THE UNIVERSITY OF LEIPZIG

for instance, where common property rights regimes have elaborate and long lasting rules can
be codified in an attempt to formalize and codify property rights to the resources in question
as was the case in Indonesia, Brazil, where common property regimes had legal recognition.
The other property regime which this study found important is the non-physical component
which relates to biodiversity, knowledge and intellectual property of the Luhya in Kakamega.
In this regard we are talking about the territory and issues relating to the access to the
intellectual resources. From the study it was learnt that issues to deal with knowledge
determination and the use of knowledge are collective, interrogational, and very restricted.
We for instance found out that the protection of natural, historical cultural and traditional
knowledge resources of indigenous natures is collectively guarded. It was established that
while the custodians of local knowledge system had a duty to relay this knowledge to their
subordinates and tribes-men, those who had received the knowledge had the obligation to
keep that knowledge and prevent though with “wrong intentions” to have that knowledge.
Access to such knowledge is usually through a process that takes one through various
procedures! We must remember that the Luhya are too secretive, too suspicious and too
procedural! For instance locating those people anticipated to have the requisite authority over
some detailed and knowledge that is regarded confidential in the Luhya terms is such a long
process.
From the above account we came to learn that institutions regarding knowledge-giving are
strict. For example during the field study we learnt that, clan elders can only be identified or
accessed through an area warden or local chief who negotiated and briefed the chief about the
kind of people who wanted to meet him. The chief in this case acts as an emissary and exudes
some reasonable degree of diplomatic skill in negotiating the acceptance of the elder. In most
cases an elder would invite other elders who are known to have a clear grasp on the subject
matter. It is also done in an effort to dispel fear that he has not given out any important
information regarding the Luhya customs and critical knowledge found to be confidential to
the society and its resources. In such instances, the team of elders would be briefed about the
real intentions of the study.
Therefore, when one sums up all this, we are made to understand the relationship between the
community and its knowledge resources. We also need to recognize the authority of the local
law or customary law in the governance of the right to knowledge access. This ultimately
makes one appreciate the way in which the rights relating to intellectual property resources
are framed. Among the many justifications usually advanced for over centralising community
ownership of knowledge resources, was the argument that; institutionalising the power to give
and advance the traditional ecological knowledge those outside the Luhya sub-tribes, would
offer enhanced efficiency in resource use and greater long-term protection of both the
knowledge and physical resource. This is very common because there are many traditional
Luhya people who still live near these forest resources and their lives depend upon their
traditional rights of physical access to use these resources.
175