Technologies, Institutions and Incentives for Conservation of Biodiversity in Non-OECD Countries:
Assessing Needs for Technical Cooperation
Building technical competence and providing institutional incentives for conservation of diversity have to go hand-in-hand. Communities and individuals can conserve diversity without being aware of the value of the diversity or its potential contribution to their life support system. In other words, non-utilitarian logic by itself can evolve and survive in many societies. With passage of time such institutions have however, become weak. At the same time, improvement in technical competence can cause both positive as well as negative consequences for the diversity. Efficient ways of resource extraction can also lead to excessive extraction. Just as higher value addition may generate more income and returns through lesser extraction. The nature and extent of extraction, therefore, is not just a function of technological competence but bio-ethics as well. How are the benefits distributed among those who conserve as well as those who add value in the biodiversity may still depend upon institutional conditions.
The ideal arrangement for developing agenda for technical competence would be to align incentives, institutions, and innovations (technological changes) with the basic bio-ethical values. In this paper, I discuss general framework of linking incentives, institutions and technologies in the first part followed by specific areas where competence in non-OECD countries needs to be built up. Finally, I summarize the indicators by which this strategy can be monitored.
Part I
Incentives, Institutions and Technologies
Public policy for conservation of biodiversity has to deal with generation of appropriate incentives for conserving diversity governed by various property right regimes. The more ambiguous the property rights higher may be the need for negotiations among the competing stakeholders. It was not that in the absence of ambiguity the need for negotiations goes down but these acquire different forms. For instance, a private individual may have a large tract of land or water body which may harbour unique species. Should the right of such individual to change the land use leading to extinction of that specie be considered absolute. This problem arises much more so in expanding urban settlements where no systematic effort has been made to identify some kind of protected pockets. Similarly, a common property resource accessed by a community may fall within a public reserve or sanctuary. Lack of contribution by the community may influence the continuation of diversity positively or negatively depending upon the efficiency of management in sanctuary. There are also large scale public forest and public lands as well as aquatic bodies which may be important source of diversity. It has been realized that same kind of incentive may not remain viable under different time frames, resource situations and access rules and differentials. Further, the same incentive may be too small for some and too big for others. Therefore, local institutions have to calibrate incentives vis a vis the task, scale and nature of contribution to conservation. Simultaneously, the local institutions also help in reducing or transforming the ambiguity in property rights. It is not to suggest that this ability of local institutions can be developed in isolation of public policy and macroeconomic incentive structures. However, public policies can only provide enabling conditions. These cannot create local institutions.
Institutions have normative element in their functioning. The boundary of any resource and rules for allocating the resource among different claimants gain legitimacy through progressive compliance of rules. The conflicts which emerge during the process of compliance may require either modification of boundaries or resource allocation rules or conflict resolution, processes or rules. Every time a boundary is modified, a stake holder may be added or reduced. What is interesting about many of the normative institutions is the ability to provide a point of reference. Thus, institutions not only help in generating collective rationality but also in providing legitimacy for such a rationality. North (1993) suggests that institutions together with the ‘constraints’ like technology `define the incentives that determine the choices individuals make when shaping the performance of societies over time’.
Many of the technologies for conservation or accessing or value addition in biodiversity may require an optimal combination of institutional structures and incentive measures. In past, incentives without institutions led to excessive biodiversity extraction. Large number of companies even in the ayurvedic drug sector whether multinational or national in origin, pursued their business without any self regulation or institutional constraints. The technological advancements without an appropriate institutional context may not generate sustainable outcomes. At the same time, outside institutions can only provide technical competence and leave the task of institution building to the local communities, NGOs and other agencies.
Typology of Technical Inputs
At the first level, there are four kinds of relationships that can guide any biodiversity user. This is derived from Ethical guidelines that several of us Pew Conservation scholars had developed two year ago (Ethical Guidelines, 1994)
i) Non-commercial Extractive
Many times scientists extract a sample for taxonomic or ecological analyses and do not have any commercial purpose in mind. It is a different matter that sometimes commercial returns may accrue from the knowledge so described.
ii) Non-Commercial Non-extractive
When an ecologist goes to a forest alone or in a team to just describe the inter-relationship among different species, no sample is being extracted and no commercial return is derived. However, once such sites are adequately described, these might become sites of economic extraction or eco-tourism. The kind of developments that are initiated subsequently may determine the technological needs of specific kinds (for instance, observation chambers, ropeways and other facilities for the purpose).
iii) Commercial Non-extractive
This is a category of ethnobotanists and ethnobiologists who may extract the knowledge of the people about biodiversity and not the diversity itself. Such knowledge may have commercial implications. The technology of cataloguing such information and interpreting the respective results for drug, dye or flavour industry may generate considerable economic rewards for the researchers.
iv) Commercial Extractive
This is the case most talked about in the literature on biodiversity prospecting. Local communities, Commercial firms or small scale manufacturers of plant products may extract biodiversity for commercial returns just as large scale firms may do so. The technical expertise in selective harvesting without impairing the long term renewability of resource is an area of urgent concern. A great deal of knowledge may exist among communities which might have observed the consequence of reckless harvesting of herbs or aquatic or avion life forms.
These four categories were devised originally to argue that ethical responsibility while accessing or exploring biodiversity cannot be of uniform kind. However, this framework can also provide some guidance in identifying broad range of technical needs for different kind of access arrangements. The advantage of this scheme is that it also helps in identifying appropriate actors who may pursue specific arrangements. Four areas of technical competence are indicated below:
1)Description: Cataloguing, characterization, data base development, networking, dissemination, feedback, etc.
2)Conservation: In situ and ex situ conservation of sites/habitats, restoration of degraded environments, non-invasive observation centers,
3)Value-addition: Extraction methods and techniques for sustainable resource withdrawal, processing, storage, transportation, marketing, benefit sharing, etc.,
4)Capacity Building: Institution building, community rehabilitation, social infrastructure and other mechanisms to safeguard local peoples’ rights, livelihoods and vision of future vis-a-vis biodiversity conservation.
Various technical needs identified below would serve one or more of these purposes. It may not necessarily make a difference to the technique whether it is used for commercial or non-commercial purpose. However, it is expected that if there is a commercial return, there is likely to be greater effort made by the involved actors in improvising the techniques and adapting them to different conditions. In any scheme of technology transfer, it is most important that ability of the recipient system to progressively upgrade the technology, repair it and revalidate it is kept in view. Otherwise technology transfer can also become a means of institutional control - a situation which many local communities and institutions may not like.
a:Technical Needs:Type 1: Description
a1. Cataloging and Safe Storage of national and International Base Collections: ex situ gene banks
The in situ conservation of genetic diversity has no substitute. But given increasing pressure on existing sites of biological diversity, the ex situ conservation provides the much needed back up option.
CGIAR last year identified the problem of improving CGIAR’s physical facilities to ensure safe keeping, to add and expand the range of species covered besides their role in-situ conservation as important areas of future investment . There is a need for redundancy in this regard at regional and global level. Another area identified was that of institution building relating to information management and communication (ibid, 1995:99).
Even in technologically more advanced non- OECD countries like India, none of the agricultural universities have a computerized information system on genetic accessions in the gene bank. The result is that probability of important land races being incorporated in the crop breeding programmes may depend to a considerable extent on the breeders personal expertise rather than on any systematic strategy of seeking the best possible combination. It has been generally agreed that local landraces are no more used as often as in past in various breeding programmes. The characterization of the germ plasm is often done with one or two goals in mind such as disease resistance or early duration. Many relatively obscure ( or well known to local people) characters remain unexploited.
The funds for growing out the germ plasm every year are constrained with most gene banks. The result is that one is not sure how much of what is in store is in perfectly viable form.
a2. Biodiversity Information Management
The future gain in technology may depend to a great extent on the way information technology is applied. Unless networked information systems exist, best use of diversity may not be possible. A good illustration in this regard is what INBio has attempted.
The INBio’s national biodiversity inventory includes six modules. The first one viz. administrative sub-module deals with system definitions and user controls. Second, lot sub-module includes data of these specimen coming from the field, name and geographic information of the collection, ecological habitat characteristics collecting method etc. Third, Specimen sub-module includes voucher number, preservation method, specimen type, nature of specimen, field notes other annotations, etc., Fourth, the Identification sub-module includes data entered by curator, essentially the information on bio-systematics. Fifth,Taxonomic sub-module includes taxonomic information in addition to common names, synonyms, etc. Finally the sixth Reports sub-module deals with local specimen and other taxonomic information. It is possible that biodiversity information management systems may vary from one location to another but there have to be some common coding arrangements for each node to become a site of the distributed data bases and information systems.
The information systems have to build capacity to provide access to local communities across different socio-ecological regions so that they could explore ex situ sources of diversity for on farm screening and participatory breeding of crops and animal breeds.
a3. Strengthening Taxonomic Competence:
Whether in plants, animals or micro organisms, the discipline of taxonomy lost importance in the last two decades to such an extent that in many parts of the developing world, there are hardly any young taxonomists. In the case of microbial taxonomy, some of the best labs in India also do not have expertise except at a few places and for a few species. The conservation of biodiversity obviously cannot proceed well without strengthening the taxonomic competence.
The problem in the case of domesticated animal diversity is very serious. There is historical category ( absent in case of plants) viz: Non descript breeds. Millions of cattle and other species are supposed to belong to this category. The Domesticated Animal Diversity Database ( DAD IS) set up by FAO is trying to address this gap in collaboration with local partners who will draw upon indigenous ecological and technological knowledge.
a4. Indexation and Cataloguing of Diversity
There are two aspects of indexation. One regarding collection, authentic identification and cataloguing of voucher specimen of plants and second dealing with properties of these samples as well as data on value addition attempted or possible to attempt. The first system of cataloguing is not restricted here to just plants but includes also the animals and micro-organisms though the process of cataloguing will vary as will the system of sample collection and storage.
Janzen (1994) refers to particular problems regarding recording, managing, and transmitting wildland biodiversity information vis-a-vis authorship, attribution, database structures, networks, distributed databases, image transmission, authority files, bar coding, retroactive data capture, OCR literature, etc. He asks," How ironic that just as great bulk of tropical humanity flees the countryside or polishes it clean, humanity is coming to have wherewithal to record forever whatever some grand parents knew, and the grand children will want to find out, about the vaporizing wildlife". I have stressed that the rate of knowledge erosion is even faster than the rate of resource erosion ( Gupta, 1992). The recording of knowledge is also useful as a key or legend to a map. Imagine a library in which catalogue has been lost. The essential issue of course remains as to why should people share their knowledge if their children any way are not going to benefit from it or they are not going to get any incentives? Thus the case for designing appropriate incentives which can reward the ethic of sharing.
Database of value added information about diversity will be meaningful only if a potential user can retrieve the source sample described in the database. This would require facilities for large scale extract storage/microbial culture storage, but more importantly the possibility of reaching the place from where the extract or culture was obtained. This will mean low cost geo referenced Geographical Information Systems. These systems will have to be so user friendly that local medicine practitioners who may or may not have tried all the diversity that is available can also broaden their repertoire. Since, exclusive access and/or exclusive rights of adding value are of great significance in market place, various contracting frameworks will have to be developed so that the user and the provider both gain in the process.
a5. Characterization of germ plasm
One of the most contentious issues in benefit sharing is the mechanism of ascertaining which contributions have been made from which sources. Commission on Plant Genetic Resources, Rome has reviewed various technologies such as DNA finger printing, RFLP, chromatography, etc., in characterizing germ plasm. However, no consensus has yet emerged about the cost effectiveness as well as reliability of the techniques. Hardon, Vosman and Hintum (1994) conclude that biology and biochemistry does not as yet provide the tools to establish or support specific ownership of biological materials or wild populations to a specific site" or a specific group. These are areas where OECD countries may have to develop joint research programme to evolve acceptable protocols.
a6. Expert systems for conservation, characterization, and cataloguing
There is an urgent need for user friendly hardware and software based expert systems to be developed which may have in their memory scientific names of plants, micro organisms, animals, etc., with minimum description to facilitate biodiversity inventorization. These expert systems can also be developed through partnership between OECD and non-OECD country experts. The softwares will need a low end to work on low powered computers as well as high end to work on high power machines.
These expert systems will also help in the scientific classification of the diversity but also help as an educational tool.
a7. Horizontal networking
Many of the modern technologies such as electronic mail and distributed databases are capable of both vertical networking as well as horizontal networking. However, given the fact that most developing countries do not have well developed telecommunication and other support systems for electronic communication to take place among different communities, solar powered transmission and receiving stations have a great merit. Such stations could enhance the ability of different communities to exchange their biodiversity information systems across different regions. The incentives for conservation may arise also when information about potential returns from judicious extraction is exchanged. One of the central problems of operationalizing Article 15.5 of Convention on Biological Diversity dealing with prior informed consent is to ensure that sufficient information has indeed been provided to the concerned provider of biodiversity resource.
Horizontal networks will improve the bargaining capacity of local communities since they would be able to exchange information and learn from each other’s experience in real time. Since the information exchange will be voluntary, the effectiveness will depend upon the nature of reciprocity people develop among themselves.
Solar powered systems may also help in exchanging information about various ecological catastrophes, ecological indicators and other information required by the people and local level functionaries of the government to conserve diversity. In case of wild life, such receiving and transmitting systems can also be helpful in tracking the movements and monitoring localized droughts or other contingencies which may trigger unusual movements. Occasionally, through local language interface some of the problems as well as solutions emanating from one location in a remote area could be commented upon by a community of conservators and scholars around the world. This is an idea which has been separately developed by the author as part of a proposal on Knowledge Centers/networks endorsed by an International Conference on Hunger and Poverty organized by International Fund for Agricultural Development in November, 1995
(Gupta, 1995). Popular support for conservation in non-OECD countries can be harnessed more easily if direct communication through language interface can take place between communities conserving the diversity and the potential stake holders.a8. Biodiversity Information Clearing House
In an informal consultation to establish a clearing house mechanism (UNEP, Geneva August 26-27, 1994), several alternatives were considered for building capacity among the developing countries as well as developed countries for this purpose. World Conservation Monitoring Centre, in its presentation, shared information about various data holdings such as tropical forest data base, protected area data base, biodiversity map library, plant data base, animal data base, CITES trade data base, bibliographic files, etc. It was mentioned that clearing house will have to recognize inability of large number of developing countries to get into electronic information networks. At the same time, this is an area where technical competence can be easily upgraded. Various data bases available around the world, most of which are based in OECD countries, could be made accessible to developing countries by developing local competence. However, the issue of property rights over information remain to be resolved.
International Convention to Combat Desertification (ICCD) also includes specific implications for conservation of Diversity.
Article 16 particularly emphasizes needs for establishing a people/community based documentation and resource centers for people to learn from each other about successful strategies to combat desertification. Data base like NAPRALERT developed by life long devotion of Dr. Farnsworth at College of Pharmacy, University of Illinois, having more than 123,000 references on more than 40,000 species is accessible to professionals in developing countries without any cost though access involves paying fees for those in developed countries. Such data bases are extremely helpful in research on natural products by forging co-operation among botanists, chemists, and biologists.
Setting up regional and global clearing houses is an urgent priority area for action.
b: Technical Needs-Type two: Conservation
b1. Habitat Conservation
The conservation of diversity can often not be done without conserving the habitats. Habitat can be conserved both through technological but also management support systems (MSS). In case of disadvantaged communities inhabiting a habitat, a MSS would include delineation of property rights so that the stakes of local communities in long term conservation can be developed. The MSS can only incorporate technological inputs after some certainty in tenurial rights has been assured.
The strategy of habitat conservation would vary in different watersheds. The prioritization of these watersheds will obviously have to be done on the basis of uniqueness of the biodiversity coupled with probability of erosion. As has been argued elsewhere (Gupta et al, 1994), the erosion of biodiversity is aided and abetted by erosion of knowledge about biodiversity. Generally, it is assumed that high emigration of people will reduce population pressure and thus may contribute to conservation of diversity. It need not happen in all habitats. In arid regions, grazing pressure plays an important role in the management of diversity. Emigration of people under such conditions may lead to reduction or modification in grazing pressure. This may be accompanied by invasion of some species overtaking the existing diversity. The opposite can also happen. The important point is that habitat conservation would require socio technical inputs blending local knowledge and modern science.
Technical skills for habitat conservation may be much more complex in certain resource situations.
b2. Agricultural biodiversity
It is well recognized that advent of green revolution and popularization of high yielding varieties led to erosion of agricultural biodiversity. It is also recognized that in-situ conservation is really an indispensable goal from the point of view of long term conservation of rare genes. The algorithms for identifying the proportion of local land race diversity which need to be conserved to capture the maximum diversity remain to be developed. In the absence of such criteria, it would not be easy to target and steer the incentives to communities and/or individuals growing land races.
Storage of seed, protection of crops and conservation farming systems may all have to be integrated to provide incentive for the purpose. In case of livestock breeds, it is all the more important that certain regions are earmarked as sanctuaries for local animal germ plasm. Since such communities would have to forego higher economic returns that may be possible through cross breeding, an adequate compensatory mechanism will have to be developed. Simultaneously large scale inventorization of good breeding stock as well as habitats of local land races is urgently called for. Studies by SRISTI have shown the passport information card of most crops do not contain even the basic information about geo-physical, micro-climatic conditions from where the germ plasm was collected, not to mention the socio economic, local use related and cultural information.
The technical skills for inventorization and large scale characterization of germ plasm, its ex-situ and in-situ conservation, and information exchange among the conserving communities as well as scientists are the areas which may need strengthening by OECD countries. The germ plasm of aquatic avion, animals and crops, trees and grasses species etc., have to be systematically catalogued.
b3. Evaluation of Non-conventional Food, Fiber and Fuel Plants
The appraisal of non-conventional plants particularly from the point of view of their safety, absence of anti-nutritional factors, cultivability, etc., would require their appraisal under ex-situ conditions. Botanical gardens and arboreta provide habitat for many threatened species and at the same time have helped in domesticating many of the now popular crops. It is estimated by the Botanic Gardens Conservation Secretariat (BGCS) that an estimated 12000 to 15000 certain species are cultivated in about 300 botanic gardens. There is a need for larger network of botanic gardens in as many decentralized locations as possible. Similar facilities need to be developed for aquaria.
In many non-OECD countries, facilities for evaluation of non conventional plants for food, fibre, fuel etc., need to be strengthened considerably.
b4. Biotechnology for Propagation of Endangered Species particularly for Rehabilitating Degraded Lands
Many developing countries have recognized the importance of biotechnology particularly with respect to tissue culture for plants that are difficult to propagate. The technical capabilities are, of course, very unevenly spread. The interaction between biotechnology and biodiversity has not been smooth. Adams (1988) had argued for creating a DNA plant gene bank system with multiple holdings around the world. He had suggested this as an effective way of conserving such plants which couldn’t be conserved in-situ. The debate on bio-safety particularly with respect to introduction of genetically modified organisms has further intensified in recent years. In the second Conference of parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity the need for Bio-safety Protocol was strongly argued by developing countries. Technical competence will also need to be developed among different developing countries to regulate biotechnological interface with biodiversity. Fears have been expressed that introduction of transgenic crops may lead to accidental transfer of genes for herbicide tolerance into wild weeds making them uncontrollable. The issue is not whether this has happened but the real challenge is to generate competence to enable evaluation of various kinds of technologies under absolute safe conditions.
b5. Human Genetic Diversity: Should It Be Studied or Not
There has been a very major controversy on the Human Genom Project primarily with the opposition aimed at safeguarding the rights of indigenous communities as well as preventing commercialization of human genetic information. This is not an issue on which there can be any easy consensus because many of the same communities might need genetic diversity information to safeguard their future survival. Without getting into the debate, it can be easily argued that genetic diagnostic is a field of knowledge that has emerged entirely through the study of Human Genome and has helped save lives of large number of people. Whether moral values in a society permit use of this information for preventing diseases or correcting them is a matter which society can judge for itself. Olson (1989) observes that knowledge generated by mapping and sequencing the Human Genome could one day enable development of advanced human gene therapy.
The contentious issue remains that providers of rare human genes are often aborigine communities whose contributions have not been adequately reciprocated. Some of these communities have also questioned the morality of research of this kind. But as said earlier, this issue should be left to the free will of each community which wants or does not, to participate in the exchange of genetic information.
b6. Grow-out Facilities for Gene Banks
Several authors have drawn attention to the erosion of genetic diversity in the gene banks primarily caused by poor storage facilities or inability of the gene bank managers to grow out the material periodically. Scientifically, maintenance function does not receive as much academic honour as improvement function does. Financial squeeze in public sector R&D institutions has further worsened the situation. This is an area which requires considerable support and strengthening.
b7. Pollution Abetment and Biodiversity Conservation
Expert Panel (I) established by UNEP in 1993, in its report on Priorities for Action for Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biological Diversity and Agenda for Scientific and Technological Research (Nairobi, 28th April, 1993), recognized the loss through physical intervention, chemical interventions and biological interventions through modification, release, and introduction of organisms. It was noted that these interventions might lead to, "changes in frequencies and spatial distribution of genes, gene pool composition, population and species size and abundance, population and species composition in communities and eco-systems as well as changes in ecological processes". The precautionary principle in the convention’s preamble is important because it states, "that where there is a threat of significant reduction or loss of biological diversity, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as the reason for postponing measures to avoid or minimize such a threat".
Large number of actions were identified as a follow up of Article 6 to 14, 17 and 18 of the CBD. A specific reference may be useful to the recommended actions under Article 12 dealing with research and training. Among other things, suggested actions were re-orientation of education and training programme with reference to conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, strengthen and create programme for taxonomic education, encourage participative learning and enquiry between professionals and public, inventorizing and monitoring biodiversity and policy research related to conservation of diversity.
c. Technical Needs Type 3: Value addition and Bio-Prospecting
c1. Bio-Prospecting:
Whether for utilitarian or non-utilitarian reasons, accessing biodiversity requires considerable skills and technologies so that existing ecological balance is not disturbed. The prospecting may be on land, or water or on tree trunks, etc.
These skills for deep sea scanning of micro-organisms as attempted in the Japanese Deepstar Project (Myers and Anderson, 1992) may be quite rare in most countries. It is suggested that micro organisms found near hydro thermal vents on the marine floor may be particularly valuable to industry because of their heat stable enzymes’ (Reid, Barber and Vina, 1995).
Evaluating Plant extracts : Screening 10,000 plant extracts could have costed about 6 Million dollar a decade ago. Now, it could be accomplished for 150,000 dollars (J.Devlin, Applied Research Resource and Technologies, Inc., pers.communication, 19 Sep., 1994, in Reid, Barber and Vina, 1995). Obviously if such is the scale at which processing can be done, the developing countries can quickly move from raw material export to value added information export. Sometimes, it is assumed that transactions of this kind will necessarily have to be asymmetrical. However, in a competitive world once information base of the chemical or biochemical inventory will be shared with many possible users within non-OECD as well as OECD countries, it is likely that unfair exchange may not take place. In any case the probability of such unfair exchanges can only be higher in the absence of appropriate technology or information base.
c2. Diversity and Organic Agriculture: setting up certification facilities for organic agriculture
Given increasing awareness about the toxic residues of pesticides and herbicides in soil and water and through that into food chain, the preference for organic products is slowly growing. But, what is seldom recognized is the fact that soil microbial diversity invariably gets conserved while pursuing organic farming systems. Another noteworthy feature of agriculture in marginal environments of developing countries is that much of the production is organic. In the absence of organic certification facilities, no value is added to such production. The result is that people have to move into more and more marginal environments to meet their income requirements without investing in the soil and water conservation.
Even under GATT, the concept of non -actionable subsidies provides that in contiguous regions of high unemployment and low per capital income, provisions of developmental subsidies will not be actionable under WTO. This is one area in which market based approach to development can be tried upon.
If OECD Countries can invest setting up organic certification facilities in non-OECD countries, this can go a long way in combining conservation goals with income improvement for producers and safe food for the enlightened consumers in the host countries as well as through exports to OECD countries. In addition to organic certification, technical inputs for product development, packaging, storage and transportation would also need to be developed.
c3. Plants for vegetative dyes, human and animal medicine and aroma: Generating Consumer Awareness
There is a growing demand for vegetative dyes in view of the adverse environmental and human health impacts of synthetic dyes. Most of vegetative dye plants are found in marginal environments and are used by the artisanal communities, weavers, traditional painters or potters, etc. Erosion of diversity has affected these plants no less. Some of these plants ( such as mehndi) are cultivated and that too in dry lands while most are not.
The conservation of medicinal and aromatic plants is a well recognized area of importance. The technical assistance for conservation, cultivation, sustainable extraction, value addition and marketing of natural products so derived will involve a number of disciplines. In addition to the interventions discussed above, facilities for consumer awareness about the toxic impacts of synthetic dyes need to be established. The ban on Azo dyes in textiles by Germany has provided the first incentive to conventional textile exporters to pay attention to vegetative dyes. In the long term, sustained exports of these products to the OECD countries cannot be achieved without the development of domestic markets, for which consumer market is the necessary condition.
c4. Natural products standardization
WHO guidelines for ascertaining effectiveness and safety of indigenous drugs need to be modified so as to include alternative ways of evaluating the same. For other natural products too, the system of standardization cannot be developed without involving local communities and experts in knowledge system closely. In the absence of such consultation, the technical assistance could as well be misdirected.
d. Technical Needs Type 4: Capacity Building
d1. Training and educationIn many of the areas listed above, capacity building programs would require long term and short term training programs to be developed by OECD countries in cooperation with relatively speaking more developed countries. In the cost of bringing and training one trainee to a European country, one could perhaps train 10-15 trainees if the programs are conducted in a developing country with an international faculty. Setting up such international training centers could be one of the priority areas of action.
For building educational facilities, the potential of distance education has to be fully exploited. An idea of electronic university was developed by some of us earlier which one could complement with written and oral tools of learning to reach the remote corners of the world. This could help in promoting the Concept of Knowledge Networks/Centers discussed earlier to convect not only communities but also people with scientific labs in developed and developing world. A working group needs to be set up this subject to operationalize some of the goals of KNs (Gupta, 1993, 1992-1995)
The goals of Knowledge Centres/Networks have been put forward as would be as follows:
a. To trigger a multi channel, multi node and multi level network of individuals, institutions and social movements engaged in generating solutions to the problem of hunger and poverty,
b. To operationalize various articles of International Convention to Combat Desertification, particularly Article 16(b), Article 18, Article 19 and 20(c & d), Article 25-3(a), Article 26, etc., in order to network existing information channels so as to make innovative solutions accessible to people in a manner that they can use these and share feedback/feed forward.
c. To generate reciprocity amongst providers and receivers of information so that incentives for problem solvers to network with knowledge centre continue to grow.
d. To develop and operationalise an international fund for recognizing, respecting and rewarding creativity and innovation at grassroots level ensuring sustainable use of natural resources, protection of basic human rights, gender equality, and ethical discourse and conduct of business.
e. To network with existing efforts all over the globe with similar goals such as International Foundation for Science, Sweden (IFS), Society for Research and Initiatives for Sustainable Technologies and Institutions (SRISTI), Honey Bee network for indigenous innovations etc.
f. To mobilize volunteers from private and public sectors, third sector and even religious organizations to generate and support local trust funds to be managed by communities trying to augment innovative solutions developed by them or others.
g. To set up a venture capital fund for small innovations which may support innovators directly or may underwrite risk or provide bank guarantees for similar funds to be set up in different parts of the world for augmenting peoples capacity to solve their own problems.
h. To fulfill an ethical obligation towards poor people by ensuring, (i) all the information concerning any programme or project is made available in local language to the peoples’ representatives at local level before designing and implementing the same, (ii) sharing of information during the course of project implementation and respecting the right of people to information, (iii) protecting the intellectual property and cultural heritage rights of local communities.
d2. Development of Self Education tools/softwares and learning modules/ teaching materials/librariesMultimedia CDs on Biodiversity Conservation, international legislations and undertakings, self teaching modules on tropical ecology for various levels of learners, intricacies of various management models, information about green markets, tools for surveying green consumers in different cultural contexts, compendium on national policy and institutional initiatives, etc., are only some illustrative areas of developing educational tools.
d3. Data Base on Innovations: Honey Bee model
We at SRISTI have developed an unique data base ( perhaps largest of its kind in the world ) on farmers’ Innovations for sustainable natural resource use. The innovations -each with name and addresses of the innovative farmer/s or communities as well as the details about the communicators of these innovations. These innovations deal with herbal pesticides, veterinary medicines, growth regulators, organic fertilizers, farm implements, soil and water conservation, leather tanning etc. In addition a data base also is being developed on Institutional innovations for managing lakes, common property grazing lands, forests etc. It will be useful to help set up such data bases supported by decentralized Decision Support Systems which could be used by local communities as well as policy makers and scientists protecting inter-alia the intellectual property rights of the innovators. This will help build the capacity at different levels and give fillip to search for sustainable technologies and institutions.
Part Two: Incentives For Conservation
Models for Incentives for Conservation:linking local knowledge, technology, Incentives and Institutions
Technological competency at different levels in society will need to be supplemented with appropriate incentives some of which will also require delineation of property rights.
Several proposals have been made about how developing a ‘rights regime’ in biodiversity and indigenous knowledge could help serve the interest of local communities. The debate on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) provisions in GATT, article 8J of the Convention on Biological Diversity, article 16 G and H of International Convention on Combating Desertification besides various resolutions of ILO, UN Economic and Social Council, Commission on Human Rights etc., have been referred while developing various alternative ‘right regimes’.
Nijar (1995) in a proposal on behalf of Third World Network, rejected the concept of privatised, invidualised or corporatised knowledge or concept of creativity. He argues that indigenous communities create collectively and, therefore, whole community will be deemed the rightful owner of such creativity or innovation.Further, in this proposal, Nijar rejects the notion of, ‘one short concept of innovation’ which he believes typifies the industrial innovation. Since the definition of knowledge system used by Nijar precludes any possibility of autonomous and independent innovation by individuals or group thereof, the question of rewarding such innovation doesn’t arise. The only right he recognizes would be held in perpetuity and, thus, cannot be extinguished by any kind of restriction to its use. Having rejected the entire framework of Intellectual Property Right as well as Industrial Patent Regime, argument is made for a new sui generis system to reflect the values of the communities.
Before one gets into the argument about how the values of the communities are determined and assessed by any outside institution, we should recognize a major limitation of this framework. If it is accepted as proposed, it would imply that every generation in different parts of the world has been carrying the knowledge and innovations only in the collective form. There is no scope for individuals to deviate or create. Similarly, no sub-group or faction of a community can depart from the conventional practices of the community and generate new insights and innovations. Our research in Honey Bee network which extends to 75 countries and is supported by SRISTI provides considerable evidence to the contrary. That is not only individuals do innovate but also these innovations often remain unrecognized by the community itself. Further, there is a lot of traditional ecological knowledge which is shared among the community but not everybody contributes to its refinement or reproduction. Very often there are only few individuals who practice and generate expertise in various facets of this knowledge system. Studies have also shown that these experts though useful to the community are seldom provided sufficient incentives to come out of poverty ratchets. The irony is that knowledge rich economically poor communities and individual innovators will remain subjugated by those members of the community who may be economically and politically more powerful. These leaders may not even practice traditional conservation ethic and in fact may have in many cases benefited from the new input intensive technologies in agriculture and livestock.
There are, however, certain arguments in the proposal by Nijar and others which deserve serious attention and are worthy of support. For instance, the argument that knowledge of people derived over long period of time is not patentable but derivatives from this knowledge are, needs to be carefully considered. The issue is about preventing asymmetry in incentives to primary as well as secondary producer as well as re-producers of knowledge. We cannot argue for protection of rights of people without recognizing the legitimacy of such rights of those who add value to peoples’ knowledge and resources.
The very concept of incentive is linked with investments and motivations. Ideally everybody should work in public interest and there should be no need for private incentives. However, such is not the case in real life. The Eastern European experience and decline of statist regimes further reinforce the need for private initiative and incentives to build a pluralistic and participative society. Within local communities, the process of involution has been feared to follow in the absence of proper incentives.
The definition of the community given by Nijar is so broad that it will be difficult to operationalise it. For instance, every person is a member of one or the other social organization that binds them together in an area or otherwise. Some organizations may be 50 year old and others may be 1000 or more years old. Similarly, the term indigenous people may also pose problems in many countries. Most people in India would like to believe themselves to be indigenous. Whether Aryan invasion took place or not 5000 years ago is still a matter of conjecture. Whether this period is long enough or not for people to be considered indigenous is a very difficult problem. Therefore, we consider local communities as a term to include not just farming but also non-farming populations living off natural resources for several decades. The presence of social and cultural ties among these people may help in defining the communities. But due to dislocation and displacement, lot of people have been forced to live far away from their original habitat. Such people may have evolved local knowledge around the region of their habitation and, therefore, could have stakes in the conservation of these resources.
The argument of indigenous people as legal entities with a status equivalent to nation state (Nijar, 1985:6) provides sufficient scope for international geo-politics to destabilize existing nations. In principle, every local community should have recognizable rights over local resources. It is all the more true for tribal people who have been denied their legitimate right over local resources. But to imply from this that each local community particularly of tribal people should become a nation state is an invitation to hegemony of various kinds of interests.
We fully endorse the idea of registration of innovations because we ourselves have pleaded for it during last 5-6 years. We also agree that failure to register should not defeat the rights of people to the innovation. However, we do not believe that those who add value to local resources identified by local communities for different uses will have no right. Our submission is that the rights of those who add value cannot be superior to the rights of those who provided the clue or did the basic R&D of linking a resource with its effect. Thus, we support the rights of those who identify local biodiversity for a particular purpose and also those who add value to such a resource for the same purpose or for some other purpose.
What can OECD countries do to provide incentives for conserving biodiversity in non-OECD countries?
The OECD countries are relatively much more rich in biotechnology whereas the non-OECD countries are rich in biodiversity. The conservation of biodiversity requires understanding the interface between ownership, management, occurrence of biodiversity, and nature of risks as well as uncertainties. Further, the kind of consumer pressure triggered by the existing market forces also influences how certain resources will be priced adequately otherwise and certain resources will not be priced.
A Plea for Global Registration of innovations, traditional knowledge and practices:
SRISTI has been pleading for a global registration system akin to Honey bee network of grassroots innovators for last several years but particularly since 1989 when the Honey bee network was start-ed and reinforced later several times (Honey Bee, 1990-1996; Gupta, 1991,1992, 1994, 1995,1996; SRISTI, 1993). Subsequently, the Third World Network also endorsed this idea as apart of their proposal on community Intellectual property rights but they had restricted the scope of such a registry only to the collective knowledge. We have argued from the beginning that innovations are produced not only by collective groups but also by individuals and not just in long past but also in the contemporary times. It will be possible to achieve the following results from such a registry:
i)acknowledgement of individual and collective creativity
ii)grant entitlements to grassroots innovators for receiving a share of any returns that may arise from commercial applications of their knowledge, innovations or practices with or without value addition
Secondary entitlements
iii)Linking the golden triangle of entrepreneurship by linking Investments, enterprise and innovations. Small scale investors in North nd South can not afford to go to various countries, scan diversity of knowledge and resources, negotiate contracts and invest up front huge investments for value addition. If they do not participate, then the field will remain dominated by only large corporations. This register will help small scale investors seek opportunities of communication with communities and individual innovators and explore opportunities of investment. large number of potential negotiations will take place increasing the opportunities for innovative communities and individuals. The competition among the investors tempered by competition among potential suppliers of a various kinds of knowledge as well as diversity will moderate expectations on both the sides.
(iv)An autonomous authority of which local community representatives will be the majority members could be entrusted with the responsibilities of having access to all the contracts. A copy of the contracts may have to be deposited with this Authority so as to avoid short changing of the communities. These contracts will also be scrutinized to see whether management plans for sustainable extraction of diversity have been drawn up n scientifically appropriate manner or not. Penalties may have to be imposed for non-sustainable extraction of herbs by domestic as well as external extractors.
(v)Each entry in the Register will be coded according to an universal system like ISBN. The postal pin code of the habitat of the community or individuals registering innovations will be incorporated in the indexation system so that geo-referencing of innovations can be done. In due course the contextual information of innovations can also be incorporated in the system so that GIs of innovations can help cross connect the communities having similar ecological situations or facing similar constraints or challenges.
(vi)The entry in the register will in the first stage be mere acknowledgement of creativity and innovation at grassroots level. But later some of the innovations will be considered appropriate for award of inventors certificate or a kind of petty patent which is a limited purpose and limited duration protection. Essential purpose of this innovation also is to enable the potential investors (a cooperative of consumers, producers, an entrepreneur, or a large firm in private or public sector).
(vii)The award of certificate will also increase entitlement of innovator/s for access to concessional credit and risk cover so that transition from collector, or producer of herbs to developer and marketeer of value added products can take place in cases where innovators deem that fit.
(viii)The registration system will also be part of Knowledge Network linking problem solving people across the world at grassroots level( see discussion on Knowledge network in the later section). This will promote people to people learning and serve as a multi-language, multi level, multi media( oral, textual, electronic) clearing house for local and indigenous communities. Where ever necessary and possible, formal scientific institutions will be linked up in the network.
I am dividing various kinds of incentives under following four categories (Gupta, 1991,1993,1995):
1) Material - individual
2) Material - collective
3) Non-material - individual
4) Non-material - collective
While describing various kinds of incentives I will particularly focus on those which can be operationalised rather easily. I will also try to highlight the ethical aspects of preservation which may require re-defining the responsibility of various stake-holders in conserving diversity.
1) Material - individual
The biodiversity and associated knowledge systems may thrive through various kinds of innovative initiatives of individuals. A private farmer may own a large ranch or a small forest which may have some unique biodiversity. Some of the feudal lords who may have been legitimized in the form of aristocrats or other allied roles may posses huge tracts of grazing lands. In some cases, the royal families may own unique habitats having unusually rich biodiversity. For instance, in Bhutan, the royal family owns large tracks of grazing lands as well as forests which are only resource of its kind in the given geo-physical niche. The natural forest have been devastated on both the sides of Bhutan along that latitude around the globe. Were it not for the enlightened conservation royal policies of Bhutan government and prudence of local communities, humanity would have lost rare and unique biodiversity residing in this parallel. But will Bhutan be able to conserve this diversity indefinitely if the global community does not pay the price of foregone income to Bhutan or other such countries.
The incentives for conserving such biodiversity could be in material form and for individual use (though if the incentives are ploughed through external assistance such as aid from OECD countries, there is no justification to reinforce land inequities. In Bhutan the enlightened Kingdom has modified the concept of sanctuaries to include people’s rights living in them to be protected. Thus though lands may have been owned privately, the incentives so far have not been utilized privately.) If the incentives are only short-term, it is possible that strategy of conservation may or may not be sustainable. If short-term investments develop capacity for generating long term revenues through non-extractive uses of biodiversity, then such incentives will fall under this category. A good example is investment in eco-tourism in some countries. The equity implications of these investments have to be carefully weighed.
The individual - material rewards conventionally include the patent rights, license fees and other forms of remunerations for individual creativity. In many non-OECD countries, there is a considerable misconception about what patents do or do not do. The historical role of reverse engineering in various developed countries in the early phase of development is cited as a justification for continued weak regime for intellectual properties. To some extent there may be some truth in this logic. However, given the economic squeeze and deficit budgets, most developing countries compete for foreign exchange through investments rather than borrowing. Many times flow of technology and resources to various developing countries may be impeded because of weak protection for intellectual properties. The incentives for biodiversity conservation unfortunately have not been linked with the efforts to strengthen IPR regime for individual or firms. Obviously the incentives for firms can not be justified without similar incentives for farmers, non farming tribal or other communities.
OECD countries can help in several ways:
A) Patent information system at decentralized level to promote participation of small scale sector in new ventures.
The information about patents will serve three conventional purposes, i) it will help investors identify ideas which are out of patent and can be commercialized easily, ii) prevent duplication of R&D and re-discovery of the wheel, and iii) encourage investors to negotiate with the patent holders for local manufacturing base.
However, the information system will also serve at least two non-conventional purposes, iv) make communities and individuals aware of their rights if infringed by any patent and v) encourage innovative communities and individuals to file patents for the improvements they have brought about in their knowledge to generate new products and processes.
B) To develop low cost decentralized system of registration of innovations/inventions( as argued herein earlier). It is well known that many innovations known to a small community or individuals may not be easily accessible to outside users and thus could not be considered as a part of state-of-art. The registration system could be relevant for individuals as well as groups and may generate a clearing house for potential investors to contact the concerned inventor/s for possible commercialization. Thus, conditions for material reward will be generated for corporate communities or individuals.
This idea has to be implemented hand in hand with the concept of Knowledge Network so that people to people communication of innovations does not get less importance than the goal of commercialization.
C) Public watchdog committees to monitor and ensure sustainable extraction of biodiversity.
The monetary incentives to individuals could also lead to excessive extraction of a resource. A good example is excessive mining of ground water because the power charges are often collected on the basis of horse power of engine and not actual power consumption. Such a system also does not provide any incentive for using energy efficient technologies. The watch dog committees may have to be financially supported for regulating and disseminating information about the scale of extraction of a resource. Special incentive may be provided to individuals who either generate substitutes for products derived from endangered species or provide mechanisms for application through biotechnology, clonal propagation or tissue culture. A wild plant may thus get domesticated and thereby generate opportunities for increasing income of people without extraction of resources from the wild.
Voluntary Incentives: In addition to above externally induced incentives, there can also be incentives of voluntary nature. For instance, some one who develops a public domain software may ask the users to contribute a given amount to the developer if they are satisfied. Voluntary contribution, we all accept, may take place very infrequently. And yet there are large number of people who continue to develop and share public domain softwares. Likewise, this is a model where individual who develops a value added product may make the information a public domain for those who want to replicate. But those who do not want to undergo the hassle of developing their product, may buy it from the producer. An innovator Mr. Upleshwar developed a herbal pesticide based on the recipe evolved by his teacher Dr. Rahudkar who in turn had drawn inspiration from traditional knowledge( Pastakia, 1996). Mr. Upleshwar wrote down the formula on the school walls in the village for anyone to copy and also sent pamphlets to large number of other villages and districts. Those who wanted, could have made it themselves. However, his experience was that large number of people preferred to buy from him rather than make it themselves. This is an example where material individual incentives are generated in the market place through combination of voluntary and entrepreneurial spirit. A fund for helping such ecopreneurs undertake market research, product development and some additional R &D exercise could be set up.
The individual - material incentives can also be generated by providing rewards to those who develop innovations which help in conservation of biodiversity. For instance, there are many medicine men and women who do not charge for their services, as a result their superior ethics makes them remain poor. If the incentive for sharing technologies and keeping them in public domain are matched by the public support for public sector and community R&D, awards for outstanding scientists (formal as well as informal) may be one way for recognizing this contribution.
2) Material - collective
The incentives in this category could be most meaningful in the co-operation between OECD and non-OECD countries. The purpose of such incentives is to recognize that creative activities may require support not just at individual but also at group level. Further, even this support to individuals may in some cases be routed through group processes. Four kinds of incentives be designed to promote creativity and innovation in conservation of biodiversity such as: a) venture capital support, b) risk cover through insurance, guarantee and risk funds, c) trust funds with or without individual leadership, and d) infrastructural development in the economically disadvantaged biodiversity rich regions etc.
A) Venture Capital Funds
Our research has shown that considerable opportunities exist for scientists or firms in formal sector for combining new technology and investments. However, similar facilities do not exist for small innovators anywhere in the world to the best of our knowledge. Perhaps this gap is a natural corollary of the gap that exists around the world in having data bases on local innovations. Honey Bee database is an exception. In the absence of venture capital fund, large number of innovations either do not become products or services or remain at the level of idea itself. The linkage between invention and enterprise requires support from formal science as well as investment agencies. If this support is of the conventional banking kind, several innovators may not have risk bearing ability to borrow at market rate of interest. A venture capital fund, on the other hand, assures the inventor that no loss would be caused to her. The fund would share the profits, if any, either through equity participation, partnership or one time payment by the innovator. Large number of natural products for which demand exists remain out of the market perhaps because incentives and infrastructure for scaling them up in a fair manner do not exist.
SRISTI Venture Capital Fund was set up on experimental basis to try to learn by doing. OECD countries could help in setting up a network of such venture capital funds entirely dedicated to development of natural products by small innovators (individuals or communities). In some cases, assistance in market research, product development, testing, etc., may also be required to link local creativity with global markets.
B) Risk Cover
Many communities are unable to make transition to sustainable land use in case they have been following resource degrading practices because of inability to take risk involved in the transition. Further, acquisition of new technology whether for production, conservation or value addition will also involve risks. In case naturally occurring herbs have to be cultivated, the on-farm research may have to be done which of course involves risks. Even if non-extractive enterprises such as livestock or agriculture have to be developed in marginal environments for people relying on biodiversity extraction, the whole process of developing these alternatives may involve considerable risks.
To encourage financial institutions to lend to scattered population at lower rate of interest may mean higher transaction cost as well as risks.
To cover various kinds of risks described above, OECD countries can help develop international guarantee fund, risk funds and insurance cover.
C) Trust Funds
The ethical values of many local communities as well as individuals are such that individual as well as collective monetary rewards in lieu of knowledge are shunned. Obviously one cannot justify such communities or individuals being kept poor because their ethical values are superior. Trust funds are a way of providing revolving funds or expandable resources to local communities for local conservation and employment generation. These funds could be managed by local communities or one of the biodiversity experts/herbalists who could act as a gatekeeper for these resources. In that sense, such funds also help to empower local experts. It remains to be seen whether such empowerment would encourage younger people to emulate such experts and help in keeping the knowledge tree alive. The trust funds can also be used for local market development, processing or adding value to local herbs or aquatic diversity or for providing small loans at low rate of interest to members of the community. The idea is to break the vicious circle of poverty which prevents such communities from coming out of poverty ratchets.
D) Support for infrastructural development/Common Property Resource Development
Whether it is watershed development or re-generation of common property resources or conservation of collective sacred groves, local savings or resources may not always be sufficient for the purpose. In addition, some new infrastructure may be required for education, marketing, processing, storage etc. In some negotiations between corporations and local communities infrastructural development emerged as one of the important demands from the local communities. However, one has to be sure that the kind of infrastructure which is developed as a form of collective reward/compensation does not generate two kinds of problems. One that it absolves the government or local bodies of their responsibility in the matter and second this process distorts the local community relation by emphasizing far too much on the preferences of only dominant sections. For instance, it is possible that the elite may demand motorable road while the disadvantaged women might prefer drinking water facility ( Gupta, 1994).The basic needs of every community should be met as a matter of human right regardless of whether it conserves biodiversity or not. What we are suggesting is that in addition to meeting local needs such funds should also be used for supplementing the infrastructure.
One area which could widen the choices of local communities is access to databases of alternative uses, technologies and resources which can help improve the local livelihood strategies without impairing the ecological balance. Many times developmental professionals have tried to romanticize the relationship between local communities with local resources. Just as no one community can solve all technological or institutional problems successfully, likewise no community would be totally insulated from outside resources and influences. The challenge is to make it possible for local communities and individuals to access and negotiate external resources at reasonable and fair terms. This may require building capacity for negotiations with outside biodiversity prospectors. Since ability to negotiate would depend upon access to alternative information, development of such knowledge networks/databases may be extremely helpful in empowering local communities (Ethical Guidelines for accessing and exploring Biodiversity developed by Pew Conservation Scholars appended to this note cold be a starting point).
There could be many other kinds of incentives for conserving biodiversity in material form and for individual purpose but mediated through collective institutions. For conservation of land races of different crops, several schemes can be devised depending upon whether the diversity is concentrated in few pockets or scattered, or has high or low degree of variability within populations. Not every grower of land race can be given incentive every year for every plot of land race. Because if incentive is too small, it will not bring about any perceptible change in the behaviour. One way to increase the size of incentive per household is to develop a system of lottery. Assuming that 500 hectares exist under a particular land race of which 50 hectares (10%) need to be conserved, 50 lottery vouchers of one hectare each could be selected by the lot for allocation among different farmers. These 50 farmers should get difference of value in the productivity of their land race vis-a-vis high yielding variety multiplied by the price difference. Thus, if a farmer got ten dollars per quintal price and only 10 quintal yield with local land race as against 20 quintal yield of the high yielding variety sold at 15 dollar per quintal. Then the farmer who gets the lottery voucher would get (15x20) - (10x10) that is 200 dollars. If it was to be distributed among all the 500 farmers either one would need lot more resources and if resources are same a farmer would get hardly 50 cents which will make no difference to one’s decision making profile.
Many more variants of this scheme can be developed to provide individual material incentive but through collective institutions.
3) Non-material individual
It is recognized that there are large number of individuals who either do not care for material rewards or do not consider such rewards as a major motivation for their decision to conserve diversity. In such cases owner, respect and recognition in local as well as national functions may provide significant motivation to conserve natural diversity.
Biodiversity conservation and promotion funds can be set up in different parts of the world for not only celebrating unique efforts of individuals or collective institutions but also to publicize in local language such contributions. The essential point here is that various ways of recognition by peers as well as society at large may help in generating the right kind of role models. Reference to such individual innovators and conservators in various media may also provide encouragement to such individuals.
4) Non-material collective
A whole range of measures can be taken up in short-term as well as medium term. The changes in curriculum and pedagogy are one of the most important candidates for consideration. It is well known that the food consumed, by the disadvantaged communities even when nutritionally superior, is considered inferior in the formal knowledge systems. In fact many of these millets grown in dry regions are actually called inferior millets. Obviously, if young minds don’t learn about the contribution local individuals or communities make towards conservation it is unlikely that they will develop respect for such behaviour.
Policy changes in the regulatory as well as managerial systems is another way in which incentives can be generated for various local communities. One of the specific ways in which non-material collective interventions can help is by modifying consumer preference as well as producer incentives for organic cultivation. In some cases, it may come under material collective if the facilities for organic certification are developed collectively. However, such facilities will also be accessible to individuals.
It is well known that much of the production in drought prone regions, hill areas or forest regions is organic in nature and primarily not by choice but due to compulsion. If organic certification facility can be developed along with market channels then incomes of such communities can be increased without impairing local eco-compatible land use. The consumer will also be benefited through availability of safer foods.
The OECD countries can help in developing organic certification facility in different non-OECD countries.
Summing up
Several indicators will have to be used to monitor whether the progress has been made according to the lines suggested here.
The concrete steps taken by OECD countries in meeting technological needs of the four kinds described here will need to be monitored. It is possible that many areas of providing incentives will need global undertakings to be finalized which is time consuming process. And yet the capacity of developing countries to improve the cataloguing, inventorization and value addition in local biodiversity will depend upon the technological competence created in the meanwhile. My feeling is that various countries will appreciate mutual positions better when they participate in the value addition process and recognize the inherent problems and challenges. Respect for people’s as well as scientists’ knowledge may increase in the process.
Notwithstanding the popular rhetoric in this regard, the real benefits to local communities will flow only when biodiversity is conserved in the long term. It is obvious that this biodiversity can not be conserved by keeping local communities poor (Gupta, 1991). The economic and other benefits are likley to flow if technological Innovations, Institutions and Incentives are combined in an appropriate manner.
The changes in the curriculum as well as pedagogy at school level will indicate how serious we are in changing the mind set of future leaders of our society. Many of the changes will not require any external aid from OECD countries at all. Perhaps it may not be totally inappropriate to link external aid to the endogenous efforts made by each country to take steps that they can take without any material resources. Lest this is seen as part of conditionalities, perhaps a multilateral mechanisms with representation of south and northern experts and community leaders could oversee such an entitlement process with transparency in developing criterion and their implementation.
The incentives of biodiversity conservation discussed in this paper primarily deal with plant biodiversity and within plants, agricultural biodiversity. However, the same model can be modified to identify incentive structure for some of the aquatic diversity as well. However, for avion diversity as well as wild animal diversity, trans boundary arrangements will have to be developed. In the case of soil microbial diversity, the incentives would be needed for habitat conservation as well as for land use management.
The technological changes have to combined with appropriate incentives and institutional development. There is a need to develop win-win solutions and get out of historical legacy of colonial exploitative models. The mutual dependent world needs an ethical transformation. The younger generation in developed as well as developing world has to recognize that their destines are intricately intertwined.
It has to be understood that no amount of financial incentives can ever substitute the ethical basis of traditional or contemporary institutional or technological innovations. In some cases, the ethical values are derived from moral and religious beliefs. We will have to respect such beliefs and recognize legitimacy of sacred consciousness in achieving secular goals. Incentives in such cases may imply expanding the policy space for pluralistic experiments. The blending between secular and sacred streams of consciousness can produce remarkable institutions for conserving diversity. In this paper, we have not discussed various ways in which one can draw upon such sources of moral beliefs. However, the model that we have described provides a whole range of options for providing incentives to individuals as well as communities engaged in conserving diversity such that nexus between high biodiversity and high poverty can be broken (Gupta, 1991).