Gateway to Think Tanks
来源类型 | Journal article |
规范类型 | 其他 |
来源ID | G03397 |
Whose access and whose benefit? Securing customary rights in India (PLA 65) | |
Sagari R. Ramdas | |
发表日期 | 2012 |
出处 | Participatory Learning and Action 65 |
出版者 | IIED |
出版年 | 2012 |
语种 | 英语 |
摘要 | This article discusses the limitations of the Nagoya Protocol from the perspective of communities in India. As it promotes access to genetic resources for commercial use, the Protocol is grounded in the exclusive intellectual property rights framework. Yet in the worldview of Adivasi and pastoralist communities, natural and genetic resources and traditional knowledge form the basis of existence and are sustained through collectivism and spirituality for future generations, and cannot be reduced to a commodity. Although the provisions on prior informed consent (PIC) and community protocols provide space for communities to assert their own worldview, they are subject to domestic law. This is a severe limitation as none of India’s ABS-related laws and institutions require PIC or community protocols. Instead, Adivasis and pastoralists are using indigenous rights laws to defend their customary rights. This article appears in Participatory Learning and Action 65 on Biodiversity and culture: exploring community protocols, rights and consent. |
区域 | India |
URL | https://pubs.iied.org/G03397/?c=mel&p=27 |
来源智库 | International Institute for Environment and Development (United Kingdom) |
资源类型 | 智库出版物 |
条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/317083 |
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 | Sagari R. Ramdas. Whose access and whose benefit? Securing customary rights in India (PLA 65). 2012. |
条目包含的文件 | ||||||
文件名称/大小 | 资源类型 | 版本类型 | 开放类型 | 使用许可 | ||
G03397.pdf(437KB) | 智库出版物 | 限制开放 | CC BY-NC-SA | 浏览 |
个性服务 |
推荐该条目 |
保存到收藏夹 |
导出为Endnote文件 |
谷歌学术 |
谷歌学术中相似的文章 |
[Sagari R. Ramdas]的文章 |
百度学术 |
百度学术中相似的文章 |
[Sagari R. Ramdas]的文章 |
必应学术 |
必应学术中相似的文章 |
[Sagari R. Ramdas]的文章 |
相关权益政策 |
暂无数据 |
收藏/分享 |
除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。