Biodiversity, Access and Benefit-Sharing

Robinson, Daniel F.

doi:10.4324/9781315882819

Cited by 25 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, though UNDRIP is only referred to 7 times, the change in terminology to include the formulation 'indigenous peoples' may denote a larger (though perhaps unintended) shift in biodiversity governance towards a more rights-based approach (Tauli-Corpuz et al 2018). This too fits suggestions by Robinson (2015) that the CBD is used by indigenous peoples as an arena they can then draw on to push self-determination goals in various national contexts. Thus, this finding could be read as a move to seek to apply pressure about UNDRIP to force the beginnings of a move towards a logic of appropriateness or moral position in the CBD (Checkel 2005).…”

Section: Definite Involvement On Specific Mattersupporting

confidence: 63%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What We Talk About When We Talk About ‘Local’ Participation: Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities’ Participation Under the Convention on Biological Diversity

Parks¹,

Schröder²

2018

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Definite Involvement On Specific Mattersupporting

confidence: 63%

“…By naming an actor as accountable, they provide an international space that indigenous peoples and local communities may use as leverage for their domestic political agendas, a tactic identified in work on the politics of these groups (e.g. Robinson 2015) as well as many others, including government departments.…”

Section: Definite Involvement On Specific Mattermentioning

confidence: 99%

What We Talk About When We Talk About ‘Local’ Participation: Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities’ Participation Under the Convention on Biological Diversity

Parks¹,

Schröder²

2018

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In contrast, there are a number of ABS agreements in the region, including some in Australia, Papua New Guinea, the Cook Islands, Vanuatu and Samoa (Robinson, ). These ABS agreements and some of the concerns about biopiracy, have no doubt encouraged some governments to sign (Australia, Palau, etc.)…”

Section: Background and Context For Aotearoa New Zealand Australia mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sometimes NGO literature has been criticised as being “strategically vague” (Dutfield 2004). In other case studies, we learn useful information about the specifics of the bioprospecting activities, as well as the concerns and perspectives of Indigenous peoples and local communities, and this helps inform policy‐making and implementation (Robinson, ; Mead and Ratuva, 2007). What is often missing is an idea of the scale of R&D activities that might be utilising the genetic resources—microbes, plants, and animals and their components—and any associated TK that might have been used either incidentally or directly.…”

Section: Background and Context For Aotearoa New Zealand Australia mentioning

confidence: 99%

Māori knowledge under the microscope: Appropriation and patenting of mātauranga Māori and related resources

Lai

Robinson

Stirrup

et al. 2019

World Intellectual Property

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the early 1990s there has been considerable global discussion and debate surrounding biodiscovery activities and the utilisation of both genetic resources (including biochemical derivatives) and associated traditional/Indigenous knowledge (TK/IK). Concerns about misappropriations and biopiracy have often been raised; however it has been difficult to quantify the scale of this problem beyond some common examples and anecdotes. This paper contributes to emerging research in this area (e.g., see Oldham et al. 2013, PLOS One, 8, e78737; and Robinson and Raven, 2017, Aust Geogr, 48, 311) and seeks to quantify patent utilisation of specific GRs where there is documented TK. A patent landscaping approach was undertaken with a focus on plants with associated mātaraunga Māori (Māori knowledge) from Aotearoa New Zealand. We explain our methodology and highlight 77 patent families of interest identified through our search. Although the findings are not definitive about misappropriation without additional analysis of the patents’ specifications and claims, and sources of mātauranga Māori, the data we outline may be useful for drawing out cases of misappropriation and biopiracy. These findings might also be useful for considering the potential implications of these for Māori claims under the Waitangi Tribunal Wai 262, potential access and benefit‐sharing (ABS) systems, and intellectual property regulations or reforms.

show abstract

“…Such unauthorized use and appropriation does happen though the chief offenders are not in fact the big drug companies, as is commonly supposed, but much smaller firms trading in various types of natural product such as foods, food supplements, herbal remedies and seeds (Robinson ). These tend to have lower profit margins on their products, though a change in their business practices could certainly provide some useful if modest benefits for local communities (Robinson, ). The critique being made here is not with the concept of biopiracy but with usage of the other two terms in the sentence opening this part of the article including the relationship between them.…”

Section: The False Binary Opposition Of Tradition and Modernitymentioning

confidence: 99%

TK unlimited: The emerging but incoherent international law of traditional knowledge protection

Dutfield

2017

World Intellectual Property

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an emerging international regime complex concerning traditional knowledge (TK). Debate continues on what form legal protection should take including how benefits from commercial use ought to be shared. This article considers how far progress is feasible. It makes three related claims. First, dominant in policy debates has been a tendency to position “tradition” in direct and binary opposition to “modern”. We show how this is ahistorical, reinforcing misconceptions regarding the nature of TK, and its relationship to other knowledge systems. It also tends to discourage possibilities for mutually advantageous collaborations based on respect for local norms regulating access, control and ownership. The second claim is that many TK advocates, by misconceiving it this way, are too expansive in terms of the knowledge that they demand the proposed international regimes should cover. This precludes possibilities for policy coherence. The third is that the access and benefit sharing measures envisaged by the Convention on Biological Diversity tend to downplay the social and cultural value of TK for holders and their communities themselves. This matters because of TK's significance to local people's lives, which is likely to outweigh potential monetary value that may arise from its translation into biotechnological knowledge inputs.

show abstract

Biodiversity, Access and Benefit-Sharing

Cited by 25 publications

References 0 publications

What We Talk About When We Talk About ‘Local’ Participation: Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities’ Participation Under the Convention on Biological Diversity

What We Talk About When We Talk About ‘Local’ Participation: Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities’ Participation Under the Convention on Biological Diversity

Māori knowledge under the microscope: Appropriation and patenting of mātauranga Māori and related resources

TK unlimited: The emerging but incoherent international law of traditional knowledge protection

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About