Consuelo Quiroz
Evidence of the accelerating depletion of natural resources and other environmental and social
problems has resulted in a global consensus on the need to see development in terms of long-term
sustainability. This interest in 'sustainable development' has been accompanied by an interest in important
related issues, such as the conservation of natural resources (e.g., biodiversity), indigenous knowledge
systems (cultural diversity), gender and intellectual property rights (IPR). This article explores the
relationship between those issues and gives some recommendations for further research and action.
Indigenous knowledge and biodiversity
The diversity of ecosystems, life forms, and the way of life of numerous communities is now threatened by
extinction. There is a growing awareness worldwide of the potentially disastrous consequences of this trend
for the earth's ecological functions and the fulfilment of basic human development needs (USAID, 1993).
Cultural diversity and biological diversity are two sides of the same coin. Living diversity in nature corresponds to a living diversity of cultures. With cultural and environmental changes, both biodiversity and the indigenous knowledge systems vital to sustainability are being lost at an incredible rate (Cunningham, 1991; Haverkort and Millar, 1994; UNEP, 1994). One of the main reasons for this rapid loss is the poverty of vast sectors of the population, which is increasing the pressure on natural resources, notably the tropical forests. Moreover, the introduction of 'western' market-oriented agricultural and forestry technology is not only displacing and even eliminating local practices in favour of monocropping (simplification of ecosystems), large-scale commercial farming and cattle raising, but has also brought with it degradation of natural resources, poorer nutrition and loss of informal channels of communication. (Gliessman, Garcia and Amador, 1981; Shiva, 1993). The study by Appleton et al. (1993:3) provides an example of the loss of local practices, in this case, through the loss of indigenous channels of communication. When the authors compared the knowledge which a 25-year-old Kenyan woman from a rural background had of medicinal plants with that of her grandmother, they found that the younger woman's knowledge was very much reduced.
There is a large body of evidence to show that in most cultures and societies indigenous peoples have successfully cultivated and inhabited areas with a high degree of diversity. This was possible in part because they were practitioners of environmental processes designed to transform, manage, and use nature, in order to conserve it. They knew that in many cases their survival--especially in tropical forest, desert and savannah short-grass areas--depended on the diversity of the ecosystems. (Alcorn, 1994; Altieri, 1987; Berkes and Folke, 1994; Gliessman, Garcia and Amador, 1981; Martinez-Alier 1994; Shiva, 1993; UNEP, 1994; USAID, 1993; Warren, 1992). The indigenous knowledge accumulated by these peoples and communities constitutes a reservoir of adaptations which are of great importance for long-term sustainability. (Berkes and Folke, 1994; Prain, 1992; SID, 1994).
Gender, biodiversity and indigenous knowledge
Despite the fact that in the last ten years many researchers have referred to the gendered nature of
ecological and agricultural science and practice in most cultures, it must be said that development efforts in
general, and biodiversity conservation strategies in particular, have typically not been gender-sensitive
(Badri and Badri, 1994). The general misconception and marginalization of women's role in conservation
strategies, which is directly related to their lack of power and their low status within society, have often
caused researchers and policy makers (mainly males) to ignore women's skills and needs as a focal issue in
mainstream sustainable development (Appleton et al. 1993; Awa, 1989; Badri and Badri, 1994; Jiggins,
1994; Rocheleau, 1991). When development efforts are discussed, women are usually depicted--if they are
depicted at all--as 'peripheral contributors to the social and economic transformation of their society' (Awa,
1989:9). One implication of this is that 'half or more of indigenous ecological science has been obscured by
the prevailing invisibility of women, their work, their interests and especially their knowledge' (Rocheleau,
1991:157).
Women in many parts of the world have traditionally played--and still play--a key role in preserving diversity (Jiggins, 1994; Shiva and Dankelman, 1992). For example, women's role in seed selection and vegetative propagation has been--and still is--crucial in many areas of the world, not only in the conservation and enhancement of genetic resources (biodiversity) but also in agricultural production in general. There are examples which show that when women have a high degree of control over their means of production, their own labour, and their forms of organizations, and if they are able to influence the development agenda, they usually opt for a diversity of animals, crops and varieties, even when the family's main fields have been turned over to the production of a single crop (Jiggins, 1994; Shiva and Dankelman, 1992).
Women's deep concern for maintaining diversity in their surrounding environment, and their general concern for the quality and sustainability of natural systems is an intimate part of women's life. This concern is rooted in their daily reality, their experience as individuals responsible for a wide range of activities closely related to the survival of their communities (e.g., food production, processing, preparation and preservation) and their concern for future generations (Badri and Badri, 1994; Norem, Yoder and Martin, 1989; UN, 1994). Moreover, these experiences of life and the way that women interact with others and with the natural environment give them a different perspective, indeed, a different kind of knowledge, what Jiggins (1994) calls 'distinctive knowledge'.
One of the major characteristics of this 'distinctive knowledge' is that it is 'holistic'. Women's relation with and perception of their environment tends to be comprehensive and multidimensional, whereas men's knowledge (notably that of males involved in 'western' profit-oriented agricultural production) tends to be one-dimensional, focusing on narrow areas such as the cultivation of a certain kind of high-yield, commercially profitable crop. This means that in the context of biodiversity, there are also differences with respect to the decisions taken. For example, when deciding which seed characteristics and varieties to preserve and what new combinations to search for, women tend to weigh a great many different complementary, interrelated advantages (e.g., flavour and cooking time). On the other hand, male farmers who employ 'modern methods' and agricultural research scientists in general usually look for the 'ideal' genetic material for a more limited range of purposes, such as high yield and a good market price (Jiggins, 1994; Shiva and Dankelman, 1992).
It should be kept in mind that there is no such thing as a set of universal gendered indigenous knowledge systems. The precise distribution of this kind of knowledge among men and women varies from place to place (Jiggins, 1994; Rocheleau, 1991). But, as Jiggins (1994:14) points out, 'the challenge is for scientists to accept that men and women farmers are germ plant consultants and research curators and to develop field methodologies and management strategies that support farmers in these roles'.
Intellectual property rights (IPR) and gender
For thousands of years information on plant genetic resources has been collected freely all over the world.
However, the growth of biotechnologies which use genetic resources, thus raising their commercial value, in
combination with the loss of biological diversity worldwide, has led to a narrowing of the 'free exchange'
principle (UNEP, 1994).
Thus far, this narrowing has been largely one-sided. For many years the developed countries have realized enormous benefits from their access to third world genetic materials, especially in the case of crop plants (Kloppenburg, 1991). There is a striking asymmetry inherent in the relationship between, on the one hand, the indigenous groups and local communities, and on the other hand, the groups acquiring the information, such as multinational pharmaceutical companies. As McNeil and McNeil (1989:31) argue, 'acquirers have power, technology, inside information, and sophisticated economic systems which allow them to take unfair advantage of the creators and the creation.' This kind of situation has been called an 'exploitive asymmetry' (Cunningham, 1991), 'the West's new frontier' (Hyndman, 1992), and 'economic hunting' (Kloppenburg, 1991).
IPR agreements are rapidly expanding in many industrialized countries. In the context of biodiversity, these agreements have been designed to cover genetically engineered materials, whether whole organisms, tissue cultures, cells, or DNA sequences. These IPR regimes are calculated to reward those who are in a position to patent certain kinds of innovation, say, but do not recognize the originators of those innovations. Some authors have warned that if this trend continues, 'the only forms of human innovations that will not be protected under an IPR regime will be those informal innovations in developing countries' (KIDSPGR report, 1990:6 cited by UNEP, 1994:5). In other words, the existing agreements do not give full and proper recognition to the rights of indigenous and local communities to their own knowledge, innovations and practices (Greaves, 1994). This inequitable situation has created dissatisfaction among different groups of peoples, and among development agencies which act as advocates for the indigenous peoples and the rights of local communities around the world. This growing concern also led to the decision to put this topic on the agenda of several international meetings, such as the UN Conference on the Environment and Development (Rio, 1992); the UN Working Group on Indigenous Populations (11th session, 1993); Farmers' Rights and the Rights of Similar Groups (Nairobi, 1994) (Greaves, 1994; UNEP, 1994). Thus far gender issues have not been discussed at these meetings.
Women are increasingly disadvantaged when dealing with issues related to IPR, because in general they have a low status in their societies and are often not directly represented at the local, regional and national political decision-making structures where IPRs are discussed. The bottom line, as Shiva (1993) says, is 'control'. If women lack the opportunity and the means to develop their capacities and obtain control (empowerment) of the decisions regarding their knowledge, innovations and practices, then there is a danger that women's ecological knowledge will be 'packaged as a product to be collected, owned, and sold in the market place of ideas of the scientific community without them being compensated in any way' (Rocheleau, 1991).
Conclusion, recommendations and further action
Clearly, there is no single answer to the complex problem of the erosion of biological and cultural diversity
worldwide, but women's control over their resources, decisions, and actions will be a key factor in the
success of any project designed to help solve these problems. This control is influenced in part by the
recognition, reinforcement and improvement of women's roles, knowledge and capabilities.
What follows is a list of recommendations and further actions designed to help women to gain--or keep-- control over their knowledge, capabilities and roles with respect to the sustainable management and use of their environment (Jiggins,1994; UNEP, 1994; UN, 1994).
Dr C. Quiroz
National Coordinator
Centre for Tropical Alternative Agriculture and Sustainable Development (CATADI)
University of The Andes, Núcleo 'Rafael Range'
Apartado Postal # 22
Trujillo 3102, Estado Trujillo
Venezuela
Tel/Fax: +58-72-33667
Tel: +58-72-721672
Fax: +58-72-711330, +58-43-340967
E-mail: cquiroz@ing.ula.ve
References
Alcorn, J.B. (1994) 'Noble savage or noble state?: Northern myths and southern realities in biodiversity
conservation', Etnoecologica 2(3):7-19.
Altieri, M. (1987) 'The significance of diversity in the maintenance of the sustainability of traditional agroecosystems', ILEIA-newsletter 3(2):3-7.
Appleton, H. et al. (1993) 'Women: Invisible technologists', Appropriate Technology 20(2):1-5.
Awa, N.E. (1989) 'Underutilization of women's IK in agricultural and rural development programs: The effect of stereotypes', pp. 3-9 in D.M. Warren, L.J. Slikkerveer and S.O. Titilola (eds) Indigenous knowledge systems: Implications for agriculture and international development. Studies in Technology and Social Change Program No. 11. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Research Foundation.
Badri, B. and A. Badri (1994) 'Women and Biodiversity', Development (1):67-71.
Berkes, F. and C. Folke (1994) 'Linking social and ecological systems for resilience and sustainability'. Paper presented at the Workshop on 'Property rights and the performance of natural resource systems'. Stockholm (Sweden): The Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics, The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.
Cunningham, A.B. (1991) 'Indigenous Knowledge and Biodiversity. Global commons or regional heritage?', Cultural Survival Quarterly, 15(2):4-8.
Gliessman, S.R, R. Garcia and M. Amador (1981) 'The ecological basis for the application of traditional agricultural technology in the management of tropical agro-ecosystems', Agro-ecosystems 7(3):173-175.
Greaves, T. (ed) (1994) Intellectual property rights for indigenous peoples: A source book. Oklahoma: Society for Applied Anthropology.
Haverkort, B. and D. Millar (1994) 'Constructing diversity: The active role of rural people in maintaining and enhancing biodiversity', Etnoecologica 2(3):51-63.
Hyndman, D. (1992) 'Ancient futures for indigenous people: Cultural and biological diversity through self-determination'. Paper presented at the International Symposium on 'Indigenous knowledge and sustainable development'. Silang, Cavite (The Philippines): IIRR.
Jiggins, J. (1994) Changing the boundaries: Women-centered perspectives on population and the environment. Washington D.C.: Island Press.
Kloppenburg Jr., J. (1991) 'No hunting! Biodiversity, indigenous rights, and scientific poaching', Cultural Survival Quarterly 15(2)14-18.
McNeil R.J. and M.J. McNeil (1989) 'Ownership of traditional information: Moral and legal obligations to compensate for taking', Northeast Indian Quarterly, Fall:30-35.
Martinez-Alier, J. (1994) 'The merchandising of biodiversity', Etnoecologica 2(3):69-86.
Norem, R.H., R. Yoder and Y. Martin (1989) 'Indigenous agricultural knowledge and gender Issues in third world agricultural development', pp.91-100 in D.M. Warren, L.J. Slikkerveer and S.O. Titilola (eds) Indigenous knowledge systems: Implications for agriculture and international development Studies in Technology and social Change Program No. 11. Ames, Iowa: Iowa State University Research Foundation.
Prain, G.D. (1992) 'Local knowledge and global resources: User participation in crop germplasm research'. Paper presented at the International Symposium on 'Indigenous knowledge and sustainable development'. Silang, Cavite (The Philippines): IIRR.
Rocheleau, D.E. (1991) 'Gender, ecology, and the science of survival: Stories and lessons from Kenya', Agriculture and Human Values 8(1/2):156-165.
Shiva, V. and I. Dankelman (1992) 'Women and biological diversity: lessons from the Indian Himalaya', pp. 44-50, in D. Cooper, R. Vellve and H. Hobbelink (eds) Growing diversity: Genetic resources and local food security. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
Shiva, V. (1993) Monocultures of the mind. Perspectives on biodiversity and biotechnology. London and New Jersey: Zed Books LTD/Third World Network.
SID (1994) Hotline development. News for policy leaders Rome (Italy):SID International Secretariat and IPS.
UN (1994) 'Preparation for the fourth world conference on women: action for equality, development and peace. Draft Platform for Action', Report of the Secretary General, E/CN.6/1994/10. New York: UN Economic and Social Council, Commission on the Status of Women.
UNEP (1994) 'Intergovernmental committee on the convention of biological diversity', Second Session, UNEP/CBD/IC/2/14. Nairobi: UNEP.
USAID (1993) African biodiversity: Foundation for the future biodiversity support program. A framework for integrating biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. Maryland: USAID consortium of World Wildlife Fund, The Nature of Conservancy, and World Resources Institute.
Warren, D.M. (1992) 'Indigenous knowledge, biodiversity conservation and development'. Keynote address presented at the International conference on 'Conservation and biodiversity in Africa: Local initiatives and institutional roles'. Nairobi: National Museums of Kenya.
Example: Potato Production in the Andes
This case study illustrates the extent of the knowledge that women farmers have of seed
diversity.
A few of the older women farmers in the Quechua Communities of the Andes possess a rare knowledge of plant breeding, probably a legacy of ancient Inca civilization. Thus far the younger generations have not emulated the role of the older farmers as 'curators of diversity'.
Potatoes are normally propagated via asexual reproduction, by planting whole potatoes or sections. The resulting plants are 'clones', ie., their characteristics are identical to those of the 'parent' potato. However, a few of the old women farmers in the province of Cuzco (a name which means 'centre of the earth' in Quechua), use true potato seed, a practice which has been all but abandoned. They learned this method of propagation from older people who came to their community from the highlands to help with the harvest. The highland peasants told the Quechua women about the fruit of the potato plant, which contains the seed.
Since the potato originated in the Andes, there are countless varieties there, and people have different uses for each type. Using seed for propagation enables the women to breed new varieties with characteristics which they themselves choose. Before harvesting the potato crop, the women collect the fruits and store them in a large ceramic bowl outside the house where they remain until the following October. By then they have become black and rotten. Allowing the fruits to rot before planting the seeds is an essential part of the process, since it produces chemicals which activate the dormant seeds prior to germination.
The seeds are planted just before the rains, and the plants are allowed to grow until they produce tiny
tubers. These foundation seed potatoes are then harvested and put away until the following year, when they
are planted out and produce first-generation tubers. The products of this harvest, 'grandchildren' of the
original seeds, will be used for 'tuberseeds'. Women sort the 'tuber seeds' by shape and colour and other
desired characteristics, often dividing them into as many as 12 types. These are usually distributed among
their children, who plant them as food crops, while some are given away in sets as wedding presents to help
young couples get a start.
(Ojeda, no date)