<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS" size=2><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>GM
WATCH daily<BR></FONT><A href="http://www.gmwatch.org"><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>http://www.gmwatch.org</FONT></A><BR><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>---<BR></FONT><A
href="http://www.biospectrumindia.com/content/columns/104041202.asp"><FONT
face="Times New Roman"
size=3>http://www.biospectrumindia.com/content/columns/104041202.asp</FONT></A><BR><FONT
face="Times New Roman" size=3>Traditional Knowledge <BR>Devinder Sharma
<BR>Monday, April 12, 2004 <BR><BR>Great gene robbery II<BR><BR>In collaboration
with developing country government, policy makers and the scientific community,
WIPO is spearheading the Great Gene Robbery II.<BR><BR>Devinder Sharma is a New
Delhi-based food and trade policy analyst. Among his recent works include two
books: GATT to WTO: Seeds of Despair and In the Famine Trap. <BR><BR>The world’s
largest collection of plant germplasm, some 6,00,000 plant accessions, are in a
safe custody under the control of the US Department of Agriculture. These
genetic resources that lie stored at Fort Collins/Fort Knox in the United States
are outside the purview of any international treaty. The countries from where
these were collected have no control or say over these resources, nor do they
get any benefit from providing these valuable resources.<BR><BR>This is the
outcome of the Great Gene Robbery part 1.<BR><BR>Some 30 years later, the
international community and that includes the Convention on Biological Diversity
(CBD), the World Intellectual Property Rights Organisation (WIPO), the World
Trade Organisation (WTO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the
Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) and several other
organisations and donor agencies have joined hands to rob the developing world
of the knowledge that comes attached with the huge biodiversity that existed in
the tropical countries.<BR><BR>In collaboration with developing country
governments, policy makers and the scientific community, WIPO is spearheading
the Great Gene Robbery II.<BR><BR>Thirty years after the developing countries
were made to believe that their economic interests were perfectly safe in
collecting and conserving the massive plant germplasm that was getting lost, the
world is at it again. And this time, it is the traditional knowledge that the
international community is suddenly so concerned and worried about. This is in
reality the green gold that lies unaccounted with the developing countries,
including India. This knowledge is worth the entire gold that is stocked with
the US treasury.<BR><BR>In India, the Department of Science and Technology,
Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), the Indian Council for
Agricultural Research (ICAR) and numerous agricultural universities, institutes
and civil society organisations are engaged in documenting traditional
knowledge. Like the earlier efforts to misappropriate genetic resources in the
name of "mankind’s heritage" and "security", this time the same language is
being used to document the traditional knowledge that tells the exploiters of
genetic wealth as to what uses the plant species can be put to. WIPO is already
putting together a mechanism to draw intellectual property rights over the
traditional knowledge that comes from the developing countries.<BR><BR>I have
often warned of the emotional rhetoric that has gone to sell the golden hardware
(traditional knowledge is the real green gold) that lies in our backyards. It is
often said that traditional knowledge, which has been passed on from generations
to generations by local and tribal communities in the developing world, is
getting lost. These would soon be lost to posterity and the humanity would be
paying a heavy price for not conserving and keeping the same alive for future
generations. The answer, therefore, is to document the traditional knowledge.
After all, it too is mankind’s heritage.<BR><BR>It was in the mid-60s and early
‘70s that the same language and expression was used to seek monopoly control
over the plant germplasm resources of the developing countries. At the height of
the green revolution, with the land grant system borrowed from the United States
well in place, we were told that plants were a mankind’s heritage but were being
lost in the process of development. Letting the plant germplasm disappear would
be at the world’s own peril. So what needs to be done is to collect whatever is
available and keep these safely in gene banks.<BR><BR>We did it. We made plant
expeditions and picked up, classified and put the germplasm resources in the
gene banks. It was then that we were told that the society would gain if, for
instance, all the rice-growing countries were to keep their rice collections at
an international centre, which in turn would act as a custodian of the
invaluable genetic wealth. We did it again in good faith. India provided a copy
of its rice collections for a common custody at the International Rice Research
Institute, Manila, in the Philippines. The wheat collections were kept at the
International Research Centre for Maize and Wheat (CIMMYT) at Mexico City. The
other collections went to the 14 other international agricultural centres under
the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research
(CGIAR).<BR><BR>We were then told that these collections are not safe at Manila
or Mexico city. After all, there is a distinct probability that a terrorist
group can blow the gene banks with the result that these resources would be lost
forever. So what do you do? You keep a copy of these collections in safe
custody. And where is this safe custody? At Fort Knox and Fort Collins in the
United States. We did it again and of course in good faith.<BR><BR>The US has
these plant genetic resources, has the finances for research and has the mastery
over genetic engineering. But what is coming in the way is as to what to do with
these genetic resources. After all, you cannot work out the chemical composition
and find out the pharmaceutical properties of each and every plant stored at
Fort Collins. The best way is to revert back to the countries, which originally
had these plant resources. To find out from the local communities as to how and
what uses they were putting these plants to. And that would give the companies
the chemical route to decipher the knowledge, draw industrial uses, seek patents
and market the product back to those countries where it has been traditionally
been used for centuries.<BR><BR>At a time when there exists so much of anger
over biopiracy, sending a bio-prospecting team from a western university or a
company would invite the wrath of the civil society in the developing world. The
best way to legitimise biopiracy, therefore, is to encourage researchers, NGOs,
and the public sector institutes to document the traditional knowledge. Give
them a little research grant and you will have the civil society and
cash-starved research institutes documenting the traditional knowledge virtually
free for you.<BR><BR>The UNDP, UNCTAD, the DFID, SIDA, CIDA, GTZ and almost all
other donors are pumping in grants for documentation of the traditional
knowledge. Except for the donors who continue to misguide the Indian
researchers, no one wants to know what this documentation is for. No one wants
to know why have we become suddenly so conscious of the fast eroding traditional
knowledge. No one wants to work out the economic price of the traditional
knowledge that is being given on an official platter. Moreover, who is using the
documentation that is being done so speedily?<BR><BR>The answer is that we all
are facilitating the process of biopiracy. And we are doing it legally and with
the backing of the international donors. Once again, such documentation is
safely going into the hands of the companies who need them desperately. But
unlike the genetic resources, it will not take 30 years for these companies to
draw IPR over traditional knowledge. International effort has already begun on
how to draw a sui generis system over traditional knowledge. It is a matter of
few years. The documented traditional knowledge will then be out of the control
of the communities, which nurtured them. The tragedy is that unlike biopiracy in
the past—neem, turmeric and the likes—the scientific community and the civil
society is a willing partner this time.<BR><BR>Devinder
Sharma</FONT><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Comic Sans MS"
size=2>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<BR>"Wir brauchen keine
Bio-Terroristen, wenn wir Gentechniker haben."<BR>Independent Science Panel (<A
href="http://www.indsp.org">www.indsp.org</A>; dt.Ü. <A
href="http://www.indsp.org/ISPgerman.pdf">www.indsp.org/ISPgerman.pdf</A>)</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>