

to Human Health.  New York: Columbia University Press.

 

Barbier, E.B., and B.A. Aylward.  (1996).  Capturing the Pharmaceutical

Value of Biodiversity in a Developing Country.  Environmental and Resource

Economics 8/2, 157-181.

 

Bhat, M.G.  (1996).  Trade-related Intellectual Property Rights to

Biological Resources: Socioeconomic Implications for Developing Countries.

Ecological Economics 19(3), 205-217.

 

Brush, Stephen B., and Doreen Stabinsky (eds.)  (1996).  Valuing Local

Knowledge: Indigenous People and Intellectual Property Rights.  Washington,

DC: Island Press.

 

Grifo, Francesca, and D. Downes.  (1996).  Agreements to Collect

Biodiversity for Pharmaceutical Research: Major Issues and Proposed

Principles.  IN Valuing Local Knowledge: Indigenous People and Intellectual

Property Rights.  (S. Brush and D. Stabinsky, eds.)  Washington, DC: Island

Press.  Pp. 281-303.

 

Iwu, Maurice.  (1996).  Implementing the Biodiversity Treaty: How to Make

International Cooperative Agreements Work.  Trends in Biotechnology 14,

78-83.

 

Iwu, Maurice. (1996).  Biodiversity Prospecting in Nigeria: Seeking Equity

and Reciprocity in Intellectual Property Rights through Partnership

Arrangements and Capacity Building.  Journal of Ethnopharmacology 51(1/3),

209-219.

 

Juma, Calestous, and John Mugabe.  (1996).  Biodiversity Prospecting:

Opportunities and Challenges for African Countries.  IN Biodiversity,

Science and Development: Towards a New Partnership.  (F. di Castri and T.

Younes, eds).  Wallingford, UK: CAB International.  Pp. 519-538.

 

Mays, T.D., and K.D. Mazan.  (1996).  Legal Issues in Sharing the Benefits

of Biodiversity Prospecting.  Journal of Ethnopharmacology 51(1/3), 93-109.

 

Miller, J.S.  (1997).  Ensuring Community Based Benefits in Multinational

Bioprospecting.  American Journal of Botany 84(6), 112-113.

 

Miller, J.S., and D.K. Harder.  (1994).  Models for Ethical Collaboration in

Biodiversity Prospecting.  Monographs in Systematic Botany 48, 239-244.

 

Moran, Katy (1998) "Mechanisms for Benefit Sharing: Nigerian Case Study for

the Convention on Biological Diversity. Washington, D.C.: the Healing Forest

Conservancy.

 

Mugabe, John, Charles Victor Barber, Gudrun Henne, Lyle Glowka, and Antonio

La Vina.  (1996).  Managing Access to Genetic Resources: Towards Strategies

for Benefit-Sharing.  Kenya, Nairobi: African Centre for Technology Studies.

 

Nabhan, Gary Paul, Angelo Joaquin Jr., Nancy Laney, and Kevin Dahl.  (1996)

Sharing the Benefits of Plant Resources and Indigenous Scientific Knowledge.

IN Valuing Local Knowledge: Indigenous People and Intellectual Property

Rights.  (Stephen B. Brush and Doreen Stabinsky, eds).  Pp. 186-208.

Washington, DC: Island Press.

 

Nettleton, D.E. Jr.  (1995).  Bioprospecting, Compensation and

Biopreservation.  Drug News and Perspectives 8/4, 250-256.

 

Posey, Darrell.  (1996).  Protecting Indigenous Peoples' Rights to

Biodiversity: People, Property, and Bioprospecting.  Environment 38(8),

37-45.

 

Putterman, Daniel M.  (1995)  Model Material Transfer Agreements for

Equitable Biodiversity Prospecting.  Colorado Journal of International

Environmental Law and Policy 7:149-177.

 

Reid, Walter V., Sarah A. Laird, Carrie A. Meyer, Rodrigo Gámez, Ana

Sittenfeld, Daniel H. Janzen, Michael A. Gollin, and Calestous Juma (eds.).

(1993).  Biodiversity Prospecting: Using Genetic Resources for Sustainable

Development.  Washington, DC: World Resources Insititute.

 

Rosenthal, Joshua P.  (1996).  Equitable Sharing of Biodiversity Benefits:

Agreements on Genetic Resources.  OECD International Conference on

Biodiversity Incentive Measuress.  Cairns, Australia, March 25-28, 1996.

 

Rubin, S., and S. Fish.  (1994).  Biodiversity Prospecting: Using Innovative

Contractual Provisions to Foster Ethnobotanical Knowledge, Technology, and

Conservation. Colorado Journal of International Evironmental Law & Policy 5,

23-58.

 

Simpson, R. David, R.A. Sedjo, and Walter V. Reid.  (1996).  Valuing

Biodiversity for Use in Pharmaceutical Research.  Journal of Political

Economy 104(1), 163-185.

 

Soejarto, D.D.  (1996).  Biodiversity Prospecting and Benefit-Sharing:

Perspectives from the Field.  Journal of Ethnopharmacology 51(1/3), 1-15.

 

ten Kate, Kerry  (1995).  The Role of Providers, Collectors and Users:

Biodiversity Prospecting Partnerships.  Biotechnology and Development

Monitor 25, 16-21.

 

Kenneth J. Goodman, M.A.

Health Researcher

Battelle Centers for Public Health Research and Evaluation

2101 Wilson Blvd., Suite 800

Arlington, VA  22201

(703) 875-2101

(703) 527-5640 - fax

goodmanj@battelle.org

 

Subject: World Bank Forum on IK and Development

Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 22:58:16 -0500 (EST)

From: Shane P Mulligan <smulliga@uoguelph.ca>

To: indknow <indknow@u.washington.edu>

 

The Bank has been hosting a knowledge and development discussion since

February 1. Week five focuses on IPRs and IK - thought some here might

want to join in. The Bank's introductory message is below.

 

More info is available at

http://www.worldbank.org/dev-forum/current-knowledge.html

 

or one can join the discussion by sending to

 

majordomo@jazz.worldbank.org

(no subject)

 

the message:

 

SUBSCRIBE IKD

 

Adios,

 

Shane P. Mulligan

P.O. Box 48-2398

University of Guelph

Guelph, Ontario

N1G 2W1, CANADA

 

smulliga@uoguelph.ca

http://www.uoguelph.ca/~smulliga

 

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 14:54:06 -0500

From: Cdahlman@worldbank.org

Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

Subject: [IKD] Introduction to Week 5

 

Week 5: Indigenous Knowledge and Intellectual Property Rights Issues.

 

Indigenous knowledge (IK) is an important, yet underutilized resource in

the development process. Numerous IK practices have evolved, especially in

agriculture, health, environment, customary law and social institutions in

various cultures and environments. Communities in other parts of the world

could benefit from such practices if the latter are exchanged and

disseminated. But there is a risk that due to the advance and rapid

dissemination of Western scientific knowledge, indigenous knowledge could

be swamped or ignored.

 

There is also concern about a tendency of pharmaceutical or agro-industrial

multinationals to appropriate indigenous knowledge, build upon it, and

patent

it without compensating the original owners of that knowledge.  Most IK

does not meet conventional patenting requirements: ownership by a legal

entity, novelty, and originality, so it is difficult to protect under

existing conventions.

 

Some of the questions that could be addressed in this week's discussion

include:

 

What are examples of IK practices in the areas of education, health, social

institutions, environment?

 

How can IK be protected?

 

What positive examples are there of compensation by multinationals of

indigenous knowledge and how was that achieved?

 

Is developing a code of ethics a viable proposition, and is it likely to

work?

 

What role could local communities play in exchanging their know-how across

cultures and borders?

 

What role could the private sector, governments or donor organizations play

without compromising IPR of the communities?

 

At a broader level there is concern that the trend towards strengthening of

intellectual property rights (IPRs) could hurt developing countries and the

poor.  This applies not only to agreements that have already been reached

but

also to future issues that are constantly being brought forward as science

and

technology open up new issues in areas such as bioengineering and software

development which are still not fully covered by existing agreements and

that

can have also have some secondary impacts.  (Take for example Monsanto's

development of hybrid seeds that are designed to become sterile so that the

plants cannot reproduce and the additional concern of this sterilization

feature could accidentally spill over and make even some local varieties

sterile.)

 

Some of the issues that could be addressed include:

 

What can be done to counterbalance some of these trends toward greater

privatization of knowledge that can negatively affect poorer developing

countries?

 

Where can stronger IPRs have positive impacts on less developed countries?

 

How can the tension between these two be best addressed?

 

How can the negotiating capacity of developing countries be strengthened in

current and future negotiations on intellectual property rights?

 

Carl Dahlman

cdahlman@worldbank.org

 

Subject: [IKD] WEEK 5 - ON RIGHTS AND WRONGS

Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 11:24:49 -0600

From: Alfonso Gumucio Dagron <agumucio@guate.net>

Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

To: "'ikd@jazz.worldbank.org'" <ikd@jazz.worldbank.org>

CC: "'James Deane'" <panos@gn.apc.org>,

     "'James Deane (PANOS)'"

     <jamesd@panoslondon.org.uk>

 

The appropriation of indigenous knowledge is a fact that affects not

only scientific knowledge (medicine, agriculture...) but also the arts.

Music for example, is one of the most affected areas in that sense.

The culture of the poorest countries is often object of pillage by

stronger countries. This is very clear to everybody in the area of

medicine, where herbal knowledge from traditional doctors has been

largely appropriated by multinational laboratories.

 

It is less known that this also happens between neighboring countries.

Traditional songs and festivals from Bolivia, for example, have been in

recent years "adopted" by Chile as if they were original from that

country, although it has very little indigenous Aymara population. Brasil

record industry made millions with the "Lambada" song until a legal

process determined that the rights were owned by a Bolivian folk group. A

third level of appropriation happens within each country: richer people

will take advantage of power and position to deprive poor people from the

rights to their knowledge, often transmitted orally from generation to

generation.

 

Actually, I have always thought that many academicians in the "First

World" have a very similar practice when they publish their books based

on the hard research made by their students, and in many cases take

credit for discoveries that were the result of a collective effort.

 

I fully agree that existing conventions do not protect indigenous

knowledge which is often a collective knowledge. Legislation on

intellectual property is also culturally biased and usually benefits the

powerful rather than the poor. Another Bolivian example: in the early

sixties a group of young Bolivian filmmakers did a research on a few

famous bandits from the US that ended their life while robbing trains in

the Bolivian highlands. They filmmakers prepared a script and went to

the US to seek for funding for a film production. Their negotiations

were not successful, 20th Century Fox rejected the project, the studio

was not interested.  But only a few years later, in 1969, the same

script was directed by George Roy Hill, with Paul Newman and  Robert

Redford. The title: "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid". The script was

credited to William Goldman. The real authors of the script attempted

legal action against 20th Century Fox, but of course they never got very

far with it.

 

In final analysis, we are talking about one same thing: power and

discrimination. But again, there is a role for communication as an

instrument of strengthening cultural values and identity.  No matter what

legislation is in place if communities continue to be marginalized and do

not know how to take advantage of laws protecting their scientific and

cultural knowledge, things will not change. Perfecting the legislation is

only one aspect, the other is empowering communities to participate more

actively in a nations life.

 

Alfonso Gumucio Dagron

gumucio-dagron@bigfoot.com

 

Subject: [IKD] Integrating Indigenous Knowledge (IK) in development

Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 11:55:36 +0100

From: "Liebenstein, Guus von" <lieb@nuffic.nl>

Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

To: "'IKD@JAZZ.WORLDBANK.ORG'" <IKD@jazz.worldbank.org>

 

I am Guus von Liebenstein, director of the Centre for International Research

and Advisory Networks (http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran).

 

I welcome the discussion on Indigenous Knowledge (IK) as it may add to the

1998/99 World Development Report (Knowledge for Development) a proper

acknowledgement of indigenous knowledge that is outside the realm of the

technocratic and scientific community. From a development perspective - to

quote Nigel Cross , Director Panos, London - it is often unconnected

knowledge that is most valuable and productive. I trust that this discussion

will also contribute to a global effort to:

 

(1) make IK a key issue on the international development agenda

 

I share Carl Dahlman's observation that Indigenous Knowledge is an

important, yet under-utilised resource in the development process. Therefore

IK should be made a key issue on the international development agenda, which

at the same time also requires international support to strengthen

developing countries' capacity to capture, store and share indigenous

knowledge.

 

(2) raise awareness among policymakers and stakeholders with a professional

interest in development (private sector, NGOs, research and training

institutions)

 

Successful impact on the international development agenda requires a

strategy to raise awareness and to sensitise the sponsors of development

(including the donor community) and other stakeholders with a professional

interest in development, on the contribution of indigenous knowledge to

development planning and implementation. Establishing IK-information systems

and sharing information plays a crucial role in this process. The use of ICT

may accelerate the process on information sharing

 

(3) apply Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSP) in development

planning and implementation

 

IK is often closely related with survival and subsistence, which puts IK at

the basis for local-level decision making in e.g. food security, human and

animal health, education, and natural resource management. IK has the

potential to provide cost-effective, locally manageable and sustainable

problem-solving strategies for local communities, especially the poor. The

use of IK for development - if the producers are willing to share their

knowledge - should be communicated globally to further integrate IK in

development planning and implementation, and in community based and

participatory approaches for development.

 

(4) increase and support of efforts for the capturing, storing and

disseminating of IK

 

Global and local efforts are necessary to create a solid body of information

(e.g. best practices) on the contribution of IK to development, that may

feed the awareness raising strategy (see under 2). Support of local,

regional and global exchange of IK is necessary to learn from lessons, to

stimulate a sustained public debate on the role of IK in development, to

create diversity in knowledge, to guarantee the authenticity of knowledge,

and to create a variety in IK-information systems and knowledge brokers.

International cooperation and partnerships are required to promote the use

of IK in development by linking involved parties (sub-networks, thematical

and/or regional focal groups) and to facilitate interaction and exchange of

information between them.

 

CIRAN/Nuffic supports activities that capture, store and disseminate

information on IK's contribution to development by publishing and sharing

information on IK and development, by technical backstopping, and

consultancy on the establishment of IK-(information)networks

(http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran/ik.html), and by stimulating the establishment

of IK Resource Centres in developing countries

(http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran/ikdm/addresses.html). It is fortunate to observe

a growing number of global initiatives which aim at the establishment of

IK-information systems, e.g. World Bank's IK Initiative

(http://www.worldbank.org/html/afr/ik/default.htm), UNESCO-MOST programme

(http://www.unesco.org/most/bphome.htm), and ILO-INDISCO programme

(http://www.ilo.org/public/english/65entrep/coop/indisco.htm)

 

When I use term indigenous knowledge, I refer to knowledge and skills which

are generated outside the formal education system, and have the potential

for providing problem-solving strategies for local communities. I would like

to state explicitly that my concept goes beyond indigenous knowledge that is

sensitive of having a potential asset for being used and exploited by

pharmaceutical or agro-industrial multinationals. As a professional in the

development business, my first concern with IK is knowledge which is

potentially relevant and valuable from a development perspective. With this

statement I have no intention to avoid the discussion on IPR. I think the

IPR issue is extremely relevant, however the IPR discussion should be dealt

with in its proper context, and should not keep us away from the discussion

on 'free' information and knowledge, which may be useful for other

communities as well.

 

Guus von Liebenstein

CIRAN/Nuffic

The Hague, the Netherlands

tel: + 31 70 4260 321

fax:+ 31 70 4260 329

email: lieb@nuffic.nl

 

Subject: Integration Indigenous Knowledge (IK) in development

Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 15:18:19 +0100

From: "Liebenstein, Guus von" <lieb@nuffic.nl>

To: "'IK-network@nuffic.nl'" <IK-network@nuffic.nl>

 

Dear Madam/Sir,

 

World Bank's Development Forum (http://www.worldbank.org/devforum/) is a

public venue for online discussions on development issues sponsored by the

World Bank on behalf of the entire development community. Its focal point is

a series of new and ongoing moderated electronic discussions on key issues

and challenges facing the development community and the world's poor, with a

particular emphasis on learning from the experience of those who face these

challenges in their daily lives.

 

The online discussion includes one on Knowledge and Information for

Development (IKD), co-sponsored by the Panos Institute London. This list

will discuss the role of information and knowledge as tools of sustainable

development, and  the challenges facing developing countries in seeking to

join the global information economy. It takes as its of departure the recent

World Bank World Development Report on Knowledge for Development and the

series of Panos Institute articles responding to that Report.

 

This week a discussion has been launched on a subject that may interest you,

i.e. Indigenous Knowledge and Intellectual Property Rights Issues. In case

you have not been informed otherwise on this online discussion list, I am

providing you with the following information, including my (CIRAN)

contribution to the list.

 

In case you wish to subscribe to the list, please send a message (do not

enter a subject) to

MAJORDOMO@JAZZ.WORLDBANK.ORG

In the body of the message type:

SUBSCRIBE IKD

 

I hope you will send your contributions as well to start a concerted effort

in promoting the use of IK in development.

Guus von Liebenstein

G.W. von Liebenstein

Director

Centre for International Research and Advisory Networks (CIRAN)

c/o Nuffic

P.O. Box 29777

2502 LT The Hague

The Netherlands

Phone: + 00 31 70 4260320/321

Fax:     + 00 31 70 4260329

e-mail:  lieb@nuffic.nl

http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran/ik.html

 

INTRODUCTION BY MODERATOR (CARL DAHLMAN)

OF THE LIST

 

Week 5: Indigenous Knowledge and Intellectual Property Rights Issues.

 

Indigenous knowledge (IK) is an important, yet underutilized resource in

the development process. Numerous IK practices have evolved, especially in

agriculture, health, environment, customary law and social institutions in

various cultures and environments. Communities in other parts of the world

could benefit from such practices if the latter are exchanged and

disseminated. But there is a risk that due to the advance and rapid

dissemination of Western scientific knowledge, indigenous knowledge could

be swamped or ignored.

 

There is also concern about a tendency of pharmaceutical or agro-industrial

multinationals to appropriate indigenous knowledge, build upon it, and

patent

it without compensating the original owners of that knowledge.  Most IK

does not meet conventional patenting requirements: ownership by a legal

entity, novelty, and originality, so it is difficult to protect under

existing conventions.

 

Some of the questions that could be addressed in this week's discussion

include:

 

What are examples of IK practices in the areas of education, health, social

institutions, environment?

 

How can IK be protected?

 

What positive examples are there of compensation by multinationals of

indigenous knowledge and how was that achieved?

 

Is developing a code of ethics a viable proposition, and is it likely to

work?

 

What role could local communities play in exchanging their know-how across

cultures and borders?

 

What role could the private sector, governments or donor organizations play

without compromising IPR of the communities?

 

At a broader level there is concern that the trend towards strengthening of

intellectual property rights (IPRs) could hurt developing countries and the

poor.  This applies not only to agreements that have already been reached

but

also to future issues that are constantly being brought forward as science

and

technology open up new issues in areas such as bioengineering and software

development which are still not fully covered by existing agreements and

that

can have also have some secondary impacts.  (Take for example Monsanto's

development of hybrid seeds that are designed to become sterile so that the

plants cannot reproduce and the additional concern of this sterilization

feature could accidentally spill over and make even some local varieties

sterile.)

 

Some of the issues that could be addressed include:

 

What can be done to counterbalance some of these trends toward greater

privatization of knowledge that can negatively affect poorer developing

countries?

 

Where can stronger IPRs have positive impacts on less developed countries?

 

How can the tension between these two be best addressed?

 

How can the negotiating capacity of developing countries be strengthened in

current and future negotiations on intellectual property rights?

 

Carl Dahlman

cdahlman@worldbank.org

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

 

CONTRIBUTION OF GUUS VON LIEBENSTEIN TO THE LIST

I am Guus von Liebenstein, director of the Centre for International Research

and Advisory Networks (http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran).

 

I welcome the discussion on Indigenous Knowledge (IK) as it may add to the

1998/99 World Development Report (Knowledge for Development) a proper

acknowledgement of indigenous knowledge that is outside the realm of the

technocratic and scientific community. From a development perspective - to

quote Nigel Cross , Director Panos, London - it is often unconnected

knowledge that is most valuable and productive. I trust that this discussion

will also contribute to a global effort to:

 

(1) make IK a key issue on the international development agenda

 

I share Carl Dahlman's observation that Indigenous Knowledge is an

important, yet under-utilised resource in the development process. Therefore

IK should be made a key issue on the international development agenda, which

at the same time also requires international support to strengthen

developing countries' capacity to capture, store and share indigenous

knowledge.

 

(2) raise awareness among policymakers and stakeholders with a professional

interest in development (private sector, NGOs, research and training

institutions)

 

Successful impact on the international development agenda requires a

strategy to raise awareness and to sensitise the sponsors of development

(including the donor community) and other stakeholders with a professional

interest in development, on the contribution of indigenous knowledge to

development planning and implementation. Establishing IK-information systems

and sharing information plays a crucial role in this process. The use of ICT

may accelerate the process on information sharing

 

(3) apply Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSP) in development

planning and implementation

 

IK is often closely related with survival and subsistence, which puts IK at

the basis for local-level decision making in e.g. food security, human and

animal health, education, and natural resource management. IK has the

potential to provide cost-effective, locally manageable and sustainable

problem-solving strategies for local communities, especially the poor. The

use of IK for development - if the producers are willing to share their

knowledge - should be communicated globally to further integrate IK in

development planning and implementation, and in community based and

participatory approaches for development.

 

(4) increase and support of efforts for the capturing, storing and

disseminating of IK

 

Global and local efforts are necessary to create a solid body of information

(e.g. best practices) on the contribution of IK to development, that may

feed the awareness raising strategy (see under 2). Support of local,

regional and global exchange of IK is necessary to learn from lessons, to

stimulate a sustained public debate on the role of IK in development, to

create diversity in knowledge, to guarantee the authenticity of knowledge,

and to create a variety in IK-information systems and knowledge brokers.

International cooperation and partnerships are required to promote the use

of IK in development by linking involved parties (sub-networks, thematical

and/or regional focal groups) and to facilitate interaction and exchange of

information between them.

 

CIRAN/Nuffic supports activities that capture, store and disseminate

information on IK's contribution to development by publishing and sharing

information on IK and development, by technical backstopping, and

consultancy on the establishment of IK-(information)networks

(http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran/ik.html), and by stimulating the establishment

of IK Resource Centres in developing countries

(http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran/ikdm/addresses.html). It is fortunate to observe

a growing number of global initiatives which aim at the establishment of

IK-information systems, e.g. World Bank's IK Initiative

(http://www.worldbank.org/html/afr/ik/default.htm), UNESCO-MOST programme

(http://www.unesco.org/most/bphome.htm), and ILO-INDISCO programme

(http://www.ilo.org/public/english/65entrep/coop/indisco.htm)

 

When I use term indigenous knowledge, I refer to knowledge and skills which

are generated outside the formal education system, and have the potential

for providing problem-solving strategies for local communities. I would like

to state explicitly that my concept goes beyond indigenous knowledge that is

sensitive of having a potential asset for being used and exploited by

pharmaceutical or agro-industrial multinationals. As a professional in the

development business, my first concern with IK is knowledge which is

potentially relevant and valuable from a development perspective. With this

statement I have no intention to avoid the discussion on IPR. I think the

IPR issue is extremely relevant, however the IPR discussion should be dealt

with in its proper context, and should not keep us away from the discussion

on 'free' information and knowledge, which may be useful for other

communities as well.

 

Guus von Liebenstein

CIRAN/Nuffic

The Hague, the Netherlands

tel: + 31 70 4260 321

fax:+ 31 70 4260 329

email: lieb@nuffic.nl

 

Subject: [IKD] Re: Role of the media

Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 16:20:23 -0500 (EST)

From: "Michel J. Menou" <Michel.Menou@wanadoo.fr>

Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

 

I am also following with interest the debates on this list.

 

As the discussion on the media is winding up, I note that the message I

sent at the beginning (reproduced below) was not posted, and that the issue

was hardly considered.

 

As one says when dealing with the media, No comment!

Michel Menou

 

>Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 09:36:04 +0100

>To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

>From: "Michel J. Menou" <Michel.Menou@wanadoo.fr>

>Subject: Re: [IKD] Role of the media - Introduction to Week 4

> 

>Is not it a bit surprising not to find in the list of central issues (even

if it has no pretense at exhaustivity) the concentration penomena in the

media, and between them and major industrial conglomerates, including those

in the telecoms and entertainment industries ?

>Alas, if I am not mistaken, the issue of the control of communications has

not yet been touched. Although who controls the communications controls the

battle field.

>But of course there is no battle ....

>Michel Menou

> 

 

Subject: [IKD] Re: Introduction to Week 5

Date: Fri, 5 Mar 1999 16:25:25 -0500 (EST)

From: "Angela C. de Siqueira" <acs4085@garnet.acns.fsu.edu>

Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

 

" Most Indigenous knowledge does not meet conventional patenting

requirements: ownership by a legal entity, novelty, and originality, so it

is difficult to protect under existing conventions."

 

Who  established the named "conventional patenting requirements"? who

benefits from them?  In fact all knowledge is a collective and historical

production. No one creates knowledge from nothing... The basis of all

knowledge is some other knowledge produced by generations, even if used

to neglect it.

 

Imagine if all previous knowledge was patented; that is, transformed in

private property of a few? How knowledge production, transformation and

re-criation would be limited if for instance the newtonian physics was a

property of a few? Or if all seeds and way of food production becomes

property of a few? Everyone will be dependent of these few...

 

Indigenous knowledge carries novelty and originality; what they do not have

is ownership by a legal entity, because they are seem as "humanity

knowledge"; that is for the benefit of all. It is not a private property or

a secret that one must buy; you can have your own "pharmacy" on your

backyard or in a collective plantation. However, this does not bring profits

for multinational corporations that want to sell their products, by creating

new markets; even destroying and appropriating of indigenous knowledge.

 

If you go to poor and developing countries there is plenty use of herbs.

Many of them never studied in labs, but has been proven efficient to cure by

the use of generations. Isn't this knowledge? Why to be said that something

is efficient or exists one has to measure it, count and make lab tests? This

is only the western way; but this not imply and cannot give authority to say

that any other form of ancient use is not useful, right,  valuable, or even

that it does not exist because there is no "scientific evidence", according

to western understanding.

 

This is the true way by which indigenous knowledge is being stolen and

appropriated: by denying its supposed lack of "scientific evidence".

Thus, those who created the "patents requirement", have the money and

technicians to make tests in lab proving the existence of some special

substance that indegenous people always used, without knowing or applying

a name for it, become property of a colletive knowledge!

 

However, they are only giving scientic names and classifying; not

discovering the use or the application of substances... Is this novelty and

originality?   It is useful to remember that advertisment and industries are

very used to make up some products changing its size, color, shape, etc

to sell old things as new ones....They try to deny that there was previous

generational knowledge about the effect of such  plants and that this

knowledge is a collective and generational patrimony; it does not have a

private owner and should not have. It is for public domain and well-being

of humanity.

 

There  lot of things we use to cook that are seen as home medicine, besides

fruits, plants and even some animals and minerals. The homeophatic medicine

is a good example of this use; however, it was very depreciated by most of

medicine schools. The millenar acunpunture was also denied as medicine by

western medicine... Sure there was pressure from multinational firms to ban

and forbidden these practices, and the best way was not to teach and even

deny these subjects in medical courses.

 

The best way to protect indigenous knowledge is to reinforce its importance;

not to deny it. This means that traditional knowledge should continue to be

passed from generation trough generations.

 

However, most of the "international aid" based on western way of life

generally comes to destroy all local culture, values and knowledge, bringing

new "ideas" for education system (a kind of "international" "neutral"

curriculum- that is completely distant from local reality; books, tests, tv

programs, radio, etc).

 

If one wants to write about indigenous knowledge spelling out the

"scientific principles" one can do for curiosity; for classification, to

better understand of the active principles, etc; but never to deny where the

knowledge comes from; all its ancient, traditional and generational usage;

and moreover not to make a pillage over their natural, collective and great

resources, reaping not only the knowledge but also their environment as a

private property.

 

Angela C. de Siqueira- acs4085@garnet.acns.fsu.edu

 

Subject: [IKD] indigenous knowledge frontier

Date: Sun, 7 Mar 99 13:24:15 +0800

From: "Com. Dev. & Eco" <gxcao@km.col.com.cn>

Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

 

Based on the experiences in Chinese society and rural areas, I want to make

following points regarding indigenous knowledge:

 

1) There is no clear boundary between indigenous knowledge and western

knowledge (or scientific knowledge),

 

2) Indigenous knowledge is a dynamic pool of accumulation of local knowledge

based on the local information flow with outside or within local

communities,

 

3) There is a need to readjust the conventional international patent system

if the patent is built on the indigenous knowledge.

 

1. Less clear boundary between indigenous knowledge and western knowledge

can be identified by both looking into indigenous knowledge and western

knowledge itself:

 

   In China, Chinese medicines based on natural resources and some

agriculture practices are continually adjusted with the newest scientific

findings, and these medicines and agriculture practices have become dominant

in Chinese society no matter how strong the sceintific education is.

Fengshui (one of Chinese indigenous technology) is another example for

guiding the place and oreintation of constructed buildings and houses, I see

more papers on Fengshui have been included into scientific publications, and

Same as mainland China, Societies such as Hongkong, Singapore, and Taiwan

very much appreciate Fengshui.

 

    Westen knowledge itself cannot be treated as unique even, if my reading

is correct, the conflict between Hollywood culture and Franch culture

somehow demonstrated.

 

2. If we look historically, indigenous knowledge is the product of cultural

diffusion, it become particularly true when we look it horizontally. For

example in Xishuanbanna, southern Yunnan province, local farmers cultivate

rubber and create many of sound techniques, which in our view should be

included in indigenous knowledge. Local farmers in Yunnan also create a head

coppicing technique to manage Eucalyptus for timber and leaves. ...... All

of these indigenous technologies in agriculture seem out of the scope of

patent issue.   What do the local people really want? Based on our findings

we found that local farmers are interested in the outside knowledge no

matter scientific or indigenous could be of useful for increasing their

production or benefiting their living or ....

 

3. There are reports that some of Chinese traditional medicines have been

patented in another country, then the domestic Chinese companies and

individuals learn the lesson and patent the medicines locally. Perhaps some

individuals will doubt that what about these companies to the original

owner. In fact the Chinese medicines have been relatively well documented by

ancester Chinese and inherited historically. There is still individual based

knowledge which is however not circulted, and these individuals have the

exclusive rihgt and position to patent. Same as the other indigenous

knowledge so called, much of the indigenous knowledge we know currently

reflects the fact that local people want them to widely circulate in order

to benefit from that openess. Those not circulated such as the grafting

technique, the special family medicine etc., may not be the case to be

discussed here.

 

Still there may be the case that the patent from the indigenous knowledge

owner, which cannot be compensated. And if that is often the case, then

there is a need to reform the current international patent system.

 

Cao Guangxia

 

ADDRESS: SOUTHWEST FORESTRY COLLEGE

         KUNMING 650224

         P.R. CHINA

         Tel: 86 871 3862525

         Fax: 86 871 5615879 /3862525

         Email: gxcao@km.col.com.cn

 

Subject: [IKD] RE: Introduction to Week 5

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 12:48:33 -0000

From: Lyla Mehta <L.Mehta@ids.ac.uk>

Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

To: "'ikd@jazz.worldbank.org'" <ikd@jazz.worldbank.org>

 

I am a research fellow in the Environment Group of the Institute of

Development Studies, University of Sussex.

 

I just plugged into your discussion last week so some of what I raise here

might have been discussed earlier. Apologies for any repetitions.

 

I agree with the previous contributors about the importance of IK for

development and the fact that it is an under-utilised resource in the

development process. However, I raise caution regarding the conclusion that

it should be captured and stored by and for development professionals for

the following reasons.

 

Not much of this discussion raises the dangers of divorcing IK from its

socio-cultural embeddedness. And the fact that the validity of IK is judged

according to western science and western notions of development rather than

being accepted and judged on its own terms.  Clearly, all forms of knowledge

- western and non-western/ urban and rural/ scientific and non-scientific-

are rooted in culture and practice ably demonstrated by several disciplines

such as the sociology of science/ science studies and anthropology.

 

Hence, it is rather naive to believe that IK can be extracted form its

socio-cultural setting and deposited for posterity somewhere else. IK - like

all forms of knowledge- is dynamic and constantly changing. Furthermore, who

sets the yardsticks of how it is to be incorporated into the "development

project" ? There are questions of power that must be addressed. On the one

hand, the WDR argues that IK must be recognised. On the other hand, it

promotes the idea of free trade, patenting and international property

rights, phenomena that are in very real terms often undermine the IK of

rural people and legitimse their appropriation for schemes and projects that

might not serve the interests of the poor (e.g. recent debates concerning

genetically modified crops and seeds). Issues concerning a wider political

economy might also stymie the life-worlds and occuptions of the poor and

marginalised. Hence there is a need to address the asymmetries of power that

cement the marginalisation of certain groups and their knowledge systems.

 

There appears to be a fundamental flaw in the WDR which views knowledge and

IK as a stock and commodity which can be readily transported or transferred

from place to place, evident in the rather ludicrous notion of Knowledge as

Light. This totally disconnects knowledge and IK from issues concerning

power, politics and their socio-cultural embeddedness.

 

Lyla Mehta

 

PS I am interested in writing an article on the rise of knowledge in the

Bank and the notion of the Knowledge Bank. If anybody has tips re: what I

should refer to, please let me know.

 

Dr Lyla Mehta

Research Fellow

Environment and Development

Institute of Development Studies

University of Sussex

Brighton BN1 9RE

UK

Tel: 44-1273-678736 (direct) and 606261 (w); 683046 (h)

Fax:               621202/691647

email: L.Mehta@ids.ac.uk

 

Subject: [IKD] WEEK 5 - ON RIGHTS AND WRONGS

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 10:27:11 -0500 (EST)

From: avongalis@ozemail.com (Athena Vongalis)

Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

 

Of course indigenous knowledge is important, that is not what is in dispute.

It is the value that is placed on it. The fact that indigenous knowledge can

be marketed without much resistance from the original owners is the key

issue here.  The old truism is that money talks, and without it the original

holders of knowledge have no basis to 'buy' their own knowledge. Bizarre

that knowledge held firm in communities has to be bought back.  But this

situation is nothing new. In Australia, the aboriginal people are still

trying to get legislation passed to recognise that they have ownership

of the land. You see, there were no such things as formal agreements of

ownership, therefore according to the law, their ownership did not exist.

 

Now, appropriating the language of law and bureacracy and to some degree

playing the game, (and having the money to do so) has given these

indigenous people a shot at ownership of their land and way of life

including beliefs, customs knowledge and so on.

 

It is fine to say the west does this and that, or that corporations do

this or that but this situation if anything is more prevalent now with the

resurgeance in the laissez faire capitalism of globalisation and will not

change with fine words nor sentiments.  I say money is the answer. Give the

local populations an open cheque book and let them sort it out. Aid

agencies,

bureaucracies, education and so on are fine but money (without strings)is

better.

 

Athena Vongalis

avongalis@ozemail.com

 

Subject: [IKD] World Bank control

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 10:36:36 -0500 (EST)

From: "C.J. Patel" <cjpatel@MailAndNews.com>

Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

 

(NOTE FROM THE MODERATORS: We debated whether to post this message by C.J.

Patel.  Frankly, we felt that it was based on a serious misunderstanding

on the substance and motivation of this list, and would just serve to

distract what we felt was an interesting, lively and diverse discussion.

However, in the interest of transparency, we decided to post it anyway.

The two moderating organizations, Panos and the World Bank, will each

post a reply.)

 

This listserve claims to discuss the questions of information and knowledge

for development, but the real question is ignored: why is it that the World

Bank tries to control every channel of communication about development? Why

does it ignore criticms from developing countries like India, which can be

heard on other outstanding Internet discussions, but as soon as a rich,

white

organization like Panos criticises them, they jump right up and set up a

special listserve to appease them. It is disgusting.

 

I've been reading the messages of this listserve for several weeks now and

all

I see are a lot of messages that are abstract discussions and second-hand

information from a bunch of World Bank bureaucrats and consultants paid by

the

World Bank. Have these people spent ten years living and trying to survive

in

a village? No, but they presume to tell others what is knowledge and how

they

should communicate. This is an insult to all of us who have been struggling

so

hard against "big business as usual" development paid by places like the

World

Bank. But I'm sure that the World Bank moderators will not dare to publish

this message.

 

C.J. Patel

cjpatel@MailAndNews.com

 

Subject: [IKD] Re: Response to CJ Patel

Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1999 10:44:05 -0500 (EST)

From: panos@gn.apc.org (James Deane)

Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org

 

In response to C.J. Patel's message:

 

        Why does the World Bank ignore criticms from developing countries

        like India, which can be heard on other outstanding Internet

        discussions, but as soon as a rich, white organization like Panos

        criticises them, they jump right up and set up a special listserve

        to appease them. It is disgusting.

 

Not too sure what constitutes a "rich white organisation" but anyway, three

points are worth making clear.  Panos agreed to accept an invitation from

the

World Bank having levelled a great deal of criticism (some of the most

incisive of which has derived from the directors of our regional offices in

Southern Africa, Eastern Africa and South Asia) at the World Development

Report and at the rationale behind the Bank's strategy of becoming a

"knowledge bank".  As an organisation specifically dedicated to promoting

informed public debate, and having received a guarantee from the Bank that,

in the event of serious disputes about which messages would and would not

be posted, then the Bank would defer to Panos, we welcomed the opportunity

to engage in a such a debate.

 

Second, just to be clear, Panos has not received a penny, cent or paisa from

the World Bank to comoderate this dialogue.

 

Third, Panos has over the last three years been engaged in a process of

radical decantralisation of the authority of the organisation to regional

offices in Kathmandu, Lusaka and Addis Ababa.  From the beginning of this

process, these offices have been designed to be independent organisations

in their own right, accountable to boards drawn from their regions, not to

our office in London. They are staffed and directed by nationals from the

regions concerned.  In the words of one of our regional directors, I'd say

we

were more mongrel than anything - and proud of it.

 

In relation to the GKD list - I think the GKD list is an excellent one

(largely funded, incidentally by the World Bank).  Knowledge is a big issue

- we felt that IKD, as a more structured, time limited discussion was a

useful complement to it.  It's up to others to decide if we were right, but

my belief is that we were.

 

        I've been reading the messages of this listserve for several weeks

        now and all I see are a lot of messages that are abstract

discussions

        and second-hand information from a bunch of World Bank bureaucrats

        and consultants paid by the World Bank.

 

As the majority of messages have been more critical of the Bank's stance

than not, it seems a little strange to argue that the very intelligent and

diverse contributions we've had have come from World Bank bureacrats. C.J.

Patel has not posted any messages before now - s/he could have done so.

Personally, I've been a little disappointed that more contributions have

not come from more World Bank staff since this would have stimulated the

dialogue more effectively.

 

        Have these people spent ten years living and trying to survive in

        a village? No, but they presume to tell others what is knowledge and

        how they should communicate.

 

Much of the thrust of the discussion has been to question who should and

should not define knowledge, with much of it agreeing that it is up to those

who need it to define what does and does not constitute "knowledge".  This

was one of the central tenets of the original Panos critique of the World

Development Report.

 

Unless there is substantial disagreement from participants to the list, I'd

suggest that further discussion of this issue takes place off line.

 

James Deane

Director, Programmes

Panos Institute

9 White Lion St

London N1 9PD, UK

 

Tel: +44 171 278 1111

Fax: +44 171 278 0345

e-mail: jamesd@panoslondon.org.uk

or      panos@gn.apc.org

Web site: http://oneworld.org/panos

No comments:

Post a Comment

Recent Posts

Traditional healing

Traditional healing

Medicinal trees

Medicinal trees

grain.org - english

Biodiversity Policy & Practice - Daily RSS Feed

Rainforest Portal RSS News Feed

What's New on the Biosafety Protocol

Rainforest Portal RSS News Feed