Detalle de Casos de Uso

The unique nature of IK is indeed characterized by the rich layers of interconnectivity

associated with indigenous peoples’ ways of life and their relationship with the land/territory.

This led me to consider IK as ‘emplaced knowledge’ to highlight such intrinsic linkages. As noted in the introductory chapter (see section 2 of chapter 1), this thesis adopts the more inclusive concept of lands/territories, in accordance with the ILO 169, to refer to ‘the total environment of the areas’ where indigenous peoples live.²³ Although the ILO 169 did not

21 WWF is an international NGO established in 1961 in Switzerland.

22 For the integrated concept of land/territory, see below (section 1.1 of this chapter).

23 I first introduced this integrated concept of land/territory in the introductory chapter of this thesis. Article

spell it out fully, this thesis takes into account the diversity of indigenous peoples’ ways of life and their habitat, as reflected in the UNDRIP, that also include waterways, such as rivers and ocean.²⁴ From the perspective of emplaced knowledge, it also led me to see how the rich layers of interconnectivity form a kind of holistic epistemology that is constantly present in indigenous peoples’ claims for rights by way of the international movement. For example, the following testimony demonstrates a typical narrative of such holistic epistemology by

indigenous peoples:²⁵

‘we do not see the protection of our rights to our cultures as separate from territorial rights and our right to self-determination…’ (Tauli-Corpuz 2004, p. 1)

This testimony is an example of what I have observed in the field. I consider such a claim as

‘emplaced resistance’, which constitutes the core of indigenous peoples’ rights claims,

including claims for IK. This led me to look into ‘emplacement’ as a conceptual frame and an analytical tool that embodies both dimensions of emplaced knowledge and emplaced

resistance, in order to reflect indigenous peoples’ holistic epistemology. This shows how the story of IK is inevitably political.

Indigenous peoples have persistently explained their conceptualization of IK as an interdependent and integrated whole as opposed to the compartmentalization imposed by the legal regime that tends to distinguish culture from knowledge. Indigenous peoples have also persistently emphasized the link and non-separation principle between IK and their cultural rights, territorial rights and the right to self-determination.²⁶ Furthermore, numerous

13(2) of ILO 169 adopted the term lands to include ‘the concept of territories, which covers the total

environment of the areas which the peoples concerned occupy or otherwise use.’

24 The diversity of indigenous ways of life include the Bajau people who are sometimes referred to by outsiders as ‘sea-gypsies’ in Southeast Asia. They live across national borders of Malaysia, Indonesia, Brunei, and the Philippines (Clifton and Majors 2012).

25 This testimony was delivered by Victoria Tauli-Corpuz who is a veteran indigenous activist from the Philippines. She was appointed the Chair of the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII) for two consecutive terms (2005-2010). She is currently the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples (since 2014, as the third mandate-holder).

26 This is what I have observed at UN forums over the years by attending annual meetings and talking to indigenous delegates during and in between those meetings. These views are also captured by Simpson (1997) and the documentations recorded by the doCip, a Swiss non-profit organization (doCip stands for the Indigenous

testimonies delivered at the UN since the 1980s have emphasized the communal

characteristics of IK.²⁷ The first study on IK issued by the United Nations Permanent Forum for Indigenous Issues (UNPFII)²⁸ provided the following account that described the code of conduct commonly practiced by IK-holders:

‘traditional practices and culture and the knowledge of plants and animals and of their methods of propagation; it includes expressions of cultural values, beliefs, rituals and community laws, and it includes knowledge regarding land and ecosystem

management. It is more often unwritten and handed down orally from generation to generation, and it is transmitted and preserved in that way. Some of the knowledge is of a highly sacred and secret nature and therefore extremely sensitive and culturally significant and not readily publicly available, even to members of the particular group’ (Dodson 2007, p. 3).

This UNPFII study was prepared by veteran indigenous activist Michael Dodson (of Australia) who was appointed by the UNPFII as the Special Rapporteur to prepare its first report on IK. This UNPFII study along with the earlier studies discussed above demonstrated the unique characteristics of IK, which is a living testimony of diversity of humanity. They also presented a very complex picture of governance and practice that cannot be easily captured by a single definition that will do justice.²⁹ In fact, as activists and commentators alike have noted with caution, a fixed definition of IK is probably not desirable in order to avoid any dogmatic treatment (Dodson 2007, Dutfield 2004). Dodson particularly advocated that it would not be in the best interest of indigenous peoples to fix a definition, given the diversity of indigenous peoples’ communities and their practices, as well as indigenous customary laws. Instead, he recommended the UNDRIP as a good reference point for indigenous peoples’ conceptualization of IK.

Peoples' Center for Documentation, Research and Information, see its website: http://www.docip.org/).

27 For further reading on interventions and documents delivered to the UN Working Group of Indigenous Populations (UNWGIP) and UN Permanent Forum for Indigenous Issues (UNPFII), see the doCip database via its website (http://www.docip.org/).

28 This UNPFII study referred to IK as ‘indigenous traditional knowledge’. As noted in the previous chapter, there are a number of different terminologies in circulation that tried to capture IK. For the purpose of consistency, this thesis adopts the term ‘indigenous knowledge’ (IK) when referring to the subject. See the previous chapter (section 2 of chapter 1) where I introduced my rationale for adopting the term IK.

29 It is beyond the scope of this chapter to engage with definitional discussion, which can be found elsewhere.

For further reading, see: e.g. Coombe (2005), Dutfield (2004), Daes (1993).

Before moving on to discuss the UNDRIP and its extraordinary process, it would be helpful to illustrate the different dimensions of the IK debate by a few real-world cases for contextualization. The following section will provide three case scenarios to demonstrate the specific issues as well as the larger picture that show how the IK story is more than trade related intellectual property debate. The snapshots will also illustrate how the seemingly distinct categories of rights, such as intellectual property rights, cultural rights, or land rights, are not always clear but blurred.