Tony Bennett, Differing diversities - Council of Europe

Reasearch position paper 7lose local scientific knowledge, innovative capacity, and wisdom about species andecosystem management. As one scholar concludes: ‘Any reduction of language diversitydiminishes the adaptational strength of our species because it lowers the pool ofknowledge from which we can draw.’ The loss of traditional farm communities, languages,and indigenous cultures all represent the erosion of human intellectual capitalon a massive scale. It is tantamount to losing a road map for survival, the key to foodsecurity, environmental stability and improving the human condition. Thus, it isincreasingly difficult to talk about the conservation and sustainable use of genes,species and ecosystems separate from human cultures.”5. For a discussion of the various definitions of indigenous knowledge and how these aresituated in relation to conventional, formal, or scientific knowledges, see Dei, Hall andGoldin-Rosenberg, 2000.6. As Graham Dutfield (2000a: 505) explains, “[a]lthough outsiders have collected knowledgeand biological resources from traditional peoples for centuries, ‘bioprospecting’(the search for and collection of biological material and traditional knowledge for commercialends, with particular reference to the pharmaceutical, biotechnological andagricultural industries) has intensified in recent years.”7. Cecilia Oh (1999) citing Vandana Shiva.8. Based principally on Articles 8.j., 16.5 and 18.4 of the Convention on BiologicalDiversity.9. Exceptions include laws in the Philippines and Peru. In the Philippines, the IndigenousPeoples’ Rights Act of 1997 recognises that indigenous cultural communities andindigenous peoples have, as part of their rights to cultural integrity, rights to control biogeneticresources, indigenous knowledge systems, in addition to rights to control,develop, and protect vital resources, health practices, resource management systems,and agricultural technologies. For a critical discussion of the legislation see Rovillos,1999a. The Ley de Biodiversidad or Biodiversity Law passed in Costa Rica in 1998 initiatedthe process of developing a sui generis regime for protecting the KIP of indigenousand local communities but also explicitly established the juridical recognition ofthese rights without any requirement of registration or prior declaration. The parametersof these community intellectual rights will be determined in consultation withindigenous peoples and peasants. See discussion in Dutfield, 2000b: 110-113. InThailand, a draft bill recognising the collective rights of traditional healers and benefitsharing for the commercial use of traditional knowledge provoked an almost immediatechallenge by the United States in 1997. See Correa, 2000.10. Indeed, according to Gurdial Singh Nijar (1999a), “[a] law to protect and further theknowledge systems of indigenous peoples and local communities would clearly contributeto the promotion of technological innovation in furtherance of the social andeconomic welfare of large segments of the Third World’s populace.”11. Bulgaria, for example, ranks amongst the most biologically diverse countries in Europewith huge numbers of endemic species and is home to many traditional and rare cultivars.Not surprisingly, given its accessibility to western researchers, it has also beensubject to exploitation including the illegal gathering (and export) of edible fungi,medicinal plants, snails, and reptiles (Bulgaria, 1998: 6). Bulgaria is a rich source forbotanical drug species within Europe and is eighth in the leading export countries in thebotanical drugs trade. Wild botanical drugs continue to be collected by villagers whohave traditional knowledge of their usages (Lange and Mladenova, 1997: 135-146).Although, restrictions on collecting, trading, and exporting species have been established,legislative initiatives have been oriented towards the preservation of biologicalresources rather than the continued cultivation of the cultural knowledge that sustainsthis biodiversity.187