Governance and Micropolitics of Traditional ... - IPRsonline.org

(nationally and internationally). Linked to this is a desired requirement for PIC and benefit
sharing when access is facilitated to GRs and TK, administered under other departments in
Thailand. Sections 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 provide extensive details about research access policies,
alleged biopiracy episodes and national laws in Thailand. The biopiracy cases discussed
indicate the relevance of a DOO requirement, however its practical implementation could
prove to be complicated, and there could be difficulties convincing those that oppose a DOO
requirement, including some members of DIP and the US FTA negotiating team. Section 3.7
indicates that benefit sharing is a secondary concern for experts and this is backed up by
comments in interviews and field research.
But such technical solutions exist in a knowledge system that seems far from the daily reality
of the local groups encountered. Likely to be of greater concern for the local communities are
means to be informed and to understand how their knowledge resources may be affected
when researchers seek to obtain access. This highlights the need for practical measures of
PIC. Respect of customary laws should be enabled through this process. Actions taken should
go beyond the implementation of laws to broader education and promotional activities
including the support of traditional healers or farmers networks, information dissemination
and consultations that filters down to all relevant groups. Appendix Two details a model
guideline for PIC and also makes reference to other practical considerations such as a
handbook to help inform local communities of their rights to PIC, problems associated with
knowledge sharing, and issues of research access. The handbook could be distributed with the
assistance of NGOs and farmers or traditional healers’ networks and could be coupled with
information meetings.
97