Conservation and Sustainable Use of Plant Genetic Resources in India: A Review of Policy Issues and Perspectives

Abstract

The 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) have propelled issues relating to the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources to the fore. This paper attempts an objective appraisal from India's viewpoint of these relevant but contentious issues. After taking stock of crop genetic wealth, the shortcomings in the present structure of legal framework for conservation of the nation's genetic resources are examined. Property rights in plant genetic resources are the key to their conservation and wise use. Although India is a treasure-house of plant biodiversity, demographic factors, lack of a property rights regime and general ignorance have resulted in the plundering of these invaluable natural resources. This paper's argument is that if intellectual property rights (IPR) are imaginatively adapted to actual needs, they can go a long way towards the conservation of crop genetic resources. The dilemmas that developing countries face in the post-World Trade Organization (WTO) scenario are presented on the one hand as the all-important goal of food security (which calls for agricultural intensification), and habitat conservation on the other. Finally, a framework is suggested for the conservation and sustainable use of plant genetic resources.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Throughout this paper, the terms ‘plant biodiversity’, ‘crop biodiversity’ and ‘agricultural biodiversity’ are used synonymously, and are intended to convey the same meaning. For an in-depth treatment of the definition, refer to Global Biodiversity: Status of the Earth's Living Resources, a report compiled by WCMC, Chapman & Hall, London, 1992, pp xiii–xviii.

This debate is succinctly captured by Srivastava

J.P.

Smith

N.J.H.

Forno

D.A.

in ‘Biodiversity and agricultural intensification: Partners for development and conservation’, Environmentally Sustainable Development Studies and Monographs, Series No 11, World Bank, Washington, DC, 1996.

Fowler

Mooney

Shattering: Food, Politics, and the Loss of Genetic Diversity, University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ, 1990, documented the value of wild material as a source of commercially valuable genetic material.

See World Development Report: Development and the Environment, World Bank, 1992, for a detailed explanation.

While highlighting these new issues, William Lesser moots the idea of ‘access legislation’. Lesser

William

, Equitable Patent Protection in the Developing World: Issues and Approaches, Eubios Ethics Institute, Tsukuba, 1991.

Ravishankar

‘Intellectual property rights and Indian agriculture: Some issues’, Policy Brief No 4, NCAP—ICAR, New Delhi, 1996.

Gupta

Anil K

, Why Does Poverty Persist in Regions of High Biodiversity? A Case for Indigenous Property Right System, Working Paper No 938, IIM, Ahmedabad, 1991.

Shiva

Vandana

Sahai

Suman

Kothari

Ashish

Biodiversity: Social and Ecological Perspectives, World Rain Forest Movement, Malaysia, 1992.

Kothari

Ashish

Anuradha

R.V.

‘Biodiversity, Intellectual Property Rights, and GATT Agreement: How to address the conflicts?’

Economic and Political Weekly, 27 October 1997, pp 2814–2820.

10.

In some quarters, it is thought that these issues are being thrust upon the nation, rather than that they are an inherent need.

11.

Gadgil

Madhav

‘Patenting life’, Artha Vijnana, Vol 37, No 4, 1995, pp 307–321.

12.

Tisdell

C.A.

Economics of Environmental Conservation: Economics for Environmental and Ecological Management, Elsevier, the Netherlands, 1994.

13.

Gadgil, op cit, Ref 11.

14.

The cases of the Philippines, Queensland, Brazil and Costa Rica passing legislation proclaiming national sovereignty over their respective germplasms, should act as a signal, and reinforce our efforts on similar lines.

15.

Reid

W.V.

Miller

K.R.

Keeping Options Alive: The Scientific Basis for Conserving Biodiversity, World Resources Institute, Washington, DC, 1989; McNeely

J.A.

Miller

K.R.

Reid

W.V.

Mittermeier

R.A.

Werner

T.B.

, Conserving the World's Biological Diversity, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, WRI, CI, WWF-US and the World Bank, Washington, DC, 1990; Frankel

O.M.

Brown

A.H.D.

Burdon

J.J.

, The Conservation of Plant Biodiversity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995; Swaminathan

M.S.

Farmers' Rights and Plant Genetic Resources — Recognition and Reward: A Dialogue, Macmillan India Press, Madras, 1995.

16.

Gadgil

Madhav

Rao

P.R. Seshagiri

, Designing Incentives to Conserve India's Biodiversity. Property Rights in a Social and Ecological Context, Beijier Institute Policy Paper, Stockholm, 1996, pp 53–62.

17.

Gupta, op cit, Ref 7.

18.

Murphee

Marshall W.

, Communities as Resource Management Institutions, Gatekeeper Series No 36, IIED, UK, 1993.

19.

Gadgil and Rao, Op cit, Ref 16.

20.

Governments can promote conservation of plant genetic resources by imparting skills, adopting suitable price policies, employing local people (in documentation and conservation efforts), and providing basic necessities such as education and healthcare.

21.

Gadgil, op cit, Ref 11, suggests Panchayat Raj institutions (PRIs) as an important means of documentation/conservation of plant genetic resources; Swaminathan, Op cit, Ref 15, has produced an exhaustive draft regarding farmers' rights and the Community Gene Fund.

22.

Source: Lesser

William

, 1986.

23.

Swaminathan, op cit, Ref 15.

24.

Gadgil, op cit, Ref 11.

25.

Gupta, op cit, Ref 7.

26.

Direct benefit sharing among indigenous people/farmers maynot be practical or viable due to: A) counter-claims and duplicity; and b) working out criteria on the basis of which rewards can be distributed is often difficult, and could result in communal conflicts.

27.

Ciriacy-Wantrup

S.V.

, Resource Conservation: Economics and Policies, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, 1951.

28.

Frankel

O.M.

Soule

M.E.

Conservation and Evolution, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1981.