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.