TRADITIONAL
KNOWLEDGE AND COMMUNITY RIGHTS PROTECTION AS AN INTEGRATED ELEMENT OF
STRATEGIES FOR
LONG TERM DRYLAND RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
Paper
prepared for:
Workshop
1: Sustainable use of Dryland Ecosystems
Eastern
and Southern Africa Regional Biodiversity Forum:
“Using Biodiversity to Strengthen Livelihoods”
21st
– 23rd February, 2000.
Mombasa,
Kenya.
Robert J. L. Lettington
Deputy Director General, Tika-Tikwe BioResources Trust (TBT)
P/Box
80322; Gaborone; Botswana.
CONTENTS
PART 1: WHAT, WHERE, WHO AND WHY? 3
1.1
Introduction 3
1.2
What – an outline 3
1.3
Where – a regional melting pot 5
1.3.1
Introduction 5
1.3.2
Anthropological Background 5
1.3.3
Ecosystem Diversity 6
1.3.4
International Border 7
1.4
Who – the intended research subjects and
beneficiaries 7
1.5
Why – the project hypothesis 8
PART 2: THE
DRYLANDS PERSPECTIVE 10
2.1 Introduction. Environmental Stress, Social Stress
and Social Collapse 10
2.2 Ecology 11
2.3 Resource poor equals
information rich 12
2.4 Information as an asset 12
PART 3: CONCLUSION 15
ANNEX: OVERHEADS 17
PART
1: WHAT, WHERE, WHO AND WHY?
1.1
Introduction
1.2
What – an outline.
1.3
Where – a regional melting pot.
1.4
Who – the intended research subjects and
beneficiaries.
1.5
Why – the project hypothesis.
1.1 Introduction
The project has so far been developed
under the title of “Traditional Knowledge and Community Rights Protection in
Botswana and Namibia: A Project for the Development of Social and Legal
Solutions for Marginalized Communities”. A different title has been adopted for
use here as this paper intends to focus on one particular element of the
project, what is seen as one of the potential impacts. The project is still in
its infancy, mostly because the final word on its funding is yet to be said. It
was hoped that this would have been settled late last year and thus we could
have brought substantive field data to this conference but unfortunately we are
still restricted to laying out the intellectual parameters and other
preparatory work. This first section provides an overview of the project as a
whole looking at the reasons for its development and its principal
characteristics. This is included here, as it is believed that the broader
picture will provide greater insight into the specific elements discussed in
part 2.
1.2
What – an outline
The project will examine the nature of traditional
knowledge, initially in Botswana and Namibia, and traditional community
attitudes towards it. This would be approached through a cross-section of
cultures and situations, such as rural and urban and agriculturalist and
pastoralist. Particular attention would be paid to who (e.g. is it community
wide, a specific group or a specific individual) generally holds a particular
type of knowledge (e.g. agricultural, medicinal or cultural) within a community
and what, if any, interactions occur with neighbouring communities regarding
such knowledge. A wide range of communities and locations is needed for the
project so that the degree to which the same knowledge is held by a variety of
communities can be identified.
An open-minded manner
will be adopted so that all possible avenues are explored. These will include
the adaptation of existing intellectual property rights frameworks, the use of
other existing frameworks such as that of cultural property or artists' moral
rights, the use of frameworks that may already be in use by communities and the
development of entirely new frameworks based upon principles held by
communities. Within this open approach the options of property based individual
or community rights and systems of non-alienable commons will be given equal
consideration. Wherever possible local communities will be directly involved in
the project in a fully participatory manner. Initially this will involve
explaining what the project intends to achieve and why but will progress to
community involvement in the identification of avenues to pursue and the
assessment of results. The belief here is that if any system is to be truly
effective in the long run the communities it is designed to protect must be
able to understand and make use of it without significant input from those
outside the community.
However, a
strong element in the formulation of this project has been the belief that
current efforts towards the development of regimes for the protection of
traditional knowledge are largely based upon the adaptation of existing
mechanisms and systems for intellectual property protection. We believe that
this approach is the reason for the failure to develop and implement realistic
legal options. Traditional knowledge does not have the same nature, and is not
held in the same manner, as the forms of knowledge currently protected by
intellectual property rights so why should one expect an adaptation of the
existing system to provide an effective solution to the problem? Thus the aim
of this project will be to develop a unique solution to a unique problem, while
also providing signposts to other stakeholders involved in similar activities
around the globe.
The project hypothesis currently
envisages dealing with two basic forms of knowledge, cultural and technical,
that subdivide into further categories. In the cultural area would be things
such as music, dances, artwork, oral history and/or literature. In the
technical are things such as agriculture, nutrition, medicine, construction,
ecology, geology and so on. There are of course “crossover” skills such as
basket weaving[1],
in Botswana best known by the Hambukushu but practiced by several other groups,
which clearly have both significant technical and cultural roles. This issue of
crossover skills or knowledge brings one to the general qualification regarding
the categorisation of traditional knowledge. One should be careful with these
basic distinctions as they are frequently extremely blurred in the eyes of a
traditional community. This tends to be an even stronger element the more
traditional a community is. For instance, however traditional a community may
seem, if it has broadly adopted Christianity or Islam then it has taken on
board a value system that is at heart anthropocentric and individualistic. Such
a value system, particularly given time, inevitably breaks down the perceived
spiritual links of innovation by reinforcing that they are the creation of man,
or at least of God’s hand working through man. Given all this it might seem a
completely false idea to attempt to categorize traditional knowledge at all.
This is only considered on the basis that when attempting to define rights and
protections it may be useful to consider a series of options, much as the
existing intellectual property system does, that are more specifically tailored
to particular characteristics and needs.
A second point, which must be
clarified at the start, regards the current debate over what exactly is
“traditional”? The normal partner of traditional in this context is indigenous
and this is specifically avoided here on the basis that the project does not
want to enter into this debate at all. The knowledge and innovations to be
studied are to be those of any community in the target area that are not suited
to protection by the orthodox intellectual property system. Principally this
means those that are not eligible for protection by the orthodox system but it
is expected that consideration will be made for looking at why innovations that
could be brought within the orthodox system are not. In general this follows
the line of thinking that anything coming from an area is indigenous to it
regardless of the background of the innovator. One reason for adopting this
approach is that in defining indigenous and / or traditional reference is often
made to ties to a geographical location, something that the following section
shows to be virtually impossible for all but the Basarwa in the proposed area
of study. Another is that reference is also often made to self-identification
as indigenous or traditional peoples. It is felt that this can be highly
subjective and, in instances where it is required that this be recognized by an
authority of some sort, open to abuse. Overall it is felt that the people that
should really be targeted by this work are marginalized peoples, those who have
been unable to seek protection from existing systems, regardless of their
backgrounds. The innovations to be protected should be any that are developed
in an informal, or traditional context – protecting only traditional
innovations would encourage the ossification of society.
1.3
Where – a regional
melting pot
1.3.1
Introduction
1.3.2
Anthropological Background
1.3.3
Ecosystem Diversity
1.3.4
International Border
1.3.1 Introduction
Several characteristics were looked
for when identifying a suitable location for the project. Chief among these
were diverse ethnic groups and cultural traditions, an international border and
a range of ecosystems. These were considered the most valuable elements, as
what was sought was diversity. A subsidiary element to these three was the
ideal of an international border that bisected ethnic and cultural groups. The
reasoning behind this is that since the project focuses on how traditional
knowledge is managed it is vital to pick a setting in which it is most likely
to be exchanged and generally disseminated. This will allow research to examine
how knowledge is managed within a community but more importantly to examine how
groups that regard themselves as distinct treat their knowledge in relation to
neighbouring distinct groups. The international frontier element adds the
possibility of whether modern political developments significantly affect
traditional systems in this instance. The region of North Western Botswana and
Northern Namibia was selected as meeting all of these criteria.
1.3.2 Anthropological Background
The ethnic make up of the region is
quite diverse with all major traditional forms of society represented in a
relatively small geographical area. On the Botswana side one has the Batawana,
the Hambukushu, the Herero and the Basarwa as the major ethnic groups. The
Batawana and the Herero are traditionally pastoralist, although the Batawana do
have some agricultural heritage, and while large sections of the population are
now urbanized in centres like Maun they still maintain strong links with their
pastoralist heritage. The Herero tend to be more culturally distinct due to a
greater distance from the political and social mainstream of the country. The
Hambukushu are a little more agriculturally inclined than the other groups in
the area and have maintained a cultural distinction for similar reasons to the
Herero. The Basarwa, alternatively known as Bushmen, San or First People in
various contexts and moments in history, are probably the most culturally
distinct of all the groups in the area. They are traditionally a transhumant
hunter-gatherer society and although many are now relatively settled,
particularly as farm workers, many still maintain their traditional lifestyle.
There are a variety of tribal groupings within the Basarwa with some of the
best known internationally being the !Ko and the !Kung. It is probably fair to
say that the Basarwa are almost completely marginalized from all aspects of
mainstream life in Botswana as recent difficulties over land rights have
illustrated. The Herero, Hambukushu and Basarwa are all supranational ethnic
groups. Within historical memory the Basarwa occupied a great swathe of
Southern Africa including what is now much of Botswana, Namibia and South
Africa. They still represent significant groups in Botswana and Namibia but
have all but disappeared in South Africa. The Herero are traditionally a
Namibian people. During the existence of what was then German South West Africa
the Hereros put up stiff resistance to German rule and this was met by quite
brutal suppression. Consequently large numbers of Hereros migrated into the
then Bechuanaland Protectorate, now Botswana, for security reasons and have
remained there ever since. The Hambukushu have a similar story to the Herero in
that they are originally an Angolan people but fleeing insecurity there they
arrived in North West Botswana and have stayed. To a degree even the Batawana
themselves have a limited history in parts of the study region, particularly in
and around the Okavango Delta. While the Delta is now famous as a tourist
attraction and has this diversity of cultural groups settled around it, until
relatively recently it was virtually off limits due to the twin scourges of the
Tsetse Fly and Malaria. Both of these problems have been largely mitigated,
with the eradication of the Tsetse Fly and the partial control of Malaria
through modern medicine. A further factor in the historical westward movements
of the Batawana has been pressure from more warlike groups from the North and
East, the most notable of these being the incursions of the Zulu / Matabele
leader Mzilikazi.
The situation is somewhat reflected
on the Namibian side of the border with the Herero, Hambukushu and Basarwa all
being present. To the extreme North of Namibia are to be found the highly
culturally distinct and traditional Himba who have continued their lifestyle
despite considerable pressure from instability associated with the Angolan
border. The Caprivi Strip is a colonial oddity stemming from German desires to
connect South West Africa with the then Tanganyika. The inhabitants of the
strip tend to consider themselves as culturally distinct from the rest of
Namibia, as witnessed by recent insecurity due to agitation for independence.
While having a distinct cohesion they are closer to the mainstream of Namibian
life than the Himba or Basarwa with their marginalization being more due to
recent political factors than a traditional way of life. Recent security
problems due to the Namibian Government’s decision to allow Angolan Government
forces to use their territory as a springboard for attacks on UNITA rebels has
only served to emphasize the fluid and unstable nature of this crossroads
between four colonial era states.
In conclusion the region chosen for
the project has a range of distinct ethnic groups that cover a variety of
traditions including pastoralist, agro-pastoralist and transhumant
hunter-gatherer. For the past several hundred years the region has witnessed
continual movements of these various groups seeking peace and stability and
consequently there has been significant interaction between groups occupying
similar areas. Equally the complex international situation has often fractured
cohesive groups into separate nationalities that still live in close
geographical and cultural proximity to one another. The belief is that this
“melting pot” of cultures provides an ideal situation in which to study the
interactions between communities of both highly divergent and similar ethnic
heritage.
1.3.3 Ecosystem Diversity
The key features
in the region are the overall setting of the Kalahari Desert with the
interspersed watercourses such as the Okavango River system and the Linyanti /
Chobe River system. The Okavango rises in the mountains of Angola, passes
through Namibia and is a permanent watercourse at least as far as Maun in
Botswana, but from that point onwards has a tendency to be somewhat seasonal.
The Linyanti / Chobe River also rises in the Angolan highlands and later feeds
into the Zambezi just above Victoria Falls. It is also permanent. There are a
number of smaller rivers in the area that are highly capricious, probably the
best known of these is the Savuti Channel which has appeared and disappeared
for decades at a time on several occasions in recorded history. The Okavango
Panhandle and Delta are the best-known features in the area with an
extraordinary level of biodiversity depending on the system. Recommendation as
a World Heritage Site by UNESCO and identification as one of the world’s
megabiodiversity hotspots by Conservation International attest to this fact.
However, the Linyanti swamps and river system also provide an equal haven for a
great variety of species, being particularly well known for mega fauna.
Both the
Okavango and the Linyanti are extremely fragile systems, principally resting on
the sands of the Kalahari. This fragility has been of great concern as it has
been shown that even a relatively limited change in the water flows can have
catastrophic effects. The clearest recent example of this was a Botswana
Government project examining harnessing the waters of the Okavango for
irrigation purposes. The theory was basically that dredging a stretch of one of
the Delta’s principal channels would increase water flows, meaning that less
water was lost in the Delta, and thus allowing for irrigation without
significant damage. Problems arose when it was discovered that the increased
water flow dislodged the natural riparian vegetation, which is only loosely
rooted in sand, and consequently desertified the whole area. A more alarming
project was planned by Namibia in the early to mid nineties when the capital,
Windhoek, had not received rain for some three and a half years. The plan was
to construct a small canal from the Okavango to Windhoek over several hundred kilometres
of desert. The combination of the potential impacts of even a small change in
the flows into the Delta with the need for high draw off quantities to allow
for massive evapo-transpiration from the open channel could have spelt
catastrophe for the ecosystem. Fortunately Windhoek received rain before the
implementation of the project began. More haunting historical examples are the
now only periodic Lake Ngami, which was a landmark during Livingstone’s travels
in the area, and the great Mkagadikadi Pan, an ancient dried out lakebed. The
message behind all these factors is that the growing human population in the
area, combined with a critical shortage of water, is an ever-present threat to
what is an already fragile situation.
Despite the
fame of the riparian systems in the area it is the semi-arid to arid ecosystem
that clearly predominates. This covers virtually the whole of northern Namibia
in one form or another and a large proportion of the north west of Botswana
once one moves a small distance from the rivers and swamps. There is a great
variety of rainfall levels, principally oriented in an east – west direction,
such that the region cannot be said to be a true desert. However, the
overwhelming characteristic of this is unpredictability with relatively low
levels being the norm. In all cases evapo-transpiration rates far exceed
rainfall and river inflow levels.
Overall the
region provides a large selection of extreme, and sometimes unique, ecosystems
with a general background of aridity. This has been favoured as on the one hand
a large range of biodiversity has traditionally been available for use in
certain key areas but the general characteristic has been one of highly limited
and specialized resources that have encouraged equally specialized uses to meet
basic needs such as food, health and cultural requirements.
1.3.4 International Border
The international
border bisecting the study area is that between Namibia and Botswana. However,
the borders with Zambia, Angola and, to some degree South Africa have all had
significant influences upon the region. Although there are strong cultural ties
across the border area it has often been tense as when Namibia was under South
African control relations with Botswana were often difficult. Subsequent to Namibian
independence there has still been some tension, particularly over territorial
disputes and water rights in the Okavango. The situation in Angola has been,
and seems set to continue to be, unstable at best. The wildlife of the Linyanti
/ Chobe area, and sometimes as far south as the Okavango, has proved a great
lure to relatively poor Zambians seeking income from poaching in relatively
wealthy Botswana. On the one hand this situation is unusual simply for the
sheer number of major borders in such a small area. However, more significantly
the pressures that these borders have generated in recent times have meant that
peoples in the area have had a large volume of exposure to each other and
sometimes to more distant neighbours. The situation adds to the diversity found
in the ecosystems and ethnic backgrounds in creating additional factors that
are likely to influence the relations between groups.
1.4 Who – the
intended research subjects and beneficiaries
The intended key
subjects of the research are quite varied, basically as varied as traditional
knowledge itself. In general any member of a community is a potential subject
for study. On the one hand it is desirable to seek out the most recognized
healers, farmers or artists as the individuals most likely to innovate, or to
be the holders of existing knowledge, and be in need of protection for those
innovations or that knowledge held. However, a large amount of the knowledge
that this project is interested in is that which is communally held and has developed
by accretion throughout the history of the group. This may be actually held by
a whole group or by particular individuals on behalf of a group, such as
healers or elders. Whichever situation prevails in a given instance does not
change the overall fact that one seeks to analyse the general community
attitude towards, and beliefs regarding, this existing body of knowledge and
innovations developed there from.
The principal
intended beneficiaries of the study are the local communities, initially of the
study area but hopefully in the long term all developing country marginalized
communities. It is hoped to achieve the wider, longer-term impact, by feeding
the results of the research into the international debate and contributing
towards the development of international protections. In specific terms it is
believed that the development of systems for the protection and appropriate
development of traditional innovations will increase marginalized community
participation in national economies and that this will produce a consequent
effect in terms of empowerment. However, it must be stressed that this economic
development is intended to be in the hands, and based on the practices, of the
communities so that it will be something they can take in whatever particular
direction they like. Of course there are many instances where such economic
advancement automatically erodes traditional lifestyles but it is believed that
this can be mitigated to some extent since much knowledge is held on a
community basis and thus requires a community decision on utilization. The
controlling fact is that if the community decides it wants to change its
lifestyle then it should be able to and if it doesn’t want to then that choice
should, to the maximum extent possible, be available too.
As mentioned in the
previous paragraph there is a secondary group of intended beneficiaries
consisting of the wider range of marginalized communities in developing
countries. It is believed that this group can be reached by a sharing of the
results of the project with governments of the sub-region, international fora
and non-governmental organizations that have an interest in the fields of
intellectual property and the rights of marginalized communities. This
dissemination will be achieved on two levels through documentary dissemination
but also, wherever possible, through roundtable discussions involving policy
makers, marginalized communities, researchers and other interested stakeholders
in as free a manner as possible. In the final analysis it is expected that this
will contribute towards the raising of the level of awareness regarding the
rights, interests and potential contributions of marginalized communities as
well as the presentation of concrete options for future activities.
1.5
Why – the project hypothesis
The basic hypothesis is that marginalized communities
have a variety of assets that are under utilized in the modern economic sphere.
Where these assets are utilized beyond the community it is frequently by
outsiders who spot the commercial application, whether this be for
pharmaceutical research, agro industries or for artistic / cultural purposes.
We have all heard of, and most of us have probably purchased, such commercial
products. A large number of us are probably also aware of the current pressure,
particularly since the entry into force of the Convention on Biological
Diversity, for the profits from these products to be more equitably
distributed.
The project will provide an in depth analysis of the
economic relevance and general feasibility of intellectual property systems
based upon both orthodox IPRs and upon alternative foundations, including other
fields of law but also extending into social and philosophical theory. The
target group will be traditional and/or indigenous communities in Botswana and
Namibia. The ultimate goal of the
project is to produce a model for a "zero" or "low impact"
system of protecting traditional knowledge/community rights that could be
initially adopted by either Botswana or Namibia, but in the long term used as
the basis for protection by other developing countries. The theory behind this
is that it is the activities of the modern economic sphere that are impinging
upon the traditional rights and cultures of communities and that the burden of
protection should thus, according to doctrines of equity, fall upon the modern
economic sphere rather than the communities concerned.
It is believed
that this is a feasible proposition for several reasons. First is that the
recognition that marginalized communities have much to offer the rest of the
world has become an increasingly accepted fact of life. There are assets to
sell and potential buyers in the market. Secondly with the advent of the TRIPs
Agreement intellectual property systems have become a more realistic
proposition in developing countries. It is believed that although there are
considerable problems with the implementation of TRIPs due to its highly
technical, and alien, nature and the inability of most countries to provide
effective enforcement measures the principle upon which a specifically tailored
developing country “sub-system” of intellectual property rights could be built
has been established. Thirdly many existing, and highly successful, projects
have already been based upon the same principles. In this area our host Kenya
has several notable examples. One was the work with Kamba woodcarvers, which
combined the development of marketing skills with education on wood types to
limit the use of threatened species. Further examples exist in the
International Centre for Insect Physiology and Ecology’s (ICIPE) work on the
development of Neem products, beekeeping and cold rub. In Southern Africa there
are now numerous examples of community based natural resource management
(CBNRM) projects involved with things such as the management of wildlife
extraction, tourism and crafts. These are all excellent projects but they tend
to have two features. Firstly they are generally oriented towards limited
sectors such as crafts and wildlife management / tourism. Secondly many of them
take the market to the people rather than taking the people to the market. By
this I mean that they tend to either import a concept or single out a specific
activity of a community and make that the focus of the project. What is proposed
here is a switching of the emphasis from the particular production sector to
the geographical area. What does this community have and do that could be n
asset in the wider world? This would clearly involve some form of cataloguing /
assessment of assets by the community. This assessment would operate on two
levels, firstly what do we have that’s potentially valuable and secondly which
of these things are we either unwilling to exploit or would we like to restrict
the use of. Such an assessment could be a potentially valuable commercial
roadmap and as such for the activity to be feasible there has to be some form
of protection in place that will prevent its illicit exploitation and
facilitate its legitimate use. In the final analysis it must be the community
that controls this process as only they can decide what it is ethically
acceptable to exploit commercially and the terms of that exploitation – these
are the factors that will control the impact upon their society.
PART 2: THE DRYLANDS
PERSPECTIVE
2.1 Introduction. Environmental
Stress, Social Stress and Social Collapse.
2.2 Ecology.
2.3 Resource poor equals information
rich.
2.4 Information as an asset.
2.1
Introduction. Environmental Stress, Social Stress and Social Collapse
As was so acutely observed by Colin
Turnbull in his book “The Mountain People” a society that is subjected to
extreme environmental stress inevitably in turn suffers extreme social stress.
This can be manifested in many different forms. The tribe studied by Turnbull
were the Ik of northeastern Uganda. The breaking of the Ik’s transhumant
pattern of life through the gazettement of the Kidepo Valley National Park and
consequent resettling of the tribe led to the total breakdown of the social
fabric of the society and while this proved highly destructive to the Ik
themselves its effects spread further through the Ik’s role in various other
“undesirable” activities such as the facilitation of cattle raiding across the
Uganda-Kenya border. Turnbull observed two basic factors, amongst others, about
the Ik. The first was that the trigger for their social collapse was
environmental stress, in this instance in the form of a loss of legal access to
the Kidepo Valley. The second was that this social collapse had negative
impacts on the Ik’s attitude towards their newer, and harsher environmental
situation – essentially they ceased to take much interest in it and were more
concerned about immediate interests than the long term. The most extreme
example of this being when a record crop was achieved and the Ik spent no time
harvesting and storing or protecting against pests, rather they took what they
immediately sought for food and let the rest rot. This was done in the
knowledge that severe hunger and possible starvation would follow. Clearly the
root cause of the Ik’s problems was political marginalization and hence a
political decision to create the Kidepo Valley National Park. However, once
this decision was made it was a combination of environmental and social stresses
that produced the final societal collapse. In other parts of Africa this
dynamic has been seen to be a contributory factor in more violent social
collapses such as in Southern Sudan, Somalia, Angola and Mozambique, to name
but a few. This is not to argue that environmental stress is usually the sole
contributory factor in situations of social collapse, in most instances it is
little more than a subsidiary element, but it can be a critical part of the
overall situation leading to collapse. Conversely environmental stress can be
addressed to provide a stabilizing and social strengthening element and that is
what is examined here.
Thus at the heart of this dynamic are
the two mutually reinforcing factors of environmental and social stress. These
have been termed as mutually reinforcing in that the movement of one in either
a positive or negative direction will affect the other accordingly, usually
given some form of time lag depending on the particular situation. On the
attached flow chart this is much simplified but in essence illustrates that if
environmental and social degradation are allowed to continue then social
disorder will increase and when a critical point is reached social collapse
occurs. This point generally being when the environment can no longer support
the population and the scramble for scarce resources overcomes the society’s
accepted rules and norms. In the opposite direction mitigation of these
stresses can provide a more sustainable relationship with the environment while
also reinforcing society’s accepted rules and norms leading to social
stability.
Obviously the ultimate goal of
drylands resource management is to find way for these stresses to move in a
positive rather than a negative direction in what is generally an innately stressed
situation, at least from the environmental perspective. On the flow chart this
is labelled as mitigation of stresses and is probably the field that most
people at this workshop are involved with in one way or another. The potential
advantage of looking at traditional knowledge protection in this field of
mitigation is that it is limited in the creation of environmental stresses,
since it advocates the use and development of what is already there, while it
has a positive influence on social stresses by emphasising the importance of
traditional cultural activities. A sort of environmentally friendly social glue
if you will.
The
general hypothesis is that the effective protection of traditional knowledge
and community rights can be a tool that addresses both environmental and social
stresses in a positive manner. It is not something that could be waved as a
magic wand but what it can achieve is enhanced stability in a situation where
other significant forces, particularly the political, are being addressed.
2.2 Ecology
A
dryland region is particularly suited to the type of research involved in this
project for two basic reasons. The first relates to the situation being
analysed and the potential impacts of the project. It basically involves what
might be called the socio-ecological situation of a dryland. The resources
required for human survival, principally a means of acquiring food and water,
are at a premium. In consequence the development options open to a people who
live in such an area are limited. On the one hand they have a limited range of
resources and on the other they have a limited supply of those that they do
possess. This can often be true even with the application of all the wizardry
of modern technology and is particularly true when one is looking for options
that do not fundamentally alter the nature of the ecosystem. Thus an obvious
question should be what could we do with the existing resources that we are not
doing already? This brings one back to the value of traditional knowledge
protection.
The
fundamental alteration of the ecosystem is what is often seen as the solution
to the limited resources of dryland regions, one often hears of the goal of
“gardens in the desert”, particularly from areas such as the Gulf States where
finance is not a major factor. Basically strategies for dryland development
tend to favour projects based on large-scale irrigation or similar major impact
ideas. Such strategies, while often useful, fundamentally alter the nature of
the ecosystem by focusing on changing it to a more conventionally productive
one by artificial means. The potential effects that this has on existing
biological and cultural diversity are not often considered as a factor due to
the overwhelming imperative of improving basic human development indicators.
The threat to cultural diversity is immediate and clear. If you change the
ecosystem in which a traditional, and to some degree even a modern, ethnic
group lives you will automatically alter all the fundamentals of their
existence and thus threaten the maintenance of their cultural heritage. The
threat to biological diversity is in reality a more general environmental
threat, which is that if we succeed in eradicating all of our dryland areas we
will fundamentally alter the balance of forces that govern the biosphere. Even
doing this on a small scale has been seen to have major effects in some
instances. Potential effects range from loss of genetic diversity to spill over
effects on neighbouring ecosystems such as desertification or more minor
upsetting of rainfall patterns to larger scale climatic variations.
The
difficulty is that larger scale strategies are based on a value system that
pushes for lush green agricultural fields and pasture that can meet food
security needs and provide a basis for cash cropping. In some instances the
overall situation may well dictate that this is the most effective choice to
make. However, in some instances the finance or the conditions are simply not
available to undertake such a large-scale project and in others it may not be
necessary. Such projects tend to overlook the value of what is already present
– things aren’t working here so they must be changed as opposed to the idea
that a bit of careful tinkering might fix them. Ultimately this is simply a
question of saying that we should be looking to the sustainable use of dryland
ecosystems rather than their alteration to other types, why risk an ecological
impact if it’s simply not necessary? Effective management of traditional
knowledge and resources maximizes the possible application of the existing
ecosystems resources, promoting the value of their diversity, and often does
this without actually altering the current demand on those resources because
often it is the abstract element of the resource, the trait in a gene or the
spirit of an artwork, that is valuable rather than the tangible resource
itself. Consequently the protection of traditional knowledge and resources
could be said to be a low, or potentially even zero, environmental impact method
of developing existing resource use.
2.3 Resource poor equals information rich
The
second reason that a dryland area is particularly suited to this research is
that people living in such extreme environments tend to possess detailed and
innovative knowledge about the resources they do possess simply due to a very
fine tuned adaptation to their harsh environment. A good example of this are
the Basarwa tribes of the Kalahari. A 1975 study, published by the Botswana
Society, specifically examines the botanical knowledge of the !Ko. The study
focused on a particular woman as the research subject as being reasonably
representative of the community average. Activities among the !Ko are divided
such that women are the principal gatherers and men the exclusive hunters,
somewhat unsurprisingly it is the results of gathering that produce the vast
majority of the !Ko diet. Dr. Heinz and his research colleague tried to select
a woman who was neither particularly well known for her gathering skills or
known for a lack of them. What became clear was that this woman, and presumably
by extension the majority of women in the community, possessed a detailed
knowledge of several hundred plants that were useful as both key dietary
elements and as supplements. By supplements I would include plants that are
considered delicacies or that provide something other than nutrition, such as
water. Even on a surface level this information can be of great interest when
one takes two factors into consideration. The first of these is that the
Basarwa have a reputation as being a society that traditionally has one of the
healthiest, most nutritionally balanced diets in the world. This combines with
the fact that they also spend one of the lowest proportions of their time
securing their basic needs of any ethnic group in the world, usually three to
four days in an average week. While it is certain that this is possible largely
due to their extremely low population density and consequent large potential
range for transhumance it is clear that the plants they gather could hold great
promise both as natural nutritional supplements and as food sources in other
crisis hit dryland areas. The second factor to consider is that drought
resistance is one of the most sought after qualities in agricultural biotechnology
today. A stock of several hundred plants that are known to be safe food sources
and that have high drought tolerance could be quite an asset with a little
basic research and marketing.
The fundamental point behind this is that groups
living in dryland ecosystems naturally tend to have a greater detailed
knowledge of their environment than those in ecosystems that provide more
easily. Thus while they may have less biodiversity than a rainforest, or some
similarly lush ecosystem, they often know more about it. They have to for
simple reasons of survival. In the modern world of scientific markets it is
knowledge that is often the key, a selection of plant extracts with known
active properties are substantially more valuable than a simple collection of
specimens from a biodiversity rich area. When beginning our initial assessments
of what is needed in a dryland ecosystem where problems are perceived a normal
procedure is to take stock of potential assets that can be utilized, the
specialized knowledge that dryland peoples so often possess should be looked at
as one of these assets.
2.4 Information as an asset
In
many instances, as the frequent accusations of biopiracy demonstrate, sources
of traditional knowledge are already being tapped for profit – just not by the
right people, the people who created, or often more importantly acted as
custodians of, the knowledge in the first place. Consequently protecting
traditional knowledge could create instant benefits through knowledge that is
already being utilized. However, most importantly, it will also encourage an
improved incentive pattern where it is the communities who stand to gain and
thus who will, with a little assistance, analyse their options. The issue of an
improved incentive pattern is what regulation, and law in general, is all about
at the end of the day. One resorts to law when there is a systemic failure in
society, regulation corrects the balance and restores equity. However, as the
mention of “a little assistance” earlier in this paragraph suggests, regulation
is not quite so simple. For regulation to be effective the first requirement is
that it has to be known about. The second, particularly in countries where
administrative structures are generally weak or distant, is that it has to be
understood. In a situation where one is trying to regulate information as an
asset three particular facts arise. The first is that information is only an
asset when you know it is. The second is that information is only an asset if
other people know it is too. The third is that assets are generally worth what
the market says they are, what it is prepared to pay. Consequently one has to
have an idea of one’s particular asset in the context of a wider marketplace,
Shona soapstone sculptures probably aren’t worth a whole lot in a village
exclusively inhabited by Shona sculptors but they can be worth a fortune in
London or New York. An asset out of context is often worth more than it is in
context. This can be just as true of biological resources as cultural, most of
the big corporate labs undertaking high throughput screening are not very near
any major sources of biodiversity or traditional knowledge. Their advantage
however, is that they know the market far better than the suppliers of the raw
material do – the buyer currently has all the information and power and
consequently prices are low. Where
knowledge is adequately protected, and thus the balance of information and
power redressed, its market price inevitably rises as its value becomes more
openly recognized. Just look at the patent system. The difficulty with
traditional knowledge is that there is a technological and financial bias
against it – how can something that was developed by a few generations of
uneducated healers or farmers possibly equate to the product of a high tech lab
and millions of dollars of research funding? The irony is that if one looks at
the success rates of development projects to date it is the relatively
unsophisticated, and cheap, CBNRM projects that have generally succeeded while
the high tech, high finance, mega projects have generally come to nothing. This
technological and financial bias against traditional knowledge, combined with
the lack of market awareness of its holders, is exactly why, even if one is
against the existing international intellectual property system, traditional
knowledge has to be protected. There is a systemic failure that prevents its
creators and holders from realizing its potential.
The
accompanying flow chart to this section is entitled “something for nothing”. As
one always hears nothing is free. The title is meant in the sense that you can
look for a reward from a previously unrealised asset rather than for free. The
flow chart revolves around the concept of “vertical” and “horizontal” resource use.
Vertical is understood to include current standard forms of resource use such
as extraction, farming etc. Thus if you intensify these activities at a certain
point they become unsustainable, overburdening the environment and risking
environmental stress. Correspondingly if you decrease these activities then you
relax the burden on the environment and limit the possibilities for stress. Of
course the chart is much simplified as in various situations decreased activity
can also potentially create environmental stress. Horizontal resource use is
understood to include a bit of lateral thinking. Essentially how could one make
use of a resource without affecting its consumption and/or what aspects of this
resource am I not currently exploiting? Horizontal use is really what this
paper is all about. Decreasing horizontal use is indicated as potentially
environmentally negative because if a resource is not recognized as such then
it is unlikely to be protected and developed at the expense of accepted
productive resources, thus risking loss of genetic diversity. However, if
resources come to be recognized as potentially valuable they are likely to be
encouraged and this has the potential for a spill over effect where
biodiversity in general is encouraged because of its innate potential to
produce future assets.
What
is discussed here is the option of providing protection, and thus greater
recognition, for existing resource use in a manner that allows for its wider
application. This can come in a range of fields. Cultural assets (art, crafts,
spiritual and political practices etc.), biological assets (medicinal plants,
agricultural and nutritional resources) and the ecosystem itself are often
currently given commercial application in other parts of the country or globe
with little or no benefit accruing to the creators/guardians of these assets.
If greater protection is provided to the rights of dryland communities then
they will have the opportunity not only to gain greater benefit from the
existing commercial application of their assets but also to explore further
possible applications. In most instances this should create greater development
opportunities for these dryland communities with little or no impact on the
ecosystems in which they live while also maximizing their opportunity to choose
the impact that such development has on their lifestyles. In many ways this is
simply an additional dimension of the existing theories of Community Based
Natural Resource Management (CBNRM).
PART 3: CONCLUSION
What
this paper seeks to establish as the problem to be solved is that far too often
traditional knowledge and resources become ignored in an area when development
becomes a goal; development can too often be a homogenising factor. Protection
of traditional resources on the one hand supports self-respect and consequently
self-reliance but it also limits the undermining of the traditional resource
base when a new one is being developed. In any situation continuity is also an important
cohesive factor, where continuity breaks down in almost any area it can lead to
social upheaval but this is exacerbated in an environmentally stressed area
such as a dryland.
In
many places this paper may well given the impression that it assumes
traditional practices are sound, environmentally friendly and sustainable per
se. I don’t want to fall into this trap but rather want to emphasise that
one feature they all possess is that they make use only of locally available
resources – and these tend to be resources that have been available for
extended periods of time because it takes a while to build up a traditional
practice. Where traditional practices are not altogether desirable, because of
population pressure or other factors, they still have the potential for
application through adaptation to conditions. In a way this idea of adaptation
is the whole point of protecting traditional practices, adaptation to greater
need and a wider market. With many resources or aspects of knowledge one doesn’t
expect that if they are sought for commercial application they will be directly
applied, particularly in the medicinal and agricultural fields. They are useful
because they are flexible and it is most often the idea, or principle, that is
important not the tangible element. This idea or principle could be the
activity of a gene or the style of an artwork, to reproduce these either
elsewhere or in an artificial environment is usually easy and creates no
additional resource pressures.
Traditional
knowledge protection should not be seen as a sophisticated and abstract project
that could be examined once we have most of our fundamental indicators of human
development sorted out. It does not have to be something that relates directly
to a national or international intellectual property office in more than a
minor advisory and/or supervisory manner. The idea, as with much of the
Convention on Biological Diversity, is that we should start from the ground up,
any system should be as simple as possible in order to be workable. This
project intends to provide solid options that policy makers and project
managers can look at for allowing marginalized communities, whether in drylands
or not, to expand the boundaries of their resource use. I say “allowing” as the
final say has to rest with the community in question, only they can decide what
is acceptable to their view of the world. Traditional resources and knowledge
are inextricably linked to culture, this is part of their advantage, and this
means that they can be extremely sensitive. These opportunities should be
developed at the same stage of a project as a shallow well, small dam or minor
irrigation activity. The problem is that this can only be done if there is an
effective national, and preferably international, framework for protecting this
element of a project – such a framework will give traditional knowledge both
greater orthodox western credibility and room to flourish at home.
In a
grand simplification there are two types of dryland situations, those that are
stressed and those that are not. Those that are stressed tend to be so due to
population pressure – this requires some new thinking because one has clearly
reached the point where traditional systems have ceased functioning due to
overburdening. Traditional knowledge protection can contribute to this new
thinking by broadening one’s view of the traditional resource base – what else
can we do with what we’ve got and who will buy it? For much knowledge there is
already the market, it’s just that it’s illicit or does not have the knowledge
creators as actors. In conceptual terms developing traditional knowledge
protection is not unlike New York City deciding to establish an office to
regulate film production – they noticed that lots of people want to make films
there and regulated it to on the one hand derive some income from licensing etc
but also to facilitate a higher volume of activity by facilitating the
activity. Of course the third policy goal was ostensibly to stop filmmakers
creating unnecessary chaos in the city through uncoordinated activity. All of
these elements have exact parallels to the development of traditional knowledge
protection in a dryland area. In the second dryland situation where there is no
stress and societies are quite comfortable existing as they do traditional
knowledge protection can still play a role as the very fact of protection
infers increased recognition of value, which in turn is empowering. This is
apart from the basic fact of equity, which requires that people have some rights
to, and control over, their creations and heritage. Whatever condition a
dryland ecosystem is in it is generally relatively resource poor and therefore
a broadening of existing resource use is the key to future development that
will not fundamentally affect the ecosystem. Such a principle of broadening
rather than deepening resource use should be considered as an element of any
dryland resource management programme.
[1]
Basket weaving in Botswana traditionally played both a cultural and a technical
role and in recent times has come to play a third in attracting the tourist
dollar. Traditionally the baskets were functional with designs that were
tailored to specific needs such as the storage of grain in buried baskets or
the storage of liquids in watertight baskets. At the same time most baskets
came to be woven on a set of basic designs that have cultural significance for
the weavers, each representing a particular vision or event that varies in its
content of artistic or spiritual importance. Additionally there is also the
fact that basket weaving is a female skill that is generally practiced in
groups. The simply meeting together for extended periods for a task that does
not overly occupy the mind of a skilled artisan, and thus allows for much
conversation, is a cultural asset in and of itself. An alternative example
might be the conscious nurturing of the skills of soapstone sculptors among the
Shona of Zimbabwe.
No comments:
Post a Comment