1
Indigenous Intellectual Rights
Spring 1999
Instructor: Manuela Cameiro da Cunha
Anthro 205/405 Intrel 405
Tuesdays and Thursdays 1.30-2.50 Pick 118
Office Hours: Mondays 1.30 to 3.00 (with sign-up sheet) H202
We will examine the field of discussion for indigenous intellectual rights in relation to
knowledge of biological resources. Many different actors participate in it, ranging from
indigenous people, their organizations, other NGOs of different scopes, academics of
different disciplines - such as botanists, anthropologists, ecologists, legal scholars,
economists, biological and chemical researchers in the academy research institutions and
in the industry - the industry as such (seeds, pharmaceuticals, etc.) with diverse strategies,
multilateral banks and institutions, international institutions such as several LJN organisms,
national governments, science foundations, and many others... The
debate also impinges on a larger one about the public and the private sphere.
Anthropology is implicated in more than one way: it has stakes in the debate, since it deals
with culture and knowledge; it purports to analyze the field itself, its structure, its rhetoric
and its internalization; and it endeavors to study the actual empirical situations resulting
from various initiatives.
The course will rely on alternating lectures and seminars. Seminars will follow the so- called
'Melbourne method', which will be fully explained in class. It involves a rotational framing,
answering and criticism of issues by three groups (into which the class will be divided at the
second session). Questions and answers should be in printed form and signed. Answers
may be around two to three pages long.
In addition, each one of the three groups should present by week 6 an integrated (ranging
from 15 to 30 pages) research study (topics A,B, C below are indicative of the realm to be
respectively covered by groups A,B and C. These studies should be written as policy
papers commissioned by indigenous organizations (remember they might or might not be
quite sophisticated, and what they want is clear information, not slogans). Studies can
nevertheless be creative in issues, in methods and in presentation devices. They should
append copies of the major documents. These studies will be discussed on week 7,8,9.
There will be no final paper required and evaluation will rely on informed participation in
class as well as on the written material along the course.
Topics:
2
C. How is local knowledge accessed and used (databases, use in the industry, at what
stages, future prospects). The debate on high through-put screening. Contracts for
research, examples (NCI, ICBG, etc.).
B. What are the debates surrounding indigenous intellectual rights? positions taken by
different sectors and NGOs? What are the existing grounds and mechanisms for claiming
indigenous intellectual rights in the international sphere? What are the provisions in
international conventions? Ethical guidelines produced to date. Alternative recipients.
A. Case studies of e.g. the Phillipines, Thailand, Colombia national laws. Case studies of
lawsuits (e.g. neem, etc.)
Readings are on reserve at the Regenstein.
Week 1:
Tuesday March 30 Course Presentation. The emergence of the notion of indigenous
intellectual rights.
Thursday April I (Organization into three groups). Three questions will be presented.
Week 2: Reading: Sahlins 1995 chapter 4 and Levi-Strauss chapter I (first part)
Tuesday 4/6 Lecture. What is 'traditional knowledge'?
Thursday 4/8 Group B answers questions; the questions and answers are criticized
by C. C also submits questions on the readings for the following week.
Week 3: Reading: Brown 1998
4/13 Lecture
4/15 Group A answers questions, critique by group B; group B poses three questions on
the readings for the following seminar
Week 4. Reading: Strathem, Descola, Cameiro da Cunha, Harvey, Afonso 1998.
Strathem 1996, 1997a and 1997 b
4/20 Lecture
4/22 Group C answers, critique by A. A poses three questions on the reading for the next
seminar.
Week 5. Readings: Coombe 1998 (Introduction and chapter 5)
4/27 Lecture
4/29 Group B answers questions; critique of questions and answers by group A. A makes
the questions for the following week.
Week 6. Readings: Balee 1998 chapter I 1. Brush and Starobinski 1996
5/4 Lecture
5/6 Group A answers questions, critique by group B; group B submits three questions on
the readings for the following seminar
3
Week 7: Reading: Study by group C. Cleveland and Murray 1997
5/11 Lecture
5/13 Group C answers, critique by A. A poses three questions on the reading for the next
seminar
Week 8: Reading: Study by group B. Nijar 1996 and Shiva 1994b
5/18 Lecture
5/20 Group B answers questions; critique of questions and answers by group A. Group A
submits three questions
Week 9: Reading: Study by group A
5/25 Lecture
5/27 Group A answers questions, critique by group B; group B poses three questions on
the readings for the following seminar
Week IO: Reading: to be announced. 6/1 Lecture
6/3 Group C answers, critique by A.
Bibliography:
There is a very large bibliography on these subjects, as well as many useful sites for
research. Here are but some indications of recent titles from diverse backgrounds.
Balee, William ed. 1998 Advances in Historical Ecology. Columbia University Press.
Chapter 11
Balick, Michael, Elizabetsky and Laird 1996 Medicinal resources of The Tropical Forest.
Columbia
University Press
Boyle, James 1996, Shamans, Software and Spleens. Harvard University Press.
Brown, Michael 1998 Can Culture be Copyrighted? Current Anthropology vol 39 n.2: 193222.
Brush, S.B. 1993 'Indigenous knowledge of biological resources and intellectual property
rights: the role of anthropology', American Anthropologist 95: 653-86.
Brush, Stephen and Doreen Stabinski 1996 Valuing Local Knowledge: Indigenous peoples
and Intellectual property rights. Island Press
4
Cleveland, David and Stephen C.Murray 1997 'The World's Crop Genetic Resources and
the
Rights of Indigenous Farmers with CA comment Current Anthropology vol.38 n.4:
477-516.
Coombe, Rosemary 1998 The Cultural Life of Intellectual Properties, Introduction and
chapter 5.
Davis, Shelton 1993 'Hard Choices. Indigenous Economic Development and Intellectual
property Rights. Akwe:Kon Journal.
Descola, Philippe 1996 "Constructing natures: symbolic ecology and social practice" in Ph.
Descola and G.Palsson eds. Nature and society. Anthropological Perspectives. London,
Routiedge.
Escobar, Arturo 1995 Encountering Development.
Fundacion Sabiduria Indigena 1997 'Rights to the Benefits of Research: compensating
indigenous peoples for their intellectual contribution' Human Organization 56(2):
127-137.
Greaves, Tom, 1994 'IPR, a Current Survey.' in Tom Greaves ed. Intellectual Property
Rights for Indigenous Peoples, a Sourcebook. Society for Applied Anthropology.
Kloppenburg, Jack and Daniel L.Kleinman 1987 "The Plant Germplasm Controversy.
Bioscience vol.37 n.3: 190-198.
L'evi-Strauss 1962 The Savage Mind.
Nijar, Gurdial Singh 1996, In Defence of Local Community Knowledge and Biodiversity.
Third World Network Paper 1, 62pp.
Pearce, David and Moran, Dominic 1994 The Economic Value of Biodiversity. IUCN,
Earthscan publications.
Posey, Darrell 1996 Traditional Resource Rights. International Instruments for Protection
and Compensation for Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities. IUCN, the
World Conservation Union.
Redford, Kent and A. Stearman 1993 'Forest dwelling Native Amazonians and the
Conservation of Biodiversity: interests in common or in collision?" Conservation
Biology 7 (2): 248-255.
5
Sahlins, Marshall 1995 How "Natives" Think about Captain Cook for example. Chicago
University Press.
Shiva, Vandana 1994 Biodiversity and Intellectual Property Rights in the Case against Free
Trade. Island Press, Washington DC
Shiva, Vandana 1994 b 'Biodiversity Conservation, People's Knowledge and Intellectual
Property Rights' in V.Shiva ed. Biodiversity Conservation. Whose Resource?
Whose Knowledge? Indian Heritage Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage: 4-3 1.
Sillitoe, Paul 1998 The Development of Indigenous Knowledge: a New Applied
Anthropology. Current Anthropology vol.39 n.2: 223-252.
Stephenson, D.J. 1994 'A legal paradigm for protecting traditional knowledge'in T.C.
Greaves ed. Intellectual property rights for indigenous peoples: a sourcebook. Oklahoma
City: Society for Applied Anthropology.
Strathem, Marilyn 1996 "Potential Property. Intellectual rights and property in persons" in
Social Anthropology vol 4,1: 17-32.
Strathem, Marilyn 1997 a " What is intellectual property after?" Workshop " Actor
Network Theory and After", Keele University, July 1997
Strathem, Marilyn, 1997b " Multiple perspectives on Intellectual Property" paper
presented to the meeting on "Intellectual, biological and cultural property Rights", Port
Moresby. August 1997, ms
Strathem, M., Descola, Ph., Cameiro da Cunha, M., Harvey, P. and Afonso,C.A. 1998
'Exploitable knowledge belongs to the creators of it' Social Anthropology.
Suagee, D.B. 1994 " Human Rights and cultural heritage: developments in the United
Nations working group on indigenous populations" in T.C. Greaves ed. Intellectual property
rights for indigenous peoples: a sourcebook.
Swanson, Timothy ed. 1995 The economics and ecology of biodiversity decline: the forces
driving global change. Cambridge Univ. Press,