The international framework for TEK conservation

The protection of TEK has been a feature of international agreements since the early 1990s. In the last two decades, a number of international agencies, such as the United Nations (UN), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation

(UNESCO), United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), and International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), have developed a range of policies aimed at the protection of indigenous rights and traditional knowledge. The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (United Nations, 2007: Article 31) provides the most explicit recognition internationally of indigenous people’s rights to their traditional knowledge:

Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, as

139

well as the manifestations of their sciences, technologies and cultures, including human and genetic resources, seeds, medicines, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literatures, designs, sports and traditional games and visual and performing arts. They also have the right to maintain, control, protect, and develop their intellectual property over such cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions.

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD, 2006) constructs specific measures for recognising and protecting TEK. Article 8(j) of the Convention promotes participant countries to:

… respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations and practices of Indigenous and local communities embodying traditional lifestyles relevant for the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and promote their wider application with the approval and involvement of the holders of such knowledge, innovations and practices and encourage the equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilisation of such knowledge, innovations and practices.

Article 8(j) also constructs a fundamental principle for TEK protection that the use of indigenous traditional knowledge, innovations and practices should only occur with the approval and involvement of the indigenous or local community. More importantly, any benefits that arise from its use should be shared with the people or community from which that knowledge originated (CBD, 2006).

Apart from the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the CBD, there are numerous other international policies and agreements that address the importance of, and urge the action towards TEK conservation (see Table 4.1 below). For example, the International Labour Organisation Convention No. 169 (ILO, 1989: Article 2 & 23) includes several provisions regarding the need to respect and protect “customs and traditions”, as well as “handicrafts, rural and community-based industries and traditional activities”.

140

Table 4.1 Summary of Major International Instruments that Recognise Indigenous Peoples’ Right to Protect their Traditional Knowledge

International Policy Instruments Provision Year

Agenda 21 Paragraph 26.1 1992

The Convention on Biological Diversity Article 8 (j) 1992 The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Articles 11 & 31 2008 The Rio Declaration on Environment and

Development Principle 22 1992

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 27 1948 The International Covenant on Economic, Social and

Cultural Rights Article 15, paragraph

1 (c) 1966

The International Covenant on Civil and Political

Rights Article 27 1966

The International Labour Organisation Convention No.169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries

Articles 2, 13, 15 &

23 1989

(Source: Australian Human Rights Commission, 2008)

The majority of the countries around the world have agreed on these different mechanisms related to TEK conservation. For instance, by the end of 2011, 168

countries had officially ratified the CBD (CBD, 2012). This reflects that the agreement of biodiversity protection, in which TEK and its protection is included, has become a trend around the globe. While the necessity of conserving TEK is no longer debatable in the literature and among most countries, the big question now is what we can do for conserving TEK before it is too late? Policies that intend to protect and revitalise TEK have been produced at the international level. However, how to transform these policies and measures into actions, especially at national and regional levels has remained a major challenge. As Collings (2009: 108) points out, many decisions made at the

international level have not always been respected or implemented at the national level, and “indigenous peoples’ voices are all too often marginalised, if heard at all”. Thus, the most urgent need in TEK and indigenous rights conservation field is to develop a

practical action strategy and implement it at the ground level.

141 1.2 Why is this study important?

This research is the first study to identify all available conservation mechanisms,

including ones already in use in the field, as well as potential ones that to date have only been discussed in the literature. By studying and synthesising all the applied and

potential conservation options, this research develops a standard classification system of TEK conservation actions. This represents a powerful toolbox for conservation project design. By applying this typology, conservation actors, including TEK holders, practitioners, researchers, NGOs and governmental and international agencies, can choose appropriate conservation mechanisms that suit their local context and match their capacity.

As discussed in the previous chapter, to date, most of the TEK studies are

location-specific case studies, and have been focusing on exploring, recording and examining TEK.

None of the studies I have reviewed (n=152) specifically focuses on TEK conservation options or actions. Within these studies, 79% (n=120) of them suggest immediate actions for TEK conservation without recommending any specific actions. While there are 35 studies (23%) which recommend specific actions for TEK conservation, only 17 (11%) studies provide examples of TEK conservation actions that have been undertaken in the field. Even though a number of international policies, agreements and conventions have made a strong voice to advocate for indigenous rights protection and TEK

conservation, documented conservation actions have been limited. Therefore, this chapter seeks to address several critical literature gaps related to TEK conservation: a review of available TEK conservation actions, development of a standard

classification system for TEK conservation options, and principles for designing effective TEK conservation.

It is also important to note that, within the TEK studies I have reviewed, none of them focuses on the assessment of TEK conservation outcomes. The study and

implementation of TEK conservation still remains at an experimental stage, and the field lacks an appropriate monitoring and evaluating system. Without proper assessment, it is difficult to know which TEK threats have been addressed, and what barriers obstruct the efficiency of conservation actions (Lee, 1999). Based on the perceptions of survey respondents and interviewees, this research will provide a discussion of the triggers and

142

barriers to TEK conservation success. I will also utilise survey responses and literature review (see discussion of the methods in Chapter 2) to develop conservation action design principles. This work represents an important baseline on which future research and analysis can be further developed.

1.3 Aim and objectives

The aims of this chapter are to explore the TEK conservation options that have been undertaken in the field and are suggested in the literature, and to develop a typology of TEK conservation actions as a toolbox for TEK holders and practitioners.

There are four key objectives:

1. To examine the applied and potential TEK conservation options.

2. To develop a TEK conservation typology.

3. To assess perceived triggers and barriers to TEK conservation.

4. To develop the principles for TEK conservation design.

2. RESULTS

As in Chapter Three, the results in this chapter are drawn from two methods: 1) the literature review (n=152) provides primary understanding and overview of TEK conservation options addressed by scholars; and 2) the global survey (n=137) and its follow-up interviews (n=46) identifies the TEK conservation actions in use addressed by TEK holders and practitioners, and forms the foundation of the TEK conservation

typology (see more details about the research methods in Chapter 2, section 3.1, 4.1 &

5). In this section, I will first present the TEK conservation action typology and analyse each conservation option; then discuss geographic patterns of TEK conservation actions and link them to the global distribution of TEK threats; and finally discuss the triggers and barriers, and design principles for the conservation success.

143