Subject: [IKD] Indigenous knowledge and intellectual property rights
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 00:27:10 +0300
From: Rob Sinclair <rsinclair@iconnect.co.ke>
To: erukangira@iconnect.co.ke
>Return-path: <owner-ikd@jazz.worldbank.org>
>Envelope-to: rsinclair@iconnect.co.ke
>Delivery-date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 03:11:43 +0300
>X-Authentication-Warning: jazz.worldbank.org: majordom set sender to
owner-wdr1998@jazz.worldbank.org using -f
>From: "Paul Mundy" <paulmundy@netcologne.de>
>To: <ikd@jazz.worldbank.org>
>Subject: [IKD] Indigenous knowledge and intellectual property rights
>Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 11:15:46 +0100
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3
>Sender: owner-wdr1998@jazz.worldbank.org
>Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
>
>Most of the discussion on intellectual property rights concentrates on
>drugs, since they are among the few potential products of indigenous
>knowledge that are patentable. Advocates of indigenous knowledge (myself
>included) often seem to assume that rainforests, and indigenous healers'
>heads, are brim-full of plants containing wonderful chemicals that can cure
>all kinds of diseases. Unfortunately, this may not be the case.
>
>According to a story in the 20 February issue of 'The Economist'
>(http://www.economist.com), Shaman Pharmaceuticals Inc collaborated with
>local healers to identify useful plants. But Shaman, and various other
>ethnobotanical organisations, have failed to find many useful bioactive
>compounds in the samples they collected. Plus, as Mark Gourley (9 Mar)
>pointed out, modern biochemistry has come up with ways to screen hundreds
of
>thousands of plant samples, without having to rely on the healers and their
>knowledge. (See http://www.shaman.com/press_releases/february11999.html for
>Shaman's spin on this).
>
>All this suggests that the intellectual property rights of those healers
may
>not be worth very much (in a commercial sense), even if they were to be
>respected.
>
>Still, there must be a mechanism to protect those rights, in the few cases
>where local knowledge does result in a patentable, profitable drug or
>chemical, especially since the profits from those few successes may be very
>large.
>
>Arguments about intellectual property rights tend to focus on multinational
>drug and agrochemical companies. But there may also be a problem with local
>industries. India, for example, has a lively industry producing Ayurvedic
>and other medicines, many based on local knowledge. I, for one, regard this
>as good: it provides valuable products and services, and generates income
>and employment. But has the industry considered the local sources of its
>technology, and sought ways of remunerating them? And do local laws require
>it to do so?
>
>Most research on drugs goes to solving disease problems in the developed
>world, since that's where the profits are to be made. Diseases common in
the
>developing world tend to be neglected. Yet it's quite possible that the
>forests (and local people's heads) contain the remedies for these neglected
>diseases. It would be nice if a new property-rights regime would (a)
provide
>incentives for research on diseases in the developing world, and at the
same
>time (b) remunerate local people for the indigenous technologies they have
>developed. But perhaps that is too much to ask?
>
>Paul Mundy
>development communication specialist
>paulmundy@netcologne.de
>http://www.netcologne.de/~nc-mundypa
>tel +49-2202-932 921, fax +49-2202-932 922
>
>
>
>
Subject: [IKD] Shaman Response on The Economist Article
Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 00:47:00 +0300
From: Rob Sinclair <rsinclair@iconnect.co.ke>
To: erukangira@iconnect.co.ke
>Return-path: <owner-ikd@jazz.worldbank.org>
>Envelope-to: rsinclair@iconnect.co.ke
>Delivery-date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 05:10:47 +0300
>X-Authentication-Warning: jazz.worldbank.org: majordom set sender to
owner-wdr1998@jazz.worldbank.org using -f
>From: CI-PERU@CONSERVATION.ORG
>Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 08:40 -0800 (PST)
>Subject: [IKD] Shaman Response on The Economist Article
>To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
>Sender: owner-wdr1998@jazz.worldbank.org
>Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
>
>Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 02:17 -0800 (PST)
>From: amazoncoal@igc.org
>Subject: Shaman Response on The Economist Article
>To: amazoncoal@igc.org
>MIME-version: 1.0
>MIME-version: 1.0
>Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN
>
> Here this may be interesting to know if you haven't read about it yet.
>
> This is Elda Silva, a junior community developer from Conservation
> International-Peru.
>
>
>______________________________ Forward Header
__________________________________
>Subject: Shaman Response on The Economist Article
>Author: amazoncoal@igc.org at cgnet
>Date: 10/3/99 2:17 AM
>
>
>South San Francisco, 3/9/99
>
>
>Dear Amazon Coalition,
>
>In regards to the article on The Economist (issue of February 20-26) about
>Shaman Pharmaceuticals, that your coordinating office decided to pass on,
we
>would like to communicate the following.
>
>First of all, ethnobotany as a science has not ended, as suggested in the
>article. Nor has the vital significance of traditional knowledge on the
use
>of medicinal plants been diminished in any way. Ethnobotany continues to
>evolve as a fundamental science into the next millennium and traditional
>knowledge will never loose its importance, even if a certain kind of
"modern
>technology" doesn't acknowledge it.
>
>It is disappointing to see how disrespectful The Economist is towards
>traditional peoples knowledge, such as in the sarcastic choice of the
picture
>of two African tribal women with a caption that says "The doctors will
>see you now." It clearly depicts the type of colonial attitude that is
>surprisingly still prevalent in certain institutions, such as The
Economist.
>
>The Economist's reference to the value of rainforests is also
reductionist,
>particularly in the following statement: "The end of Shaman's adventure
does
>not, however, mean that the rainforests have lost their allure completely.
>Merck, for example, has a long standing arrangement with Costa Rica to
>prospect for drugs in that country's forests." It seems that The
>Economist only values rainforests as a potential source of pharmaceutical
>products. The "allure" (as they say) of the rainforests, however, is much
>greater, for their role in regulating global climate, contributing to
>fresh water supply, sheltering and sustaining indigenous peoples and their
>unique cultures, and, most importantly, for its spiritual value that so
>few recognize and respect. It is very sad that certain institutions
>still have such a myopic view of the world.
>
>In comparing the automated mass-screening process, conventionally used by
the
>pharmaceutical industry, with Shaman's ethnobotanical research and drug
>development process, The Economist fails to inform that so many important
>chemical compounds, such as morphine and quinine, used in pharmaceutical
>products were originally discovered based on their use by indigenous
cultures.
>
>Nowadays, if any pharmaceutical company chooses to work with
>natural compounds based on the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples,
>they should abide by Article 8 J of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
>
>Although The Economist indicates that Shaman Pharmaceuticals decided not to
>develop Provir at this point after the meeting with the FDA, it failed to
>reveal that the FDA while suggesting further clinical studies,
>acknowledged no particular safety issues with SP-303 Provir and that the
>drug appeared to work.
>
>Shaman's SP-303 Provir concluded its pivotal Phase III clinical studies
with
>favorable results announced on December 22, 1998. Has ethnobotany really
>ended as an approach to drug development, or is the extremely difficult and
>expensive drug development process in the United States the real issue?
>
>Another very important fact, barely mentioned in The Economist, is that
Shaman
>Pharmaceuticals created a 100% wholly-owned subsidiary on December 10th,
1998,
>to develop and market botanicals as dietary supplements. Shaman Botanicals
>will continue to work with traditional healers throughout the world to
>discover, and develop novel dietary supplements by identifying and
>standardizing key compounds from tropical plants with a history of
>medicinal use. We believe that through Shaman Botanicals and its
>harvesting of medicinal plants, the income generating opportunities for
>forest communities and the conservation of biocultural diversity can be
>potentially greater than before.
>
>Shaman Botanicals will use the same approach as Shaman Pharmaceuticals in
>terms of ecological sustainability and the return of benefits to the
>cultural groups it works with through the Healing Forest Conservancy.
>Shaman's mechanism for the return of benefits to the cultural groups it
>works with has been selected by the Convention on Biological Diversity's
>(CBD) executive office as a good example of companies that are
>attempting to implement the mandates of the CBD.
>
>Shaman never started any adventure as put by The Economist. Shaman
created an
>unique research methodology for drug development based on the science of
>ethnobotany with real incentives for the conservation of biocultural
>diversity, which will now be also used for the development of dietary
>supplements. Therefore, we practice a more advanced form of modern
technology,
>one that praises all the aspects of sustainability, including economic,
>environmental, social and cultural.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Beto Borges
>Manager of Sustainable Harvesting
>Ethnobotany and Conservation
>Shaman Pharmaceuticals, INC.
>
>
>
>
Subject: Shaman discussion
Date: Sat, 03 Apr 1999 00:22:41 +0300
From: Rob Sinclair <rsinclair@iconnect.co.ke>
To: erukangira@iconnect.co.ke
>Return-path: <owner-ikd@jazz.worldbank.org>
>Envelope-to: rsinclair@iconnect.co.ke
>Delivery-date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 05:07:44 +0300
>X-Authentication-Warning: jazz.worldbank.org: majordom set sender to
owner-wdr1998@jazz.worldbank.org using -f
>From: Michel.Menou@wanadoo.fr
>Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 14:49:13 +0100 (MET)
>Sender: owner-wdr1998@jazz.worldbank.org
>Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
>
>Identité Message:<4.0.1.19990311125037.00dfa1e0@pop.wanadoo.fr>
>Identité Message:<4.0.1.19990311125037.00dfa1e0@pop.wanadoo.fr>
>X-Sender: Michel.Menou@pop.wanadoo.fr
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0.1
>Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 14:44:34 +0100
>To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
>From: "Michel J. Menou" <Michel.Menou@wanadoo.fr>
>Subject: Re: [IKD] Indigenous knowledge and intellectual property rights
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>At 11:15 09/03/99 +0100, Paul Mundy wrote:
>> snip
>>According to a story in the 20 February issue of 'The Economist'
>>(http://www.economist.com), Shaman Pharmaceuticals Inc collaborated with
>>local healers to identify useful plants. But Shaman, and various other
>>ethnobotanical organisations, have failed to find many useful bioactive
>>compounds in the samples they collected. Plus, as Mark Gourley (9 Mar)
>>pointed out, modern biochemistry has come up with ways to screen hundreds
of
>>thousands of plant samples, without having to rely on the healers and
their
>>knowledge. (See http://www.shaman.com/press_releases/february11999.html
for
>>Shaman's spin on this).
>>
>>All this suggests that the intellectual property rights of those healers
may
>>not be worth very much (in a commercial sense), even if they were to be
>>respected.
>
>R: It would be surprising that:
>a) industrial enterprises and traditional healers would have the same sense
>and practice of active principles;
>b) industrial enterprises recognize their debt to unorganized healers;
>c) ethnobotanists would ever find plants with therapeutic properties
>without being briefed by traditional healers; thus who is the "inventor" or
>discoverer, and who has rights?
>
>On the other hand the issue is no longer restricted to the healers'
>knowledge but extends to the possibility for companies to patent the hard
>properties of nature, based on some quite trivial extraction or genetic
>transformation they have operated upon them.
>
>Michel Menou
>michel.menou@wanadoo.fr
>
>
Subject: [IKD] Indigenous Knowledge and Intellectual Property
Date: Sun, 04 Apr 1999 00:09:34 +0300
From: Rob Sinclair <rsinclair@iconnect.co.ke>
To: erukangira@iconnect.co.ke
>Return-path: <owner-ikd@jazz.worldbank.org>
>Envelope-to: rsinclair@iconnect.co.ke
>Delivery-date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 03:43:15 +0300
>X-Authentication-Warning: jazz.worldbank.org: majordom set sender to
owner-wdr1998@jazz.worldbank.org using -f
>From: wgtrr.ocees@mansfield.oxford.ac.uk
>Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 05:44:06 +0000 (GMT)
>To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
>Subject: [IKD] Indigenous Knowledge and Intellectual Property
>Sender: owner-wdr1998@jazz.worldbank.org
>Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
>
>My name is Graham Dutfield and I'm currently a PhD student at Oxford
>University. I've been doing IPR and genetic resource related research for
>a number of years and would like to share the following thoughts with
>other list members.
>
> It is frequently assumed that ownership and property rights,
>including intellectual property rights, are alien concepts in indigenous
>and traditional societies. Such communities and peoples, it is said, are
>characterised by a strong sharing ethos with respect to biological
>resources and biodiversity-related knowledge. In fact, the anthropological
>literature reveals that such concepts - or at least close equivalents to
>them - may well be no less common than the sharing ethos. Proprietary
>systems do exist in many traditional societies, but it would be erroneous
>to assume that there is a generic system of collective intellectual rights
>which is common to them all. Being locally specific, these systems display
>a far greater diversity than those that are available to protect the
>valuable intangibles of industrial firms. (Patents and copyrights are by
>comparison blunt, rather clumsy instruments.) This suggests that it may
>not be correct to suppose that patents, copyrights, trade secrets and
>trademarks are entirely alien concepts to native peoples and traditional
>rural communities.
>
>Even so, it is quite another matter to suggest that
>IPRs, particularly patents, are suitable mechanisms to protect traditional
>knowledge. A great deal of traditional knowledge cannot be traced to a
>specific community or geographical area. Thus, no identifiable group of
>people may exist in which rights to such knowledge can be vested. In those
>cases where the sources of knowledge can be attributed to single
>individuals or communities, or to kinship or gender-based groups, there
>are practical obstacles which make patenting unfeasible. While TEK of this
>kind may be patentable in theory, it is most unlikely that the potential
>applicants could bear the cost of acquiring and then defending a patent.
>Tremendous controversy has arisen because while the patent system is to
>all intents and purposes unavailable for indigenous communities to use,
>there have been numerous cases of inventions derived from TEK being
>patented. This is why a lot of indigenous peoples' representatives condemn
>the patent system as being predatory. Are they right to think so? On
>balance I think they have a very good point.
>
>But I do worry that some of those (usually non-indigenous) people
>who condemn the corporate 'biopirates' weaken their position by failing to
>build their case on the existence of traditional proprietary systems,
>while assuming that all TEK is communally shared and traceable to no
>entity more specific than the (usually anonymous) 'local community' or
>'Third World farmers'. In effect, they seem to be saying that traditional
>knowledge is, by its very nature, a part of the public domain. This surely
>is just what the pharmaceutical and seed companies want to hear. If
>traditional knowledge is not secret and is not even considered by the
>holders themselves to be anybody's legal property, then it is reasonable
>to assume that nobody's rights are being infringed by publishing this
>knowledge or commercially exploiting it. These advocates of indigenous
>rights are then forced to resort to moral arguments to claim that
>traditional knowledge should enjoy a privileged legal status vis--vis
>other public domain knowledge originating from non-traditional sources
>such as public or private sector research programmes. This position is
>quite difficult to sustain.
>
>On the contrary, I would argue in favour of indigenous peoples' rights on
>three grounds, that: (1) Not all TEK is in the public domain; (2)
>Unconsented placement of knowledge into the public domain does
>not in itself extinguish the legitimate entitlements of the holders and
>may in fact violate them--Unless they have agreed to share such knowledge
>and are fully aware of the legal implications of doing so, documenting
>and/or disseminating their knowledge is surely morally wrong; and (3) TEK
>holders should be compensated for the wider benefits of doing so. In other
>words, with respect to collective traditional knowledge that has been in
>the public domain for so long that no legitimate rights claimants exist,
>it is still possible to argue that indigenous peoples should be
>compensated as an incentive for maintaining their biodiversity-friendly
>knowledge and resource management systems. This need not be justified on
>moral grounds at all, since the industrial users of plant genetic
>resources would benefit as would the biosphere and humankind. How to do
>this in the practical sense is of course very difficult.
>
>As I understand it, indigenous peoples see Western law as an
>imposition which seems to cancel out their own custom based regulations.
>This is reasonable. After all, if indigenous peoples in WTO member states
>are required to accept the existence of patents that they are economically
>prevented from availing themselves of, why shouldn't their own
>knowledge-related regimes be respected by others? It is perhaps this
>point, that one type of IPR system is being universalised and prioritised
>to the exclusion, even the negation, of all others, that causes the most
>legitimate disquiet among those who are unable to see how they themselves
>can benefit from this system. Policy makers schooled in Western legal
>systems are apt to suppose that the only IPRs that exist are the ones
>referred to in TRIPS and the WIPO-administered conventions. On the
>contrary, traditional societies often have very complex custom-based IPR
>systems. Just as members of these societies can benefit from learning
>about the western IPR tradition, it's about time that lawyers, policy
>makers and many of those who claim authority to speak on behalf of
>indigenous peoples and local communities, also learnt about how
>traditional communities generate, use, manage and control their own
>knowledge.
>
>Graham Dutfield
>wgtrr.oceed@mansfield.oxford.ac.uk
>
>
Subject: [IKD] Re: Strategic website (Information overload)
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 07:49:43 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alice Watson <awatson@club-internet.fr>
Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
Organization: Home
To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
In response to Chris Watkins, another task to be added to the task list
would be, to set up tailor-made pages of useful Web resources,
depending on what part of the world one is in, and which language(s)
one is working with.
Here are a few linguistic (usually Euro-centric) resource links, on-line
dictionaries and glossaries:
http://www.issco.unige.ch/resources/Linguistics/welcome.html
http://www.lib.ic.ac.uk/rfires
http://www.abacom.com/innomagi/online/referenc/dictiona.htm
http://www.encyberpedia.com/glossary.htm
http://www.inform.umd.edu:8080/LibInfo/Reference_Room/Dictionaries/
http://www.unilat.org/dtil/etis/fr/dic-int.htm
http://www.admin.ch/ch/f/bk/sp/dicos/dicos.html
http://www.univ-pau.fr/~oubrik/leaterm.html
http://www.riofil.org/dictionnaire.htm
Translation software:
http://worldlanguage.com/ (translation software, but again, not very
good)
http://www.nwgraphics.com/transoft.htm (commercial software)
I like the idea of immediate, 'integrated' links to explanations so that
they are readily visible and easy to use, although of course one has to
take account of readers of printed copy, which would have to include
references to footnotes or annexes.
Perhaps, on the basis of this sort of 'mark-up' approach, a system could
be devised which served two purposes: for human readers, to indicate and
assist with difficult expressions and vocabulary, and for translation
programs, to signal idiomatic expressions and specialised terminology
which can be found by looking up an indicated source; this implies, of
course, that new norms for text preparation would have to be
implemented, in tandem with translation program development.
Solving these issues will no doubt imply a lot of extra work as Chris
says, but it might be worth trying.
Alice Watson
awatson@club-internet.fr
Subject: [IKD] Re: ICTs and Knowledge
Date: Mon, 5 Apr 1999 07:52:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: athena.vongalis@general.monash.edu.au (Athena Vongalis)
Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
So much talk about the media and the power of the media to control
information. I am stunned by the silence over the last week or so.
Surely this is the time to speak out about about media control and
monopolies, the role of language to create a reality, the sources of
information that constitute and describe 'reality'. In all this
information, how do we know what is real and true. While we expect
others, in less fortunate positions to 'trust us', how can this be
so when I don't trust us. It's a tangled web indeed.
Athena Vongalis
athena.vongalis@general.monash.edu.au
Subject: [IKD] Indigenous Knowledge -- some thoughts on the discussion
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 00:51:42 +0300
From: Rob Sinclair <rsinclair@iconnect.co.ke>
To: erukangira@iconnect.co.ke
>Return-path: <owner-ikd@jazz.worldbank.org>
>Envelope-to: rsinclair@iconnect.co.ke
>Delivery-date: Wed, 17 Mar 1999 03:18:43 +0300
>X-Authentication-Warning: jazz.worldbank.org: majordom set sender to
owner-wdr1998@jazz.worldbank.org using -f
>From: Rwoytek@worldbank.org
>Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 20:08:34 -0500
>Subject: [IKD] Indigenous Knowledge -- some thoughts on the discussion
>To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
>Content-disposition: inline
>X-Lotus-FromDomain: WORLDBANK
>X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by jazz.worldbank.org
id UAA14891
>Sender: owner-wdr1998@jazz.worldbank.org
>Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
>
>
>As the very interesting and lively discussion evolved over the last ten
days,
>the following important messages emerge:
>
>1. Indigenous Knowledge is not only an issue of technical practices,
>processes and products but also about social organizations and institutions
>
>2. The importance of Indigenous Knowledge needs further re-enforcement
>
>3. Addressing intellectual property rights for indigenous knowledge is
not
>only about remuneration
>
>4. Indigenous intellectual property rights systems should be considered
when
>designing international standards of ethics or rights on IK.
>
>5. Capturing, sharing, and dissemination of IK is not only a legal issue
>but a question of empowerment
>
>A number of interesting examples were reported how IK and practices
affected
>the life of communities - and how international or government activities
>affect local knowledge or its bearers.
>
>Other participants discussed the paradigms of development cooperation,
>globalization, the role of media or other, wider aspects that have a
bearing
>beyond this weeks discussion, rather within the framework of this list's
>overall context.
>
>The following is a comment to these five messages within the context of the
>introductory message for week 5, that IK is an underutilized resource in
>the development process, and that IK should be shared across communities.
>
>Knowledge to be appreciated, to develop, to adapt and to evolve requires
>some form of exchange and dissemination. If a community learns some IK
>practices from another community and adapts them to their requirements,
>value is added on both, the receiving as well as the providing sides - as
>long as provider and recipient control the process. This ideal situation
>rarely exists. (Incidentally, I learned of a very exciting example of a
>cross-cultural exchange last year in Zimbabwe: a traditional healer had
>traveled to China to learn Acupuncture. He had done so on his own account
>- no donor, no NGO involved - had learned the practice, excelled in the
>exams and incorporated it into his practices.)
>
>This is where development agents or the private sector come in and play a
>role - usually according to their own rules. As we have learned from the
>Shaman Inc. example, briefly discussed here last week, alternatives exist
>that serve both interests.
>
>The development community can play a role of leveling the field, too:
>
>--Raising awareness among the development practitioners and decision makers
>about value and importance of IK
>
>--Provide information of relevant practices
>
>--Establish platforms and opportunities of exchange and build partnerships
>
>--Support local communities to protect, or share their knowledge according
to
>their requirements
>
>--Support an international process that addresses the IPR issue of IK in
such
>a way that the exchange of knowledge is fostered without compromising the
>rights of the local communities
>
>As the list's focus moves on to other issues, I would like to invite list
>members to stay in touch with the "Indigenous Knowledge for Development"
>Initiative of the World Bank. You are also invited to share those
experiences
>where IK has played an important role in a development project or you may
want
>to consider contributing to the referral database that you find under:
>
>http://www.worldbank.org/html/afr/ik/access.htm
>
>(Those of you, not having access to the World Wide Web, please drop a line
and
>we'll send you a respective e-mail or even a hard copy of our report.
Please,
>also note that some of the material is also available in French.)
>
>
>Reinhard Woytek
>The World Bank
>Practice Manager Indigenous Knowledge for Development Initiative
>1818, H Street NW
>Washington D.C. 20433
>USA
>Tel: 1-202-473 1641
>Fax: 1-202-477 2977
>
>URL: http://www.worldbank.org/html/afr/ik/
>Email: rwoytek@worldbank.org
>
>
Subject: [IKD] Introduction to Week 8
Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 18:40:00 -0400
From: Cdahlman@worldbank.org
Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
To: IKD@jazz.worldbank.org
CC: Jamed@panoslondon.org.uk
Introduction to Week 8: Implications for International Institutions
As announced at the outset of this discussion, the topic reserved for
the
final week is the role of international institutions in using knowledge for
development. During the discussion several participants made the point that
it
was necessary to define what was meant by development in order to
meaningfully
discuss knowledge and information for development. We promised that this
also
would be taken up during this final week. As that can be a very broad topic
in
its own right I propose that without unnecessarily constraining the
discussion
of development we give special emphasis to the role of international
institutions in development, however it is defined.
Based on the lively discussion we have had over the past eight weeks I
am
certain we will have a wide range of critical views including those that may
argue that development, like knowledge, is something that has to be self
determined by communities and developing countries themselves, and that
therefore international institutions may have a very limited role, if any.
Others may also argue that international institutions could contribute more
to
development if they were to approach the challenge quite differently. All
of
these views will be entertained, but the discussion will be most useful if
it
can be grounded in the reality of the world in which international
institutions
operate. These constraints are different for different kinds of
institutions
but typically include the stakeholders interests, the source of funding,
limited
financial and human resources, and imperfect information and knowledge,
including biases, and other limitations. This discussion therefore will be
more
productive to the extent that some of these constraints are considered
explicity
and there are concrete proposals as to how those constraints can be
addressed.
I also propose that the discussion consider the relative importance of
financial resources that may be contributed by international institutions as
opposed to policy advice, information, or knowledge transfer. Finally, I
propose that the discussion consider how international institutions can
improve
their effectiveness in helping to create knowledge that is relevant to
developing countries, how they can help to collect and disseminate relevant
knowledge, and perhaps most importantly, how they can help to create local
capacity in developing countries to create, access, acquire, adapt,
disseminate
and use knowledge for their economic and social development.
Carl Dahlman
World Bank
cdahlman@worldbank.org
No comments:
Post a Comment