Biodiversity convention recognizes aboriginals

Biodiversity convention recognizes aboriginals

By Dini S. Djalal

JAKARTA (JP): It was a perfect tourism photo opportunity. On
the first day of the recently-concluded international convention
on biodiversity, a group of scantily-clad Mentawai dancers
performed for a captive audience in the air-conditioned halls of
the Jakarta Convention Center.

To other indigenous peoples and observers, the message was
clear: Indigenous peoples in the environmentally-oriented
convention will be sidelined as spectacle and information source.

When the 1994 Convention declared that indigenous communities,
who conserve the genetic plant resources feeding the US$43
billion medicinal plants industry, should be given "equal sharing
of benefits", indigenous peoples across the world hailed the
historic decision.

"It is one of the few legally-binding international agreements
involving indigenous peoples," said Alejandro Argumendo, a
Kechuan Peruvian working for the Canadian non-governmental
organization (NGO) Cultural Survival.

Although an indigenous soapbox has been erected, the speakers
are on low volume. The achievements of this year's convention for
indigenous peoples have not been outstanding.

"Among the media and the NGOs, the indigenous issue gained a
lot of attention. But in formal discussions, mention of
indigenous peoples was minimal," said Abdon Nababan, program
director of the Indonesian environmental-group Sejati Foundation.

In defense of the convention, many participants repeat that
its achievements are already significant.

"Just being here has brought the attention of the world," said
Fred Portier, from Canada's Shuswap community. Roger Birosel, a
Llocano from the Earthsavers Movement and a member of the
Philippines' delegation, pointed to the planned research with the
World Trade Organization as a concrete step forward.

But the thousands of indigenous peoples facing encroachment on
their land and livelihood require leaps, not small steps.

Terminology

Even at the current relaxed pace, though, innumerable
bottlenecks threaten to further slow convention implementations.
Problems of terminology proved a particularly insistent thorn.

This year's convention focused on recognition of indigenous
communities. Bioprospecting, or the study and extraction of plant
genetic resources and traditional knowledge, should "involve all
interested parties, including indigenous and local communities,"
the convention members agreed.

There were, however, no specific guidelines.

"The convention is one thing, but the protocols and
implementation of the convention are a different and more complex
matter altogether," said Massimo Pieri from the Italy-based
biotechnology developer Cobase.

Inadequate guidelines for the benefit-sharing of profits,
access to genetic resources, and the increasing incidents of
biopiracy (unregulated exploitation of plant and microbial
diversity), also hinder progress.

The most significant achievement -- the proposal by Canada to
set up one or two secretariat seats for indigenous peoples -- is
equally questionable. Can, or should, one United Nations employee
represent the world's 20,000 indigenous communities? Alejandro
Argumendo feels even NGOs speak for only a small portion of the
indigenous communities.

"We only represent sectors of indigenous peoples", said
Argumendo.

Appropriate representation is perhaps the key issue, and
Indonesia's policy towards indigenous peoples -- or lack of one
-- is its best illustration. Here terminology proved contentious.
Indonesia's Minister of Environment Sarwono Kusumaatmadja drew
the ire of indigenous peoples and environmentalists with his
claim that there are no "indigenous peoples" in Indonesia, but
rather "vulnerable groups".

Representative from the Indonesian Environmental Forum (WALHI)
Arimbi countered, "Vulnerable groups, like women and children,
are not always indigenous peoples. Indigenous peoples are not
defined by vulnerability, but rather by a strong relationship
with their habitat."

Considering that Indonesia hosted the convention addressing
"indigenous peoples", Sarwono's use of different terminology was
perplexing. Yet, it unearthed the political weight of the issue.

"The government is still suspicious of indigenous issues.
There is still the feeling that indigenous issues mean
separatism," explained Abdon Nababan.

Arimbi agrees. "The government avoids the term indigenous,
because they fear it is a threat to national stability," she
said.

National laws already favor government interests. By law, the
central government owns all forests, earth and soil, and has
ultimate rights to all research materials. Furthermore, how the
proposals of the convention will ultimately be translated into
national legislation is subject to ministerial recommendation.

While participants do not doubt Minister Sarwono's dedication
to the convention, they argue that the main problem is ignorance
and transparency. "Biodiversity is a new issue for everybody, not
just indigenous peoples, but also the government, the public, and
even NGOs. It will take some time before we can understand the
issue and tackle it," said Arimbi.

Indonesia's position on patent rights, licensing procedures,
and coordination between administrative institutions, is complex
and requires clarification. More importantly, it is unclear how
profits are, and would be, redistributed to local communities.

Tackling the issue entails greater cooperation between the
government and the concerned communities -- a relationship still
in its infancy. "Here the dialog between civil society and the
state has not happened," explained Nababan.

Talks between the world's indigenous peoples, represented by
NGOs, and ruling powers is also problematic, hampered again by
terminological arguments. Biopiracy is a pressing problem for
indigenous communities, but governments and the private sector
balk at the use of the term.

Roger Birosel says that confrontational behavior is self-
defeating.

"You have to get away from talking about issues which sound
threatening, such as power or biopiracy. You can talk about this
to NGOs, but to government and businesspeople, you have to be
more diplomatic," he said.

Yet to some, a defensive posture is unnecessary in the absence
of wrongdoing.

"Talking about biopiracy is only offensive if the countries
are doing it. Why should it be offensive otherwise?" questioned
Fred Portier.

While activists argue over terminology, unmonitored
bioprospecting continues in a different guise. Advancements in
tissue and cell culture technology, as well as microbe screening,
have been a boon to scientists.

"Bioprospecting is now called chemical prospecting. They're
reducing everything to molecules, and there's less chance of
linking rights to molecules," said Argumendo.

"It's a well thought-out strategy," he added.

It may be an unnecessary strategy. A biopirate's biggest
advantage over indigenous communities is that neither speaks each
other's language, or understand each other's ways. In general,
the concept of intellectual property rights is alien to
indigenous communities. Their value systems are based on
collective sharing of resources and knowledge. When scientists
arrive asking for medicines and traditional knowledge, indigenous
communities, unaware of the scientists' motives, are unlikely to
refuse.

Even the Baduy of West Java, long regarded as isolationists,
do not oppose the sharing of resources.

"We get visitors from Jakarta asking us for medicine. We are
glad to offer them our medicine, it's our responsibility to help
others," said Jaro Pulung, the head of Kanekes village. They are
not accustomed to compensation. "We are not materialistic. We are
open and want to share," said Jaro.

That may be a philosophy their urbanized counterparts do not
share, but will gladly accept.