Revisiting the Debate on IPR

World or European-wide intellectual property concepts, rules and mechanisms such as Protected Geographical Indications (GIs) represent an option to control access to local and traditional resources and ensure the principles of benefit sharing in the exploitation of these, as promoted in the Convention on Biological Diversity. The relationship between different intellectual property concepts, rules and mechanisms protecting farmers' rights and their impact on the preservation of indigenous species and traditional and local knowledge is discussed. An analysis of different legal frameworks shows that most of the systems offer only a minor protection level. Currently only the European protection scheme for Geographical Indications seems to fulfil the goal to conserve and to support traditional resources and their sustainable exploitation. Nevertheless, even this system has some gaps and pitfalls which the interested farmers and regional initiatives need to be aware of.

1999

Recent debate has focused on the use of intellectual property regimes for the protection of indigenous resources. Both domesticated crops and useful wild plants are shaped by indigenous knowledge and by their uses within indigenous cultures. This implies that the preservation of cultural systems is as important as the conservation of the associated biological resources. Intellectual property has been suggested as a means to protect indigenous resources from misappropriation, and to create increased investment in their conservation. Four recent books that discuss the problems that arise from the application of IPR for the protection of indigenous resources highlight a salient issue: that current IPR systems may conflict and undermine the culture, social structure, and knowledge systems of indigenous societies. In order to support conservation through indigenous management of biodiversity, a number of steps are required for the negotiation of intellectual property systems that are mor...

International Research Journal of Social Sciences, 2013

The importance of biodiversity and traditional knowledge protection has increased immensely in the recent past, due to the technological leap in the area of Biotechnology. The pace of competition induced the Western scientists and Multi National Corporations infiltrate local community's traditional knowledge and genetic resources. This in turn resulted in major conflicts among local communities, national governments and MNCs. International agreements dealing with Intellectual Property Rights and Bio Diversity, like Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Agreement has contradictory objectives. This article explores the fundamental tenants, divergence, controversies between CBD and TRIPs; also specifically looks at the major controversies within the Agreements

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 1998

The recognition of IPRs as human rights entails a renewed concern for social justice issues in an era of so-called global harmonization of intellectual property protections that further challenges our considerations of sovereignty. The issue of intellectual property has, for many indigenous peoples, been an effective rhetorical vehicle to keep issues of autonomy and self-determination on the global bargaining table. However, it would be a gross misrepresentation of global cultural politics to suggest that all indigenous interest in intellectual property assumes a collective cultural form. An acknowledgement of IPRs status as human rights instruments seems timely, if not urgent, given the contemporary hegemony of financial and trade considerations in global discussions of intellectual property.

2010

World or European-wide intellectual property concepts, rules and mechanisms such as Protected Geographical Indications (GIs) represent an option to control access to local and traditional resources and ensure the principles of benefit sharing in the exploitation of these, as promoted in the Convention on Biological Diversity. The relationship between different intellectual property concepts, rules and mechanisms protecting farmers' rights and their impact on the preservation of indigenous species and traditional and local knowledge is discussed. An analysis of different legal frameworks shows that most of the systems offer only a minor protection level. Currently only the European protection scheme for Geographical Indications seems to fulfil the goal to conserve and to support traditional resources and their sustainable exploitation. Nevertheless, even this system has some gaps and pitfalls which the interested farmers and regional initiatives need to be aware of.

2017

Biodiversity degradation has been recorded on international policy agenda for several decades. There are numerous ethical issues for biodiversity conservation. There are numerous strategies to reverse the biodiversity decline, ranging from economic, through ecological, to ethical Both the rationale for biodiversity conservation action and its success differ greatly on the basis of paradigms represented by various professionals associated with conservation, as well as social-cultural and political context. The successful understanding of conservation goals to great extent depends on conservation stakeholders, i.e. people at different governance levels who work with implementing biodiversity policies in practice. There is an urgent need to know how forest dwelling communities understand biodiversity and the reasons behind their action for conservation. This article critically examines various ethical dimensions of conservation strategies adopted by communities.

Proposal, 2009

The historical connections that people possess stem from old traditions based on a system of governance and cultural protocol that allow for alternative ways to relate to their communities, and to those around them, with respect to the use and management of shared natural resources. For this to happen effectively, customary law needs to be recognized so that the ruling structure can shift from a top down to a bottom up model, one that will offer more participation, debate, discussion, and mutual collaboration, so that benefit will accrue to the collectivity rather than just an individual. In fact, according to Wilma Mankiller, “one of the great challenges for Indigenous Peoples in the 21st Century will be to develop practical models to capture, maintain, and pass on traditional knowledge systems and value to future generations.” To do this, Argumedo et al says that “pre-existing customary rights of traditional farmers and resource custodians also need to be recognized.” Bastida and Encina (2006) pose the following question: “are [indigenous peoples and local communities] in condition to demand the protection of their collective cultural and intellectual rights outside of the legal framework of intellectual property, which governs the terms to access their own knowledge, innovations and practices established in Article 8(J) of the Convention on Biological Diversity?” With respect to legal systems that protect traditional knowledge, the issue is this: that whereas “a number of legally binding treaties protect the inventions of industrialized countries, no such protection exists for holders of traditional knowledge, or TK, who live mainly in the South” (Argumedo et al.).

Sustainable development requires establishing a functional balance between socioeconomic development and environmental protection, with traditional knowledge (TK) held by indigenous and local communities (ILCs), including traditional practices of conservation and sustainable use of natural resources, playing an integral role in achieving global sustainable development goals. This paper looks at the inclusion of TK in two principle regimes: the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA). It explains TK within this context, summarizes key elements of applicable legal frameworks, and analyzes certain legal measures from domestic implementation of the treaties. It suggests that traditional knowledge of ILCs provides a channel for sustainable development which has been nurtured for centuries and should be more effectively integrated into decision-making procedures through greater protections for TK and local empowerment of ILCs for governance and equitable benefit sharing.

Völkerrechtsblog, 2020

This paper reviews international law and policy regarding the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities that are defining the role of traditional and indigenous knowledge in the management and conservation of biodiversity. The most influential forums occur within the United Nations system, particularly the Working Group on Indigenous Populations and the Convention on Biological Diversity. We discuss the "soft-law" context of declarations, regional agreements, ethical guidelines, research protocols, and policy frameworks, which reinforce indigenous entitlements. The elaboration of these rights will increasingly impinge upon scientific research by regulating access to the knowledge and resources of indigenous and local communities, and by requiring that policy and management be made with their full participation. Scientists should respond by following these developments, institutionalizing this participation at all levels of scientific activity, and respecting the value of indigenous knowledge.