scholarly journals Protecting Intellectual Property Rights and Traditional Ecological Knowledge: A Critical Look at Peru's Law 27811

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-79
Author(s):  
Michelle Hak Hepburn
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Traditional Ecological Knowledge ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Ecological Knowledge ◽  
History Of ◽  
Protecting Intellectual Property ◽  
San Martín

The Peruvian government's Law N. 27811, an intellectual property law passed in 2002 and designed to register and protect traditional knowledge, provides productive opportunities for critical analysis. Framed within the trajectory of international intellectual property rights and discussions that complicate the integration of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) into Cartesian scientific frameworks, this paper critically examines how the Peruvian law has been implemented and its impacts in Indigenous communities, particularly in the Andean Amazon region. The analysis is based on the author's work assisting Indigenous communities in San Martin register their knowledge through this law. While the law represents an advanced legal attempt to address power inequalities, it remains problematic. It does not address the impoverishment of Indigenous Peoples and continues to subordinate Indigenous TEK to Cartesian science. Although it is a symbolic recognition of the value of Peruvian Indigenous Peoples, other mechanisms are still required to redress the long history of colonization and racism.

Beyond Unbridled Optimism and Fear: Indigenous Peoples, Intellectual Property, Human Rights and the Globalisation of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Folklore: Part I

2013 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 319-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Caroline Joan S. Picart ◽  
Marlowe Fox
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Property Law ◽  
Cultural Expression ◽  
Intellectual Property Law ◽  
Traditional Cultural Expressions

Abstract This article is the first part of a two-part piece, which considers the intellectual property rights of indigenous peoples. After establishing pragmatic working definitions of who “indigenous peoples” are and what folklore (or “traditional cultural expression”) is, as compared with, but dialectically related to, “traditional knowledge,” this article does the following: 1) explains why western assumptions built into intellectual property law make this area of law a problematic tool for protecting traditional knowledge (TK) and expressions of folklore (EoF) or traditional cultural expressions (TCE) of indigenous peoples; and 2) creates a general sketch of human rights related legal instruments that could be and have been harnessed, with varying degrees of success, in the protection of the intellectual property of indigenous peoples.

scholarly journals Intellectual Property Rights Systems and the Assemblage of Local Knowledge Systems

2008 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saskia Vermeylen ◽  
George Martin ◽  
Roland Clift
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Traditional Knowledge ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Local Knowledge ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Third Space ◽  
Unresolved Conflict ◽  
Indigenous Society

The mounting loss of the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples presents environmental as well as ethical issues. Fundamental among these is the sustainability of indigenous societies and their ecosystems. Although the commercial expropriation of traditional knowledge grows, rooted in a global, corporate application of intellectual property rights (IPRs), the survival of indigenous societies becomes more problematic. One reason for this is an unresolved conflict between two perspectives. In the modernist view, traditional knowledge is a tool to use (or discard) for the development of indigenous society, and therefore it must be subordinated to Western science. Alternatively, in the postmodernist view, it is harmonious with nature, providing a new paradigm for human ecology, and must be preserved intact. We argue that this encumbering polarization can be allayed by shifting from a dualism of traditional and scientific knowledge to an assemblage of local knowledge, which is constituted by the interaction of both in a third space. We argue that IPR can be reconfigured to become the framework for creating such a third space.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document