Search
site map
IP Handbook Blog
Your source for expert commentary on IP management issues.
Go to the blog
About
MIHR
PIPRA
Fiocruz, Brazil
bioDevelopments- Institute
|
AMMANN, Klaus
Klaus is Emeritus Professor of Biodiversity at the University of Bern, Switzerland. He has worked in vegetation and glacial history, vegetation ecology, urban ecology, lichen chemistry, biomonitoring air pollution and plant taxonomy. He also served as director of the Botanical Garden at the University of Bern. He has been the leader of numerous research projects supported by the Swiss Government and the E.U. on research in ecological monitoring in Bulgaria, biomonitoring air pollution, European plant conservation, risk assessment of gene flow of transgenic crops, and communication strategies. He is a member of numerous scientific committees and organizations, such as chair of the section of biodiversity of the European Federation of Biotechnology, and the Swiss committee on biosafety. He is member of the board of directors of Africa Harvest and involved in biosafety research on sorghum in Africa. He also is active in the field of philosophy and methodology of science communication, together with his wife Dr. Biljana Papazov Ammann. Presently he is guest professor at the Delft University of Technology, Department of Biotechnology, Holland.
Abstract
Reconciling Traditional Knowledge with Modern Agriculture: A Guide for Building Bridges
Abstract:
In the years since the Convention on Biological Diversity was adopted, issues of traditional knowledge have come to affect the legitimacy of the multilateral trading system, in general, and its IP (intellectual property) aspects, in particular. In order to engage indigenous knowledge in furthering socio-economic development, policy-makers will need to reconsider the prevailing notion of a fundamental dichotomy between indigenous and scientific knowledge and begin to challenge both types of knowledge. This chapter concentrates on traditional knowledge—and how it relates to the ecology of agriculture, in all of its variants—and compares it to recent advances in scientific knowledge and the resulting applications of biotechnology in global agriculture.
The chapter argues that this dichotomy between traditional and scientific ways of knowing is not only artificial but problematic, in that it hinders exchange and communication between the two. The dichotomy between traditional knowledge and scientific knowledge is most apparent in, and lies at the root of, perceived differences between the approaches of today’s organic farming and technology-intensive farming systems. While indeed there are important differences, traditional knowledge and scientific knowledge share important similarities. Knowledge, in both cases, is based on human observation and experience and is tested, replicated, and transmitted within its respective community through social institutions and mechanisms put in place for that purpose. Moreover, deeper examination of the genetic integrity of plants used within organic and biotechnology-based agricultural systems shows that the respective crop varieties being used under each system are more similar than they are different. Increasingly, organic farming is building on scientific knowledge, and agricultural biotechnology is seeking to draw on traditional knowledge.
This chapter challenges policy-makers and scientists to examine and, ultimately, to move beyond those conceptual worldviews, or constructs, that maintain the current divide between traditional knowledge/organic agriculture and scientific knowledge/agricultural biotechnology.
By building the bridge between traditional knowledge and science and becoming free to draw upon the best existing ideas and practices from both, a larger palate is available to draw from. But, more importantly, by integrating the innovation systems of both traditional and scientific communities, a much larger range of new ideas and practices could be generated. The chapter calls such dynamic integration the “participatory approach” to agricultural innovation, building upon the “unifying power of sustainable development” and leading to balanced choices in agricultural production chains and rural land use.
Such an integration would require adaptations of Western social institutions and mechanisms of intellectual property in order to interface in a more nuanced fashion with quasi-public-domain knowledge that is external to the published records of Western science and IP systems. At the same time, indigenous communities will need to learn to adapt their social institutions and mechanisms that govern what is, in a sense, sovereign or communal property to coexist with and at times be translated into formal IP rights and practical uses that are external to their traditional systems.
|