Review of national legislation regulating bioprospecting covering such areas as conservation, sustainable utilisation of genetic resources, benefit sharing and IPRs.
Golvan, C. (1992). “Aboriginal Art and the Protection of Indigenous Cultural Rights.” European Intellectual Property Law Review7: 227-232.
The aboriginal art industry is a lucrative one which employs thousands of people. 1988 retail sales were $18.5 million. A number of court cases have been concerned with the protection of the right to prevent others from exploiting their works of art. An organisation now exists to manage the copyright claims of aborigines. Author suggests legislative measures that would eliminate time limitation from copyright and recognise civil rights that could function alongside copyright.
Goodland, R. and G. Ledec (1989). “Balancing Conversion with Conservation in World Bank Projects.” Environment31(9): 7-35.
Explains the rationale for the World Bank’s wildlife management project, whose has two principle components are: to prevent, minimise, or partially compensate for the conversion of wildlands and, thereby, to preserve biodiversity; and to increase the project’s economic or social benefits by preserving and improving the environmental services provided by wildlands.
Goodland, R. J. A., E. O. A. Asibey, et al. (1990). “Tropical Moist Forest Management: The Urgency of Transition to Sustainability.” Environmental Conservation17(4): 303-18.
Proposes a transition to sustainability of tropical forest use by improvements in current logging techniques, by deflecting logging to secondary forest, by extracting only high quality hardwoods from forest, and by promotion of tree plantations.
Goodland, R. (1993). “Ethical Priorities in Environmentally Sustainable Energy Systems: The Case of Tropical Hydropower.” International Journal of Sustainable Development1(4): 3-14.
Argues for approval of hydropower projects in accordance with a selection process informed by concern for environment, human rights and the need for consensus.
Goodland, R. and H. Daly (1993). “Why Northern Income Growth is not the Solution to Southern Poverty.” Ecological Economics8: 85-101.
Argues that the North should stabilise its resource consumption and reduce its damage to global life-support systems.
Goodland, R. and H. Daly (1993). Poverty Alleviation is Essential for Environmental Sustainability. Washington DC, The World Bank.
Deals with poverty alleviation and environmental sustainability presenting five common points of view and offering ways to resolve conflicts among approaches informed by these views.
Goodman, A. H. (1996). Glorification of the Genes? The Life Industry. M. Baumann, J. Bell, F. Koechlin and M. Pimbert. London, Intermediate Technology Publications Ltd.: 149-160.
Argues that the concept of race is dangerous, and scientific enterprises based on the concept, such as the HGDP, are dangerous.
Gopo, J. M. (1991). Use of DNA Fingerprints in Protection of Property Rights and in Development of a Biodiversity Conservation Strategy Programme. Nairobi, Kenya. B. a. G. R. I. f. I. a. C. International Symposium on: Property Rights. June 10-15.
Discussion on the application of DNA fingerprinting techniques to biodiversity conservation as well as to protection of IPRs.
Government of the Northwest Territories - Department of Culture and Communications (1991). Report of the Traditional Knowledge Working Group. Yellowknife, GNWT.
The Traditional Knowledge Working Group consists mainly of indigenous people and representatives of government ministries, and was established to seek ways in which the GNWT and NGOs could work together to document traditional knowledge and ensure it is applied both by government and other agencies. The main sections of the Report are as follows: The meaning of traditional knowledge; The current use of traditional knowledge; The potential use of traditional knowledge; Principles for the preservation and use of traditional knowledge; Overcoming obstacles to the use of traditional knowledge; and Recommendations for government action.
Government of the Northwest Territories - Department of Culture and Communications (1994). Response to the Government of the Northwest Territories to the Report of the Traditional Knowledge Working Group. Yellowknife, GNWT.
The GNWT’s response to the Report of the Traditional Knowledge Working Group including the 20 recommendations for government action made in the Report.
Graham, G. M. (1987). “Protection and Reversion of Cultural Property.” The International Lawyer21(3): 755-793.
Traces history of laws concerning protection of cultural property as it increasingly became based on the notion of cultural patrimony. Affirmative rather than negative obligations on states prevailed in the 20th century, as did the notion of common heritage of mankind. Various international legal instruments and declarations were developed based on different understandings of what constitutes cultural property. Whatever, demands for reversion cannot easily be sustained by law in many cases.
Gray, A. (1990). Between the Spice of Life and the Melting Pot: Biodiversity Conservation and its Impact on Indigenous Peoples. Copenhagen, International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs.
Indigenous peoples constitute most of the world’s cultural diversity and tend to inhabit areas of the world with greatest biodiversity. Nevertheless, many advocates of conservation believe that the interests of indigenous peoples are best served by tying them more closely to the world economic system. Green Capitalism is another top-down approach harmful to conservation and likely to lead to further exploitation of indigenous peoples. The way for indigenous peoples to protect biodiversity is through the recognition of their rights to their territories. Furthermore they should be able to control the marketing of their commodities and receive respect and recognition for the benefits which come from their knowledge.
Gray, A. (1990). Indigenous Peoples and the Marketing of the Rainforest. The Ecologist. 20: 223-227.
The marketing of ‘sustainably-produced’ rainforest products is being touted by environment and development organisations as a key to saving the rainforests. However, as so often in the past, there is a danger that the opinions of the indigenous inhabitants of the forests will be ignored. If these people do not have control over the marketing of rainforest products, they will become dependent on outside forces over which they have no control; outside forces which will inevitably lead to the destruction both of the indigenous societies and the rainforests.
Gray, A. (1991). The Impact of Biodiversity Conservation on Indigenous Peoples. Biodiversity: Social and Ecological Perspectives. V. Shiva, P. Anderson, H. Schukinget al. London, UK and New Jersey, USA / Penang, Malaysia, Zed Books Ltd. / World Rainforest Movement.
Indigenous peoples constitute 90-95% of the world’s cultural diversity. Although they also tend to inhabit areas of the world with greatest biodiversity the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy does not give them an important role except by tying them more closely to the world economic system. This is dangerous when demand for products drive production turning indigenous people into effective “wage labourers” for Northern customers’ demands. Green Capitalism is another top-down approach harmful to conservation and likely to lead to further exploitation of indigenous peoples.
Gray, A. (1995). Whose Knowledge is it anyway? Indigenous Affairs: 2-4.
Since the 1993 Mataatua Declaration, there have been regular statements by indigenous peoples drawing attention to the critical importance of their cultural and genetic heritage. This can be attributed to bioprospecting and developments in international law, especially the TRIPS agreement. Responses seem to be based on three main approaches or emphases: (i) seeking to reform IPR laws; (ii) rejecting IPRs altogether in favour of notions of ‘indigenous knowledge’ or ‘cultural heritage’; and (iii) using concepts like ‘traditional resource rights’, which blend the benefits of the former two.
Gray, A., A. Parellada, et al. (1998). From Principles to Practice: Indigenous Peoples and Biodiversity Conservation in Latin America. Indigenous Peoples and Biodiversity Conservation in Latin America, Pucallpa, Peru, IWGIA.
Both indigenous peoples and conservationists are taking initiatives to try to combine indigenous rights with the need to protect the environment. Such an approach constitutes a new model for conservation, based on an alliance between the two groups rather than a conflict, and is gradually becoming more prominent. In 1996, the Forest Peoples Programme and the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs decided to join forces with indigenous organisations and pool their experiences in order to analyse the different priorities of conservation and indigenous rights movements and promote dialogue between them. An indigenous peoples’ organisation, AIDESEP, proposed a meeting of conservationists and indigenous peoples in Pucallpa, Peru, and the resulting conference provided the material for this volume.
Grayson, A. J., Ed. (1995). The World’s Forests: International Initiatives since Rio. Oxford, The Commonwealth Forestry Association, Oxford Forestry Institute.
Summary of inter-governmental and non-governmental forest initiatives undertaken since UNCED.
Greaves, T. (1994). IPR, a Current Survey. Intellectual Property Rights for Indigenous Peoples: A Sourcebook. T. Greaves. Oklahoma City, SfAA: 1-16.
Provides an introduction and overview to various questions that often arise when IPRs are proposed as a means by which indigenous peoples can protect their cultural knowledge, control whether it may be sed by outsiders, and, where possible, receive compensation for authorised use.
Greaves, T., Ed. (1994). Intellectual Property Rights for Indigenous Peoples: A Sourcebook. Oklahoma City, Society for Applied Anthropology.
The rights of indigenous societies to control the use of their cultural knowledge by outsiders has become an issue of global importance. This book includes both cases where indigenous groups have asserted these rights, and analyses of the legal and political contexts for such rights.
Greaves, T. (1995). “The Intellectual Property of Sovereign Tribes.” Science Communication17(2): 201-213.
Discusses how indigenous groups are experimenting with IPRs to solve a keenly felt problem: how to gain control over what outsiders can use of indigenous culture. The main IPRs are ill-suited but the applications of IPRs for tribal groups are providing some measure of legal protection. There is also a global compaign to modify or supplement existing IPRs to make them more useful for protecting traditional culture. In the interim, indigenous groups are relying on measures at the level of their reservation and tribal governments that, in varying degrees, impose some collective control over outsiders’ unfettered appropriation of their cultural information.
Greaves, T. (1996). Tribal Rights. Valuing Local Knowledge: Indigenous Peoples and Intellectual Property Rights. S. B. Brush and D. Stabinsky. Covelo, CA, Island Press.
Indigenous people are already asserting IPR related rights making the work of non indigenous professionals irrelevant. For indigenous people IPRs are not about ownership and compensation, but about control of cultural knowledge. Examples mostly form North America are given to demonstrate that indigenous peoples are taking control of their knowledge at their own initiatives.
Greeley, M. and J. Farrington (1989). Potential Implications of Agricultural Biotechnology for the Third World. Agricultural Biotechnology: Prospects for the Third World. J. Farrington, Overseas Development Institute: 49-65.
Green, R. and N. M. Mitchell (1990). American Indian Sacred Objects, Skeletal Remains, Repatriation and Reburial: A Resource Guide. Washington DC, The American Indian Program, National Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institute.
Bibliography relevant to debate over issues surrounding the care, handling and disposition of American Indian materials, including sacred objects and skeletal remains.
Green College Centre for Environmental Policy and Understanding (1993). Seminar on Intellectual Property Rights, Indigenous Cultures and Biodiversity Conservation, May 14th 1993. Oxford, Green College.
Report of seminar containing participants with expertise in a wide variety of fields: pharmaceutical research, medicine, law, economics, biochemistry and anthropology, and working in academia, NGOs and industry. Talks and discussions dealt with IPRs, pharmaceutical research, indigenous cultures and conservation.
Greengrass, B. (1989). “UPOV and the Protection of Plant Breeders - Past Developments, Future Perspectives.” International Review of Industrial Property and Copyright Law20(5): 622-36.
Briefly traces the history of the UPOV Convention , describes its main characteristics, and provides suggestions for enabling the patent and breeders’ right systems to complement each other.
Greengrass, B. (1991). “The 1991 Act of the UPOV Convention.” European Intellectual Property Review13(12): 466-472.
A key UPOV official explains the changes in the 1991 version of the UPOV Convention.
Greengrass, B. (1996). UPOV and Farmers’ Rights. Agrobiodiversity and Farmers’ Rights. M. S. Swaminathan. Madras, M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation. MSSRF Proceedings Number 14: 50-56.
Overview of the UPOV Convention by the organisation’s Vice-Secretary General. Affirms that farmers were the foundation of the seed industry in Western Europe and North America and that in developing countries, farmers should also be regarded as the potential growth point of a professional seed industry. It is concluded that to give practical expression to the Farmers’ Rights concept, it may be necessary to think in terms of an IPR system.
Grenier, L. (1998). Working with Indigenous Knowledge: A Guide for Researchers. Ottawa, International Development Research Centre.
In the 1990s, indigenous knowledge has been fertile ground for research, and a wealth of information now exists on the topic. The information, however, is disparate and no truly comprehensive guide exists until now. This guidebook demonstrates what indigenous knowledge can contribute to a sustainable development strategy that accounts for the potential of the local environment and the experience and wisdom of the indigenous population. Through an extensive review of field examples as well as current theory and practice, it provides a succinct yet comprehensive review of indigenous knowledge research and assessment.
Griffiths, T. (1993). Indigenous Knowledge and Intellectual Property: A Preliminary Review of the Anthropological Literature. Oxford, Foundation for Ethnobiology.
Discussion of the various kinds of knowledge in indigenous communities and the role knowledge plays in cultural identity and forging social ties within and between social groups, communities and individuals. Intellectual property is knowledge restricted in the process of social differentiation. However, it is still quite different from intellectual property as understood in modern societies. Local knowledge is an asset in negotiations over land claims.
Grifo, F. T., D. Downes, et al. (1996). Intellectual Property Rights Agreements as a Mechanism to Achieve Biodiversity Conservation: The International Biodiversity Group’s Program. Valuing Local Knowledge: Indigenous Peoples and Intellectual Property Rights. S. B. Brush and D. Stabinsky. Covelo, CA.
Explains the work of the International Cooperative Biodiversity Groups, which are intended to integrate conservation and development through drug discovery based on natural products.
Grifo, F. T. (1996). Chemical Prospecting: An Overview of the International Cooperative Groups Program. Biodiversity, Biotechnology, and Sustainable Development in Health and Agriculture: Emerging Connections. P. A. H. Organization. Washington DC, Pan American Health Organization. Scientific Publication No.560: 12-26.
Presents the goals and activities of the International Biodiversity Cooperative Groups (ICBG) programme, which consists of bioprospecting partnerships involving the public and private sectors, conservation NGOs and academic institutions, and operating in tropical and dryland regions of Central America, South America and West Africa. The programme seeks to implement the objectives of the CBD.
Grifo, F. and J. Rosenthal, Eds. (1997). Biodiversity and Human Health. Covelo, CA, Island Press.
This book brings together leading thinkers on the global environment and biomedicine to explore the human health consequences of the loss of biological diversity. Based on a two-day conference sponsored by the National Institute of Health, the National Science Foundation, and the Smithsonian Institution, the book opens a dialogue among experts from the fields of public health, biology, epidemiology, botany, ecology, demography, and pharmacology on this vital but often neglected concern.
Gudeman, S. (1996). Sketches, Qualms and Other Thoughts on Intellectual Property Rights. Valuing Local Knowledge: Indigenous Peoples and Intellectual Property Rights. S. B. Brush and D. Stabinsky. Covelo, CA, Island Press.
Theoretical discussion of possible role for IPRs in protecting and rewarding traditional knowledge. A limited role is envisaged, but monetary rewards will not prevent erosion of local economies.
Guerrero, A. M. (1994). Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights of the Kuna People of Panama. Voices of the Earth. L. v. d. Vlist. Amsterdam, NCIV & International Books: 70-72.
Describes the provisions of the First Draft Fundamental Law concerning the indigenous people of the Kuna Yala Territory in Panama.
Guerrero, A. M. (1994). The Autonomy of the Kuna Yala Territory in the Republic of Panama. Voices of the Earth. L. v. d. Vlist. Amsterdam, NCIV & International Books: 148-167.
Describes the political and administrative structure of the Kuna Yala Territory of Panama, which has its genesis in the millenarian practices of Kuna indigenous law.
Guha, R. and M. Gadgil (1989). “State Forestry and Social Conflict in British India.” Past & Present(123): 141-177.
Attempts to reconstruct the ecological history of India during the colonial period using insights derived from recent debates in human ecology. Grassroots resistance movements are described and it is argued that their legacy persists today.
Guijt, I., F. Hinchcliffe, et al. (1995). The Hidden Harvest: The Value of Wild Resources in Agricultural Systems. London, International Institute for Environment and Development - Sustainable Agriculture Programme.
Summary of a research project that aims to investigate, through local-level valuation, the importance of wild plant and animal resources in agricultural systems and to rural livelihoods.
Gupta, A. K. (1987). Why Poor People Don’t Cooperate: Learning from Traditional Systems. The Research Relationship: Practice and Politics in Social Policy Research. G. C. Wenger. London, Allen and Unwin: 111-127.
Development planners and academics have wondered why cooperative organisations set up to serve the rural poor fail to elicit their cooperation. The importance of involving the poor in generating alternatives for their own development is emphasised. Social scientists, it is stressed, must be accountable to those disadvantaged people whose cause they espouse, lest the solutions they espouse become worse than the problem.
Gupta, A. (1990). “Peasant Knowledge: Who Has Rights to Use it?” ILEIA NewsletterMarch: 24-24.
What is knowledge and who has the right to use it? Academics have their reasons, but does that mean robbing the poor? The author poses some important reflections for himself and others who work with farmers. If knowledge were truly a common property, the academic discussion about rights to it would be trivial. But if knowledge can be expropriated by free riders or rent seekers, rules of the game need to be evolved.
Gupta, A. K. (1990). The Right to Resource: Peasant Knowledge, Protocol of its ‘Extraction’ and Ethics of Collaboration in Extractions. Ahmedabad, Indian Institute of Management.
According to the author, peasant knowledge is a resource and an important source for the generation of technologies for sustainable technologies. The author presents the various ways that outsiders relate to the knowledge and rights of local people, enumerates some of the dilemmas that arise, and argues that there is a need to develop rules of the game to deal with definition, appropriation, value addition, and distribution of resources and benefits.
Gupta, A. (1990). Who and What is Minewatch? London, Minewatch.
Minewatch aims to gather and disseminate information on the nature of specific types of mining, with emphasis on their social/environmental/economic impact and their infringement primarily on indigenous land rights or land claims.
Gupta, A. K., K. Patel, et al. (1992). Conserving Diversity for Sustainable Development: The Case of Plants of Insecticidal and Veterinary Medicine Importance. Ahmedabad, India, Indian Institute of Management.
Authors documenting local technical innovations and ecological systems. This work indicates the considerable potential for building upon peoples’ knowledge for developing sustainable techniques. A case is made for redefining the framework for biodiversity conservation to include traditional knowledge.
Gupta, A. K. (1992). Biodiversity, Poverty and Intellectual Property Rights of Third World Peasants: A Case for Renegotiating Global Understanding. Biodiversity: Implications for Global Food Security. M. S. Swaminathan and S. Jana. Delhi, Macmillan, India: 236-256.
Explains importance of biodiversity and traditional knowledge systems. Author discusses possible mechanisms for compensating conservers of biodiversity.
Gupta, A. (1992). The Honey Bee has Stung! Forest Trees and People: 8-16.
Anil Gupta has initiated a programme to document local technical knowledge from around the world. He aims to facilitate exchange of knowledge between and among innovative farmers and formal researchers. Gupta argues that it is important to acknowledge by name the source of innovations and then to return research based on this innovation. Compensation should be paid in case knowledge is commercialised.
Gupta, A. K. (1993). Creativity, Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Networking at Grassroots Level.
The key objectives of SRISTI are to strengthen the capacity of grassroots level innovations and inventors engaged in conserving biodiversity to (a) protect their IPRs (b) experiment to add value to their knowledge (c) evolve entrepreneurial ability to generate returns form their knowledge (d) enrich their cultural and institutional basis of dealing with nature.
Gupta, A. K. (1993). Secular Basis of Sustainable Spirit: Understanding Roots of Creativity and Innovations at Grassroots Level. C. o. T. S. a. T. o. India. Bombay, November 29.
The tradition of invention which has both a sacred basis and a secular orientation survives in poor areas of the world. It can be harnessed as a basis for sustainable development. Author explains work of SRISTI and the Honey Bee Network.
Gupta, A. K. (1995). “Ethical Dilemmas in Conservation of Biodiversity: Towards Developing Globally Acceptable Ethical Guidelines.” Eubios Journal of Asian and International Bioethics