| |
The World Trade Organization (WTO), who soon came out with another
agenda and was not sure about such conditions. However, WTO observes
that TK could be protected by existing IP system. But it is well
known that the present WTO system does not adequately recognize
IK holder's rights, and does not effectively insulate IK from
intellectual piracy. Further, it is also realized that indigenous
technical knowledge holders would have difficulty in availing
themselves of benefits of IPR systems as well as IPR-like rights
because of the cost associated with acquisition, maintenance and
enforcement of IPRs (Arunachalam, 2002). It is, however, quite
heartening to note that in the 4th session of WTO held at Doha
during November 9-14, 2001, it was recorded as "we instruct
council for TRIPS to examine, Inter alia, the relationship between
the TRIPS agreement and CBD, the protection of TK and folklore".
It is in this context and background that the documentation on
ethnobiological information carried out by "All India Co-ordinated
Research Project on Ethnobiology (AICRPE)" and the benefit
sharing experiment conducted by the author are to be assessed.
It demonstrated the relevance of partnership in defending and
realizing the traditional resource rights as well as in making
the best use of the indigenous bio-resource and associated knowledge
in wealth creation.
Traditional
Knowledge Systems & IPR
IPR
emerged strongly during the Industrial Revolution and it was an
important driving force behind industrial growth and development
in the past few centuries. The IPR from the very beginning has
not recognized the informal system of innovation of artisans,
farmers, indigenous communities/tribes, etc. In many cases the
informal knowledge of traditional community, which directly or
indirectly contributed to production of new products went unrecognized.
The profit accrued from commercial production of such products
has never been shared with the traditional communities, who gave
the original lead for developing such products. The indigenous
communities in many part of the world were voicing against this
discrimination. At the first International Congress on Ethnobiology
held at Belem, in 1987, ethnobiologists (many from Latin America),
environmentalists, scientists discussed these issues and resolved
to come out with a Declaration now known as 'Declaration of Belem'.
The declaration recognized a basic obligation that procedures
to be developed to compensate native people on their knowledge
on their biological resources. The Second Congress on International
Congress on Ethnobiology held at Kunming, China in 1990 resolved
to establish a Global Action plan, the "Kunming Action Plan",
calling for specific and urgent action to stop destruction of
biological and cultural diversity as mandated in the 'Declaration
of Belem'. This meeting also gave to the establishment of global
coalition for Biocultural Diversity to unite the indigenous people,
scientists and environmentalists concerned with the protection
of indigenous/local people's rights. Pushpangadan took an active
part in the above deliberation and he was elected as the Treasure
of International Society of Ethnobiology in the meeting held at
Kunming in November 1999
The
presence of powerful spokesmen, particularly Dr. Durrel Posey
of International Society for Ethnobiology (ISE) at Rio De Janeiro
'Earth Summit' made it possible incorporate to articles pertained
to the legal protection of traditional/local community rights
in the text of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
It
was in the above said background Pushpangadan was motivated to
experiment the benefit sharing mechanism with the Kani Tribe.
Tribal
Settings in India:
India
has over 70 million tribals belonging to over 550 communities.
They inhabit in about 5000 villages, which are located in and
around forests of high mountainous regions of the country. The
tribal communities who live in the forest mostly lead a nomadic
or semi nomadic life subsisting mainly on forest produces.
|
|