Recognition of TK in the Latin America region - an example to follow

A couple of weeks ago the Peruvian National Institute for the Defence of Competition and Intellectual Property (INDECOPI), in order to preserve the knowledge that native peoples have on the use of biodiversity, presented 453 titles of collective knowledge to communities located in the Loreto region in Peru. 

The indigenous peoples of this region managed to register 453 knowledge related to more than 120 plants in the Amazon area, covering different uses such as food, medicine, vegetable dyes, etc. To date, INDECOPI has registered over 800 TK in the name of indigenous communities.By these titles the Peruvian State through the INDECOPI guarantees the rights of these peoples that the use of their knowledge is made only with their consent -- they are the true owners.

In August 2002, Law 27811 was enacted in Peru establishing a sui generis intellectual property protection for collective knowledge of indigenous peoples linked to biological resources, ie the properties, uses and characteristics of the biodiversity.

Since 2010, the Office of Inventions and New Technologies of INDECOPI works with the Research Institute of the Peruvian Amazon (IIAP), through its programs PIBA (Biodiversity Research Program Amazon) and Cultural Diversity Research and Economics Amazon (Sociodiversity) in the recovery of the collective knowledge of indigenous peoples. They live with the people, experiencing their customs and needs. Only then TK is identified, reassessed and recorded, so that in future the indigenous community gets the benefit.

Source INDECOPI.

Peru on protecting traditional knowledge

The Peruvian Institute for the Defense of Competition and Intellectual Property Protection (INDECOPI), meet last week in Lima with representatives of fourteen countries in Latin America. The meeting aimed to share experience on systems of resource protection and traditional knowledge. This time, the institution will share the Peruvian experience in the protection of genetic resources and traditional knowledge, specifically through the national registries of traditional knowledge and system identification, management and monitoring of cases of biopiracy.

INDECOPI says “Today, the importance of these resources and knowledge is becoming increasingly clear, given its application and use in different branches of food industry and health, and becoming part of the identity and cultural heritage of our people”.

Peru set up a legislative framework to protect genetic resources and traditional knowledge -- Law No. 27811, which covers a sui generis rule of collective traditional knowledge related to biodiversity. Peru also has a National Anti-Biopiracy Commission, chaired by INDECOPI, which aims to identify, analyze and deal with cases of biopiracy involving Peruvian origin resources or traditional knowledge of indigenous Peruvians. The Commission has resolved favourably to the Peruvian and indigenous peoples, 10 cases of biopiracy (in the patent offices of Japan, Korea, France and European Patent Office).

INDECOPI reports that the meeting was also attended by Chief of Staff Advisors to the Presidency of the Council of Ministers, Mauritius Chabaneix Belling and Begoña Venero, Head of the Section of Genetic Resources and Knowledge traditional World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva.

Source INDECOPI.

Indigenous Peoples are consumers too

The Peruvian Institute for the Defense of Competition and Intellectual Property (INDECOPI) launches the opening of its new headquarters in the region of Cusco. Yet, since 1995, INDECOPI Cusco has provided to its citizens various consumers services.

This time and celebrating ‘consumer’s week’ it has published and made available the 'consumer Decalogue in Quechua', designed to promote and defend the rights of these indigenous peoples.

It is claimed that this step aims to promote and disseminate the top ten consumer rights, among people who speak Quechua, thus creating a healthy culture of respect for this people. INDECOPI informs that through this Decalogue it will guide and educate about a million Quechua-speakers of different communities living in the Cusco region, so that in addition to know and defend their rights, they will have access to satisfactory products and services.

Peru ratified ILO Convention 169 back in 1994 and while I can see this Decalogue as a way to integrate more the communities, I indeed believe that it is a good application of Article 4 – guaranteeing enjoyment of the general rights of citizenship without discrimination.

Ecuador, Chile, Colombia and Argentina have also ratified the Convention and have Quechua-speakers communities, but will they follow this initiative?

Another question that I might query is that INDECOPI Cusco claims that in 2011, attended 1,157 claims, having been solved 95% of them through the process of conciliation – very good indeed. But, will this initiative of bringing the Decalogue in Quechua also be extended to filing claims in Quechua? That would be the cherry on top of the cake.

The Inca Route as heritage: keeping an eye on the prize

News recently came out that Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru are ready to submit their joint application for adding the Inca Route – Qhapaq Ñan – to the World Heritage List.

What is so special about it?

Well, for one, it is the most multinational nomination to ever be presented to UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee. Secondly, and most importantly, it is a testament to the achievements of the Inca civilization, which pre-dated European conquest in the Americas, and, even though they were ultimately defeated by the Spaniards, mainly via warfare and disease-spreading , their culture still finds resonance amongst indigenous peoples in these countries.

The nomination, with the assistance of UNESCO, is being prepared for some 10 years and is now about to see the light of day. The Qhapaq Ñan is likely to be nominated as a cultural landscape, due to the connections between nature and man-made elements throughout its six thousand kilometres. A cultural route such as Qhapaq Ñan (a prominent European example being the Camino de Santiago de Compostela) is but a succession of landscapes, and, there lacking a specific category for cultural routes in the World Heritage List, it is appropriate that it be nominated as a cultural landscape.

Another reason why it is appropriate that it be nominated as a cultural landscape is that this category is the one through which intangible cultural heritage elements seep most strongly into the World Heritage System. Given the surviving connections between the Qhapaq Ñan and indigenous peoples in these countries, it is important that the living culture (that is, the intangible) aspects of this heritage also be acknowledged, even if it is very unlikely that communities along the route will have much of a say in the nomination process, let alone the actual management of the route.

It is cause for concern that communities be excluded from international heritage processes, seen as they are the ones who will most likely be impacted by the elevation of their heritage to “international status”, and the ones to whom any economic benefits arising from the exploitation of this heritage should return. But the World Heritage system is not the only one to exclude communities – all UNESCO regimes for the protection of heritage do so. One exception on paper is the system of the Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003), which has language on community involvement, and even specific programs for that purpose now in its implementation phase. However, these are little more than lip service as they stand, seen as communities are not given a voice directly before UNESCO, only at the national level, which means states are the only ones who still get to speak before the international community about heritage and its importance, getting to ultimately decide what heritage is for international safeguarding purposes.

While an overhaul of the UNESCO system, while much desired, would be unlikely to come before the Qhapaq Ñan is added to the World Heritage List, it is essential that communities, national authorities and (most importantly for the purposes of inscription on the List and subsequent management) UNESCO and the international community keep their eyes set on what really matters: that the living heritage of the Incan Route be preserved and enhanced, and not replaced by a folklorized version of the Inca culture that caters to European tourists, or that favors the monumentality of the route as opposed to the rich multiplicity of the many small nuances and textures of the cultural fabrics that compose this amazing route, and make it a true testament to mankind.

Written by Lucas Lixinski.