TITLE: UNESCO's Upcoming Summit To Pursue Social Equity Goal
AUTHOR: Keya Acharya
PUBLICATION: IPS: Science
DATE: 5 February 1999
SOURCE: Inter Press Service
URL: http://www.ips.org
________________________________________________________
UNESCO's Upcoming Summit To Pursue Social Equity Goal
By Keya Acharya
BANGALORE, India, Feb 5 (IPS) - UNESCO needs a programme that will protect
and promote indigenous knowledge systems in science in the new millennium,
scientists and scholars from 10 UNESCO member countries recommended at a
conference in this Indian city.
Science in this century, they said at a meeting organised ahead of the
UNESCO World Conference on Science, has not addressed the problems of the
underprivileged in Asia, Africa and South America.
Instead there are two worlds: the industrialised North and the impoverished
South, speaker after speaker from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal and
other countries said last week in Bangalore.
According to them, most scientific research this century has been
monopolised by large private concerns like pharmaceutical giants that
intensively tapped natural resources from developing countries rich in
biological and natural wealth.
Indigenous knowledge systems that had for centuries used these resources in
local systems are now losing out to scientific industry. The issue of
intellectual property rights in a global economy is now a challenge
confronting science, they reminded.
The 186-member UNESCO, they said, must establish an international fund for
conservation and promotion of these non-formal knowledge systems,
particularly with strengthening the role of women in this process.
The suggestions form the 49 participants were incorporated in the Bangalore
Communique that will be assimilated in the Draft Declaration of UNESCO's
upcoming World Conference on Science scheduled to be held in Bucharest in
July.
The Bangalore conference on 'Science and Society' was the last of the
preparatory meetings organised by UNESCO. Earlier meetings were held in
Canada, France and Australia last year.
Dr Ali Kazancigil, executive secretary of UNESCO's Social Sciences, Research
and Policy at its headquarters in Paris, believed the Bangalore symposium to
be of special importance as it represented perspectives from developing
countries.
The draft now recognises the need for addressing the present inequities in
science due to globalisation. A global economy has put pressures on both
natural resources and intellectual property regimes that have exacerbated
rather than reduced inequalities.
When asked if he felt that UNESCO's directives for social change through
science would be implemented, Dr Kazancigil said UNESCO can only bear upon
the world community to follow certain policies, not pressure it to make laws
in this regard.
UNESCO's directives, he reminded, have however been used as a moral
yardstick by the international community in the last 50 years of its
existence.
Dr Kazancigil was optimistic that UNESCO could now also bear upon its member
states to follow a new social contract in science in the next millennium.
Prof Madhav Gadgil of the Centre for Ecological Sciences at the Indian
Institute of Science (IISc) in Bangalore cited the case of the Soliga tribe
of south India whose knowledge of the Phyllanthus emblica, an indigenous
tree with many known benefits, has proved to be far superior to its
scientific documentation.
Yet the Soligas knowledge was not recognised by formal science. Prof Gadgil
said, ''Science must develop a new contract of making such people partners
in managing and monitoring nature.''
Indian expert Dr Smitu Kothari, member of IUCN's Ethics Committee and
visiting Professor at Cornell University, United States, said instances of
India's successful local community initiatives of ecological restoration
needs to be recognised by national and international scientific and
government institutions. He gave the example of 'Timbuctoo', a 32-acre area
that is now a successful story of community effort for development in Andhra
Pradesh, India.
In eight years, Timbuctoo's initiatives of ecological regeneration has
raised the water table, regenerated 250 species of plants without active
planting measures and the state's government has now given the group 2,000
acres for similar regeneration efforts.
Similar grassroots initiatives are also now a method of alternative
technology in irrigation, power and social forestry schemes in the Himalayan
kingdom Nepal, its scientists said.
In Sri Lanka, its largest NGO, the Lanka Jatika Sarvoday Shramadhana
Sangamaya, has pioneered the ethic of community effort through the
traditional Buddhist philosophy of non-violence that has allowed all
communities to participate.
In fact local communities are ''now conserving for public good at personal
cost'', said Indian agriculture scientist and UNESCO EcoTechnology Chair,
M.S Swaminathan.
Studies conducted in India by the Foundation he heads, has numerous cases of
village people, mainly women, who have perfectly preserved seeds that have
indigenous genes. They rely on oral tradition to hand down their skills.
Their rights to this knowledge is now threatened by globalisation that has
allowed science the access to gene research.
Developing countries, including India, have been slow in drawing up their
rights in preserving indigenous knowledge, he said. (END/IPS/ka/an/99)
_________________________________________________________
ABOUT THIS LISTSERVER -- BIO-IPR is an irregular listserver put out by
Genetic Resources Action International (GRAIN). Its purpose is to circulate
information about recent developments in the field of intellectual property
rights related to biodiversity & associated knowledge. BIO-IPR is a strictly
non-commercial and educational service for nonprofit organisations and
individuals active in the struggle against IPRs on life.
HOW TO PARTICIPATE -- To get on the mailing list, send the word "subscribe"
(no quotes) as the subject of an email message to
<bio-ipr-request@cuenet.com>. To get off the list, send the word
"unsubscribe" instead. To submit material to the list, address your message
to <bio-ipr@cuenet.com>. A note with further details about BIO-IPR is sent
to all subscribers.
ABOUT GRAIN -- For general information about GRAIN, you may visit our
wwwsite http://www.grain.org or send an email to <grain@bcn.servicom.es>.
Subject: UNESCO's Upcoming Summit To Pursue Social Equity Goal
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 04:26:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Department of Zoology <pdh@u.washington.edu>
To: indknow@u.washington.edu
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 1999 09:11:55 -0200 (EDT)
From: David Hathaway <hathaway@netflash.com.br>
To: Multiple recipients of list <biodiv-l@bdt.org.br>
Subject: UNESCO's Upcoming Summit To Pursue Social Equity Goal
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 10:40:06 +0800
To: bio-ipr@cuenet.com
From: GRAIN Los Banos <grain@baylink.mozcom.com>
Subject: [BIO-IPR] UNESCO's Upcoming Summit To Pursue Social Equity Goal
BIO-IPR docserver
________________________________________________________
TITLE: UNESCO's Upcoming Summit To Pursue Social Equity Goal
AUTHOR: Keya Acharya
PUBLICATION: IPS: Science
DATE: 5 February 1999
SOURCE: Inter Press Service
URL: http://www.ips.org
________________________________________________________
UNESCO's Upcoming Summit To Pursue Social Equity Goal
By Keya Acharya
BANGALORE, India, Feb 5 (IPS) - UNESCO needs a programme that will protect
and promote indigenous knowledge systems in science in the new millennium,
scientists and scholars from 10 UNESCO member countries recommended at a
conference in this Indian city.
Science in this century, they said at a meeting organised ahead of the
UNESCO World Conference on Science, has not addressed the problems of the
underprivileged in Asia, Africa and South America.
Instead there are two worlds: the industrialised North and the impoverished
South, speaker after speaker from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Nepal and
other countries said last week in Bangalore.
According to them, most scientific research this century has been
monopolised by large private concerns like pharmaceutical giants that
intensively tapped natural resources from developing countries rich in
biological and natural wealth.
Indigenous knowledge systems that had for centuries used these resources in
local systems are now losing out to scientific industry. The issue of
intellectual property rights in a global economy is now a challenge
confronting science, they reminded.
The 186-member UNESCO, they said, must establish an international fund for
conservation and promotion of these non-formal knowledge systems,
particularly with strengthening the role of women in this process.
The suggestions from the 49 participants were incorporated in the Bangalore
Communique that will be assimilated in the Draft Declaration of UNESCO's
upcoming World Conference on Science scheduled to be held in Bucharest in
July.
The Bangalore conference on 'Science and Society' was the last of the
preparatory meetings organised by UNESCO. Earlier meetings were held in
Canada, France and Australia last year.
Dr Ali Kazancigil, executive secretary of UNESCO's Social Sciences, Research
and Policy at its headquarters in Paris, believed the Bangalore symposium to
be of special importance as it represented perspectives from developing
countries.
The draft now recognises the need for addressing the present inequities in
science due to globalisation. A global economy has put pressures on both
natural resources and intellectual property regimes that have exacerbated
rather than reduced inequalities.
When asked if he felt that UNESCO's directives for social change through
science would be implemented, Dr Kazancigil said UNESCO can only bear upon
the world community to follow certain policies, not pressure it to make laws
in this regard.
UNESCO's directives, he reminded, have however been used as a moral
yardstick by the international community in the last 50 years of its
existence.
Dr Kazancigil was optimistic that UNESCO could now also bear upon its member
states to follow a new social contract in science in the next millennium.
Prof Madhav Gadgil of the Centre for Ecological Sciences at the Indian
Institute of Science (IISc) in Bangalore cited the case of the Soliga tribe
of south India whose knowledge of the Phyllanthus emblica, an indigenous
tree with many known benefits, has proved to be far superior to its
scientific documentation.
Yet the Soligas knowledge was not recognised by formal science. Prof Gadgil
said, ''Science must develop a new contract of making such people partners
in managing and monitoring nature.''
Indian expert Dr Smitu Kothari, member of IUCN's Ethics Committee and
visiting Professor at Cornell University, United States, said instances of
India's successful local community initiatives of ecological restoration
needs to be recognised by national and international scientific and
government institutions. He gave the example of 'Timbuctoo', a 32-acre area
that is now a successful story of community effort for development in Andhra
Pradesh, India.
In eight years, Timbuctoo's initiatives of ecological regeneration has
raised the water table, regenerated 250 species of plants without active
planting measures and the state's government has now given the group 2,000
acres for similar regeneration efforts.
Similar grassroots initiatives are also now a method of alternative
technology in irrigation, power and social forestry schemes in the Himalayan
kingdom Nepal, its scientists said.
In Sri Lanka, its largest NGO, the Lanka Jatika Sarvoday Shramadhana
Sangamaya, has pioneered the ethic of community effort through the
traditional Buddhist philosophy of non-violence that has allowed all
communities to participate.
In fact local communities are ''now conserving for public good at personal
cost'', said Indian agriculture scientist and UNESCO EcoTechnology Chair,
M.S Swaminathan.
Studies conducted in India by the Foundation he heads, has numerous cases of
village people, mainly women, who have perfectly preserved seeds that have
indigenous genes. They rely on oral tradition to hand down their skills.
Their rights to this knowledge is now threatened by globalisation that has
allowed science the access to gene research.
Developing countries, including India, have been slow in drawing up their
rights in preserving indigenous knowledge, he said. (END/IPS/ka/an/99)
Subject: Winkels+Flemming
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 10:18:15 -0800 (PST)
From: Department of Zoology <pdh@u.washington.edu>
To: indknow@u.washington.edu
To: <INDKNOW-owner@u.washington.edu>
From: George Woolston <George.Woolston@veteli.fi>
Subject: Winkels+Flemming
Agroforestry and forest management are not my fields, but in my work on
traditional wooden architecture in Finland I have come across much
traditional ecological knowledge of forestry. Some ethnographic material
which is now over one hundred years old, has recently been uncovered and
analysed in Finland. Several researchers here are currently working on
contemporary applications of this historical knowledge.
About IK promotion and transfer, as mentioned by Alexandra Winkels (INDKNOW
recently), I see the mixing of practical indigenous knowledge and its
transfer between Nations as potentially useful. Peoples developing their
own building technologies in similar climates and even with similar material
resources, did not always come up with the same solutions. I understand
that an organisation called Craterre in Grenoble, France, has collected from
various parts of the world e.g. earthfast building construction methods and
experimented with them. In Peshawar, Pakistan, I have seen African earth
building methods advocated and demonstrated at a building technology centre
for housing Afghan refugees.
Could Nielsen Flemming (on INDKNOW recently) provide me with a reference for
Chambers, whom he mentions as "perceiving the recognition of IK as a
paradigm
shift" ? Flemming also says that the present situation is that rhetoric
about IK is loud but the empirical base very thin. I agree, and am trying
to improve some of the empirical base to my work on the human ecology of a
traditional habitat, using an intensive case study of one river valley.
Flemming wrote:
>To what extent can IK be generalised. Some researchers describe IK as very
>site-specific and highly adapted to local biological and cultural niches.
If
>this is the case, can we then expect to gain anything from transferring IK
>from one location to another. A related question is to what extent IK can
be
>de-contextualised and still make sense.
To this I can only comment that it depends... and each case is different.
Flemming continues:
>- Problems of translation when IK is translated into Western/scientific
>representation and back again by non-indigenous people. This issue has some
>bearing on the R&D strategies, e.g. advantages/disadvantages of
participatory
>approaches and the employment of indigenous experts in R&D projects.
This is a vital issue. Western/scientific experts should respect and deal
gently with these precious sources of new knowledge, avoiding the dilution
of their content to suit commercial industrial interests.
In my case, can the issue of intellectual property rights be said not exist,
since we are "mining" historical peasant knowledge, no longer used by
anyone?
George Woolston
Subject: Winkels+Flemming
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 20:12:50 -0500
From: "Indigenous Peoples' Biodiversity Network" <ipbn@web.net>
To: indknow@u.washington.edu
To: <INDKNOW-owner@u.washington.edu>
From: George Woolston <George.Woolston@veteli.fi>
Subject: Winkels+Flemming
Agroforestry and forest management are not my fields, but in my work on
traditional wooden architecture in Finland I have come across much
traditional ecological knowledge of forestry. Some ethnographic material
which is now over one hundred years old, has recently been uncovered and
analysed in Finland. Several researchers here are currently working on
contemporary applications of this historical knowledge.
About IK promotion and transfer, as mentioned by Alexandra Winkels (INDKNOW
recently), I see the mixing of practical indigenous knowledge and its
transfer between Nations as potentially useful. Peoples developing their
own building technologies in similar climates and even with similar material
resources, did not always come up with the same solutions. I understand
that an organisation called Craterre in Grenoble, France, has collected from
various parts of the world e.g. earthfast building construction methods and
experimented with them. In Peshawar, Pakistan, I have seen African earth
building methods advocated and demonstrated at a building technology centre
for housing Afghan refugees.
Could Nielsen Flemming (on INDKNOW recently) provide me with a reference for
Chambers, whom he mentions as "perceiving the recognition of IK as a
paradigm
shift" ? Flemming also says that the present situation is that rhetoric
about IK is loud but the empirical base very thin. I agree, and am trying
to improve some of the empirical base to my work on the human ecology of a
traditional habitat, using an intensive case study of one river valley.
Flemming wrote:
>To what extent can IK be generalised. Some researchers describe IK as very
>site-specific and highly adapted to local biological and cultural niches.
If
>this is the case, can we then expect to gain anything from transferring IK
>from one location to another. A related question is to what extent IK can
be
>de-contextualised and still make sense.
To this I can only comment that it depends... and each case is different.
Flemming continues:
>- Problems of translation when IK is translated into Western/scientific
>representation and back again by non-indigenous people. This issue has some
>bearing on the R&D strategies, e.g. advantages/disadvantages of
participatory
>approaches and the employment of indigenous experts in R&D projects.
This is a vital issue. Western/scientific experts should respect and deal
gently with these precious sources of new knowledge, avoiding the dilution
of their content to suit commercial industrial interests.
In my case, can the issue of intellectual property rights be said not exist,
since we are "mining" historical peasant knowledge, no longer used by
anyone?
George Woolston
___________________________________________________________
The Indigenous Peoples' Biodiversity Network
(IPBN) is an association of indigenous peoples
and indigenous peoples'organizations working
towards the common goal of nurturing biological
diversity for the benefit of indigenous communities
and humankind as a whole. The IPBN is active in
issues of indigenous knowledge, intellectual property
and benefit sharing and works closely with indigenous
communities around the world to strengthen their
capacity to maintain and benefit from their own knowledge,
innovations and practices, which includes having a voice
in national,regional and international policy development.
Indigenous Peoples' Biodiversity Network (IPBN)
P.O. Box 567
Cusco, Peru
Tel: 51 84 232 603
Fax: 51 84 245 021
e-mail:ipbn@web.net
Subject: RE: IK use in development
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 20:13:20 -0500
From: "Indigenous Peoples' Biodiversity Network" <ipbn@web.net>
To: "'aw240@hermes.cam.ac.uk'" <aw240@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
CC: indknow@u.washington.edu
Dear Alexadra Winkels,
Information on indigenous knowledge which is scattered throughout
the Internet is searched, indexed and made available on the Indigenous
Knowledge Pages <http://www.nuffic.nl/ik-pages/index.html>. Resources that
offer an overview of a specific subject or that are specific for one region
or country can be browsed, but it is also possible to search resources that
we have selected and described. This resource has been made available by
Nuffic/CIRAN.
We aim to facilitate and improve the exchange of information within
the International Indigenous Knowledge (IK) Network
<http://www.nuffic.nl/ik-pages/info2.html>. CIRAN also provides the IK
network with a journal and newsletter, the Indigenous Knowledge and
Development Monitor. This publication promotes the exchange of information
on indigenous knowledge as it relates to sustainable development.
I hope this site will be a good starting point for further
information and references regarding indigenous knowledge. In respect to
agroforestry and forest management: pointers are available to this topic as
well.
Succes.
Gerard van Westrienen.
PS: we are interested in the results of your study.
----------------------------
Gerard van Westrienen
Nuffic/CIRAN, Centre for International Research and Advisory Networks
P.O.Box 29777, 2502 LT The Hague - The Netherlands
Tel: +31-70-4260325 Fax: +31-70-4260329
Email: gerardw@nuffic.nl Home page:
http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran/
Please note the change of our domain name: from nufficcs.nl to nuffic.nl
> -----Original Message-----
> From: aw240@hermes.cam.ac.uk [SMTP:aw240@hermes.cam.ac.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 1999 7:39 PM
> To: indknow@u.washington.edu
> Subject: IK use in development
>
> I am currnetly looking into the institutional use of indigenous/local
> knowledge international development assistance - the implications and
> possibilties of IK transfer from projects of different cultural and
> geographical contexts. I'm trying to narrow my interest down to
> agroforestry and sustainable forest management practices.
>
> I would be very interested in your views about:
>
> a) priority research areas - what is currently regarded as important in
> the
> realm of IK promotion and transfer; is there any similar research out
> there?
>
> b) any information about internationally funded projects (UN, GTZ, IUCN,
> WWF, etc. ) that have successfully/ unsuccessfully incorporated IK;
>
> c) experiences with different donor organisations: how the agenda (in
> regards to IK) has changes over recent years and what about rhetoric vs
> action?
>
> d) any further information/ contacts/ references regarding indigenous
> knowledge in respect to agroforestry and forest management.
>
> Thank you very much for your time and input.
>
> Regards,
> Alexandra Winkels
>
> Research Student,
> University of Cambridge
>
___________________________________________________________
The Indigenous Peoples' Biodiversity Network
(IPBN) is an association of indigenous peoples
and indigenous peoples'organizations working
towards the common goal of nurturing biological
diversity for the benefit of indigenous communities
and humankind as a whole. The IPBN is active in
issues of indigenous knowledge, intellectual property
and benefit sharing and works closely with indigenous
communities around the world to strengthen their
capacity to maintain and benefit from their own knowledge,
innovations and practices, which includes having a voice
in national,regional and international policy development.
Indigenous Peoples' Biodiversity Network (IPBN)
P.O. Box 567
Cusco, Peru
Tel: 51 84 232 603
Fax: 51 84 245 021
e-mail:ipbn@web.net
Subject: ...no subject...
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 20:14:42 -0500
From: "Indigenous Peoples' Biodiversity Network" <ipbn@web.net>
To: indknow@u.washington.edu
aw240@hermes.cam.ac.uk wrote:
>
> I am currnetly looking into the institutional use of indigenous/local
> knowledge international development assistance - the implications and
> possibilties of IK transfer from projects of different cultural and
> geographical contexts. I'm trying to narrow my interest down to
> agroforestry and sustainable forest management practices.
>
> I would be very interested in your views about:
>
> a) priority research areas - what is currently regarded as important in
the
> realm of IK promotion and transfer; is there any similar research out
> there?
>
> b) any information about internationally funded projects (UN, GTZ, IUCN,
> WWF, etc. ) that have successfully/ unsuccessfully incorporated IK;
>
> c) experiences with different donor organisations: how the agenda (in
> regards to IK) has changes over recent years and what about rhetoric vs
> action?
>
> d) any further information/ contacts/ references regarding indigenous
> knowledge in respect to agroforestry and forest management.
>
> Thank you very much for your time and input.
>
> Regards,
> Alexandra Winkels
>
> Research Student,
> University of Cambridge
For some years I have worked with the issues related to the use of
indigenous
knowledge (IK) in agroforestry research. Most of my work has been under the
auspices of ICRAF (the International Centre for Research in Agroforestry).
ICRAF and many other international research centres, and NGOs have had
increased utilisation of IK on the agenda for several years but it is still
difficult to see big changes on the ground.
One reason is that IK has always been used in research and development (R&D)
projects. Most of the low-input technologies being promoted by development
projects or researched by research institutions originate from third world
people themselves. It is actually difficult to think of any technology that
does not. However, this state of affairs was not recognised earlier and it
is
therefore easy to get the impression that earlier new knowledge in R&D
originated from scientists and other non-indigenous sources. Since this is
not
the case, it can be difficult to see the changes on the ground. To some
extent
you have to look for changes of attitude, e.g. where do R&D workers look for
solutions when they encounter a problem.
I think that IK is increasingly being used in R&D simply because the trend
is
to make projects more participatory and demand-driven. Not long ago it was
unusual to ask client in the third world about their opinion about
priorities
in R&D whereas today this is normal. Still this practice does not ensure
that
IK is used to any significant extent or in any systematic way. Without
structural changes to R&D the potential of IK is likely to remain untapped.
Some writers, e.g. Chambers, perceive the recognition of IK as a paradigm
shift. If that is true, then the shift has happened to some extent and it is
now moving to a time of normal science where the paradigm has to be widely
applied. This description fits well to the present situation where rhetoric
about IK is loud but the empirical base very thin.
Priority research areas in relation to the areas you mention would include:
- To what extent can IK be generalised. Some researchers describe IK as very
site-specific and highly adapted to local biological and cultural niches. If
this is the case, can we then expect to gain anything from transferring IK
from one location to another. A related question is to what extent IK can be
de-contextualised and still make sense.
- What extent is the spatial variation in IK. Some writers claim it is low -
others that it is large. This issue has important implications for the
organisation of R&D activities.
- Problems of translation when IK is translated into Western/scientific
representation and back again by non-indigenous people. This issue has some
bearing on the R&D strategies, e.g. advantages/disadvantages of
participatory
approaches and the employment of indigenous experts in R&D projects.
- Intellectual property rights have become a very important issue.
My Ph.D. thesis is about to be published but if you contact me by email I
can
send you a copy now.
_____________________________________________________________
Flemming Nielsen
Associate Researcher
Wageningen University
TAO-Group
Nieuwlandern
Nieuwe Kanaal 11
6709 PA
Wageningen
tel. +31 (0)317 483608
fax. +31 (0)317 484759
email. fnielsen@pobox.com
http://www.pobox.com/~fnielsen
_____________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________
The Indigenous Peoples' Biodiversity Network
(IPBN) is an association of indigenous peoples
and indigenous peoples'organizations working
towards the common goal of nurturing biological
diversity for the benefit of indigenous communities
and humankind as a whole. The IPBN is active in
issues of indigenous knowledge, intellectual property
and benefit sharing and works closely with indigenous
communities around the world to strengthen their
capacity to maintain and benefit from their own knowledge,
innovations and practices, which includes having a voice
in national,regional and international policy development.
Indigenous Peoples' Biodiversity Network (IPBN)
P.O. Box 567
Cusco, Peru
Tel: 51 84 232 603
Fax: 51 84 245 021
e-mail:ipbn@web.net
Subject: [BIO-IPR] UPOV threatens Francophone Africa
Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 11:08:02 -0800
Resent-From: bio-ipr@cuenet.com
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 01:34:22 +0800
From: GRAIN Los Banos <grain@baylink.mozcom.com>
To: bio-ipr@cuenet.com
--
BIO-IPR docserver
________________________________________________________
TITLE: Legal "Terminator" Threatens Francophone Africa's Farmers
AUTHOR: Rural Advancement Foundation International
PUBLICATION: RAFI News Release
DATE: 17 February 1999
URL: http://www.rafi.org/pr/release27.html
________________________________________________________
Rural Advancement Foundation International
News Release - 17 February 1999
LEGAL "TERMINATOR" THREATENS
FRANCOPHONE AFRICA'S FARMERS
RIGHT TO SAVE SEED IN POOR COUNTRIES MAY BE ELIMINATED
AS 15 AFRICAN STATES ARE PRESSURED TO ACCEPT UPOV '91
Fifteen Francophone African states, among them some of the poorest countries
in the world, are under pressure to sign away the right of more than 20
million small-holder farmers to save and exchange crop seed. The decision to
abandon Africa’s 12,000-year tradition of seed saving will be finalized at a
meeting February 22-25 in the Central African Republic. The 15 governments
have been told to adopt draconian intellectual property legislation for
plant varieties in order to conform to a provision in the World Trade
Organization (WTO) that obliges signatories to "protect" plant varieties.
The legislation (a kind of legal "Terminator" because it prohibits farmers
from replanting "protected" seed) is also known, euphemistically, as "Plant
Breeders’ Rights". If adopted, the legislation will throw some of Africa’s
poorest countries into an intellectual property cartel dominated by a
handful of OECD states led by the USA, the UK, and Japan.
During meetings in East Africa a few days ago, RAFI’s Pat Mooney and Hope
Shand learned that OAPI (l’Organisation Africaine de la Propriete
Intellectuelle/African Intellectual Property Organization) has agreed to
adopt "UPOV 91" — the world’s most restrictive form of Plant Breeders’
Rights. The Convention is managed by the Union for the Protection of New
Varieties of Plants (UPOV) — a subsidiary treaty of the Geneva-based World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
"Francophone African countries are being bullied into adopting UPOV’91",
says Pat Mooney, "even though the WTO is about to conduct a review of its
plant variety ‘protection’ clause." Adds Hope Shand, "The review is not
expected to be completed before 2001. Many analysts predict that a whole new
trade negotiating round may be launched before the review is completed."
"African patent offices are being asked to climb on a wagon other countries
in other regions may never accept," agrees Pat Mooney, "Conceivably, a new
trade round could render compliance unnecessary. Since six of the 15 OAPI
states are "least developed countries" (according to UNDP definitions),
regardless of the review or a new negotiating round, they have until at
least 2006 before they have to introduce any kind of legislation. " "In a
worst case scenario," Hope Shand concludes, "OAPI members would still have
the option to accept legislation that would allow farmers to save, re-use,
and even sell purchased seed. Where is the pressure coming from and why are
sovereign countries selling off the historic rights of their farmers?"
Urgent Action:
RAFI is writing to each of the 15 OAPI countries, contacting both Ministers
of Agriculture and Ministers responsible for patent offices. "Depending on
the country," Pat Mooney notes, "between one-fifth and one-half of all the
farmers are small-holders who depend heavily on their ability to save seed
in order to keep production reliable and costs low. There are at least 20
million such farmers in OAPI states," Mooney says, "Next week’s decision
could be a major blow to the region’s food security. We suspect that most
Agriculture Ministers don’t even know what their patent offices are
proposing to do."
What is OAPI?
The precursor to OAPI was established on September 13, 1962, by 12
francophone African heads of state. It was called the "Office Africain et
Malgache de la Propriete Industrielle (OAMPI). The agreement establishing
OAMPI was revised in Bangui, Central African Republic on March 27, 1977, and
gave birth to OAPI, the "Organisation Africaine de la Propriete
Intellectuelle". It has 15 members: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central
African Republic, Chad, Congo, Djibouti, Gabon, Guinea, Ivory Coast, Niger,
Mali, Mauritania, Senegal, Togo. Of these, the following are considered
least developed countries by UNDP: Burkina Faso, Central African Republic,
Guinea, Mali, Mauritania, and Togo.
What is UPOV 91?
The original international Plant Breeders’ Rights convention was adopted in
Paris in 1961. Since then, the Convention has been amended several times and
two forms of PBR are now in common use. Most UPOV members, in fact, adhere
to its 1978 convention, which is widely interpreted by governments to allow
farmers to save and exchange seed. UPOV’s 1991 convention, however, assumes
that farmers cannot save seed unless governments permit specific exceptions.
Around the world, 1.4 billion people depend on the ability of small-holder
farmers to save seed for their family food security. To date, the only UPOV
members to confirm the 1991 convention are Bulgaria, Denmark, Germany,
Israel, Japan, Netherlands, Moldova, Russia, Sweden, UK, and USA. If OAPI
bows to WTO and UPOV pressure during the meeting February 22-25, the 15
francophone African States will more than double the Convention’s roster of
members.
RAFI - International Office
110 Osborne St., Suite 202
Winnipeg MB R3L 1Y5 CANADA
Tel: (1-204) 453 52 59
Fax: (1-204) 925 80 34
Email: rafi@rafi.org
Web: http://www.rafi.org
_________________________________________________________
ABOUT THIS LISTSERVER -- BIO-IPR is an irregular listserver put out by
Genetic Resources Action International (GRAIN). Its purpose is to circulate
information about recent developments in the field of intellectual property
rights related to biodiversity & associated knowledge. BIO-IPR is a strictly
non-commercial and educational service for nonprofit organisations and
individuals active in the struggle against IPRs on life. The views expressed
in each post are those of the indicated author(s).
HOW TO PARTICIPATE -- To get on the mailing list, send the word "subscribe"
(no quotes) as the subject of an email message to
<bio-ipr-request@cuenet.com>. To get off the list, send the word
"unsubscribe" instead. To submit material to the list, address your message
to <bio-ipr@cuenet.com>. A note with further details about BIO-IPR is sent
to all subscribers.
ABOUT GRAIN -- For general information about GRAIN, you may visit our
website http://www.grain.org or send an email to <grain@bcn.servicom.es>.
Subject: [IKD] Indigenous knowledge
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 21:54 -0800 (PST)
From: CI-PERU@CONSERVATION.ORG
Reply-To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
To: ikd@jazz.worldbank.org
My name is Elda Silva, I am a Peruvian community developer, did my
master's at Virginia Tech(USA) and came back to my country to adquire
experience on sustainable development. You can say a westernized
acultured person borned in a developing country, which is full of
indigenous knowledge. There are some thoughts that I would like to
share with you all.
Globalization has created new values on indigenous cultures and
knowledge. We are learning to value the diversity of cultures in the
context of a monoculture. We intend to preserve them and feel
responsible for their future.
On the other hand, we have that some indigenous communities still
believe that by adquiring western customs ans knowledge they are
becoming developed.
Thus, there is an increasing gap between western and indigenous
ideologies. It would be interesting to create a way of communication
and sharing of ideas worldwide that would allow indigenous communities
to do their own decision making. We as international developers should
be able to support them the best way we can but avoid making decisions
for them.
An itiative would be to start working locally with indigenous
communities in each country with eventual forums regionwide or nation
wide that would allow different indigenous groups to discuss with
western international developers on specific agenda issues for
sustainable development.
Would be happy to receive any comments.
Elda Silva
Community developer in the Cordillera del Condor project
e-mail CI-PERU@CONSERVATION.ORG
Subject: CFP: FEL Conference - Endangered Langs & Education - Maynooth 1999
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 23:51:17 +0000
From: Nicholas Ostler <nostler@chibcha.demon.co.uk>
To: Recipient List Suppressed:;
Endangered Languages and Education
----------------------------------------
Maynooth, Ireland - 17-19 September 1999
CALL FOR PAPERS
The workshop will provide a forum for researchers and activists working for
the maintenance of indigenous languages that face an uncertain future. (It
is the third in a series of annual workshops and conferences hosted by the
Foundation for Endangered Languages.)
CONFERENCE SCOPE AND AIMS
When a language is endangered, it is because the community who use it may
cease to do so the foreseeable future. This is often because new
generations of the community are not acquiring the language, or if they do,
are not using it so much as speakers in the past.
Education, seen as any formal process whereby knowledge is passed on to new
people, usually plays an important part in such changes. But it may act to
promote, resist or even reverse the loss of a language:
· the knowledge or values passed on may be difficult to combine with a
communityÕs traditions as expressed in its ancestral language;
· the transition from oral to literate culture, or from paper-based to
electronic media, may threaten a breakdown in transmission;
· the very procedure of formal education may disrupt the traditional
transmission of the language;
· there may be controversy on what language should be used in formal
education;
· there may be doubt whether there is scope in later life to apply what is
taught;
· there may be perplexity on what methods may best be used in modern
circumstances to transmit knowledge from older days;
· members of the community may have difficulty in fitting into the
education system of the state as a whole, and hence find it hard to achieve
their rightful political influence;
· public ignorance in democracies may be a threat to benign national policy
towards their smaller languages.
All these issues, and more, are relevant to our conference this year.
One fundamental tension is that while organized education may be a threat
to traditional culture and language (bringing foreign elements to the
explicit attention of pupils), people once educated are more likely to
resist unwanted intrusions from outsiders, and build confidence in their
own traditions.
· So how can education programmes be formulated with clear reference to,
and respect for, local culture?
· Who will be the teachers in such programmes, and how can they be trained?
· In setting up such programmes, is there a useful role for international
organizations (as FEL) to help in negotations with local administrations or
national governments, and indeed international programmes?
In some communities, particularly in Europe, there is no such conflict
between prevailing models of education and the traditions of the language
community. Nevertheless, there may be controversy on the role of a local
or regional language in formal education.
· Ethically and empirically, what is the right balance between option and
compulsion in the curriculum?
· How does the role for minority languages bear on the balance between
mother-tongue and foreign-language instruction?
It will be a particular feature of our conference to bring the concerns of
"ethno-education", where education mediates between cultures that have been
separate, into contrast with those of "bi-lingual education", where there
has been traditional co-existence, but the smaller language may be losing
out.
The Foundation for Endangered Languages is a registered charity in England
Wales. FEL conferences, besides being opportunities to discuss the issues
from a global viewpoint, are working meetings of the Foundation, defining
our overall policy for future years. Participants at the conference
therefore need to be members of the Foundation. There are full facilities
to join on arrival, but all proposers are strongly urged to join as soon as
possible, and so take full part in the FoundationÕs activities in the
lead-up to the conference.
The dates will be 17-19 September 1999, and the venue St Patrick's
College,Maynooth, near Dublin, in Ireland. There will be a preliminary
volume of proceedings distributed at the Conference.
Presentations will last twenty minutes each, with a further ten minutes for
discussion. All presentations should be accessible largely in English, but
use of the languages of interest, for quotation or exemplification, may
well be appropriate.
Organizers:
Nicholas Ostler Foundation for Endangered Languages, Bath,
England
Christopher Moseley BBC Monitoring Service
Kim McCone et al. St Patrick's College, Maynooth
Programme Committee:
Mahendra Verma, Anthony Woodbury, Tasaku Tsunoda, Janig Stephens, Jane
Simpson, Mari Rhydwen, Jon Reyhner, Nicholas Ostler, Donncha O Croinin,
David Nash, Christopher Moseley, Kenneth Mackinnon, Tony McEnery, Kim
McCone, Karen Johnson Weiner, Nigel Birch.
ABSTRACT SUBMISSION
Abstracts should not exceed 500 words. They can be submitted in one of two
ways: hard copy or electronic submission. They should be in English.
A) Hard copies (or faxes):
One copy should be sent to:
Nicholas Ostler
Foundation for Endangered Languages
Batheaston Villa, 172 Bailbrook Lane
Bath BA1 7AA England
This should have a clear short title, but should not bear anything to
identify the author(s).
On a separate sheet, please include the following information:
NAME : Names of the author(s)
TITLE: Title of the paper
EMAIL: Email address of the first author, if any
ADDR: Postal address of the first author
TEL: Telephone number of the first author, if any
FAX: Fax number of the first author, if any
The name of the first author will be used in all correspondence.
If possible, please also send an e-mail to Nicholas Ostler at
<nostler@chibcha.demon.co.uk> informing him of the hard copy submission.
This is in case the hard copy does not reach its destination. This e-mail
should contain the information specified in the section below.
B) Electronic submission:
Electronic submission should be in plain ascii text email message giving
the following details:
# NAME : Name of first author
# TITLE: Title of the paper
# EMAIL: E-mail address of the first author
# ADDR: Postal address of the first author
# TEL: Telephone number of the first author, if any
# FAX: Fax number of the first author
and in a separate section
# ABSTR: Abstract of the paper
IMPORTANT DATES
Abstract submission deadline March 21
Notification of Committee's decision April 18
Authors submit camera-ready text July 18
Conference Sept 17-19
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nicholas Ostler
Linguacubun Ltd
Batheaston Villa, 172 Bailbrook Lane
Bath BA1 7AA England
+44-1225-85-2865 fax +44-1225-85-9258
nostler@chibcha.demon.co.uk
No comments:
Post a Comment