Challenges Of Traditional Knowledge Products In GI Registration

In today's scenario the need of preserving Traditional Knowledge is to be considered by the young generation itself. Indirectly, preservation of Traditional Knowledge will result in protection of culture and societal values as well as techniques which are important for mankind. When it comes to registration of Traditional Knowledge if we go in the west almost all the producers and developers very well know how to register the Traditional Knowledge as well as the GI but in some countries, specially Asian countries, there are many small producers and developers who are unaware of getting registered as well as they don't have the means and sources so as to register the pre-existing knowledge which results in the destruction of Traditional Knowledge which is a loss for the current generation as well as to generations to come.

Indigenous peoples and local communities' bio-cultural legacy is inextricably linked to their traditional knowledge. Traditional knowledge on biological resources is used in more than just rural and indigenous communities' daily lives and means of subsistence. Products that are ecological, medicinal, and organic are very popular right now, especially in urban areas.

The herbal medicine, beauty care products, and personal care industries are the prime focused user field of those resources. The growing market desire for organic resources and the associated TK would contribute to residents' and the indigenous community's advantages and means of subsistence. The present state of affairs, however, demonstrates that it is not as it appears. Few local groups or bearers of traditional knowledge have profited significantly from the commercial application of their expertise internationally.

GIs are increasing in popularity worldwide as a platform for the conservation and advancement of traditional knowledge and may assist communities develop and safeguard markets for their bio-cultural goods. Nearly 200 biological and cultural items of Indian origins are recognised, including a range of agricultural, handicraft, industrial, textile, and food products. These also include products that are based on TK which has been handed down from one generation of the artisans' public to the next, highlighting India's rich tradition in the arts and crafts of various genres and the considerable archetypes that GIs may come in and play in the framework of those product^[1] lines.

GI is used to protect traditional knowledge and communities, where protection is given to only those products that meet the geographical origin requirements and quality standards linked with origin. It could not only protect consumer interests but also produce them.^[2] As a result, principles such as unfair trade practices, consumer protection against deception, "passing off" (when some products are passed off as true GI), and others have helped in shaping the concept of GI.

Why Do We Need To Protect Traditional Knowledge?

In the present IPR system, several proposals are formed to safeguard traditional knowledge. Because of the diversity of traditional knowledge, such proposals are not sufficiently clear on the issue of protection. As a result, before considering how traditional knowledge may be protected, it is necessary to define that what is the need for traditional knowledge protection, which may include various reasons such as equity considerations, conservation concerns, preservation of traditional practices and culture, prevention of unauthorized parties appropriating components of traditional knowledge, and promotion of its use and importance in development. Few experts think that conventional knowledge should be protected by the patent system, but the novelty and inventive step requirements will not be waived in this circumstance.

Because trade secret law is still not available in India, trade secret measures to secure conventional information would likely fail. In these circumstances, it is evident that the current intellectual property system is insufficient for preserving conventional knowledge.^[3] It does take some steps to preserve traditional knowledge in India, however.

Traditional knowledge is readily accessible to local groups, and the information bearers are not aware of the necessity to preserve their rights to intellectual property resulting in one of the main causes of this misuse. Protection becomes much more challenging, and thievery becomes simpler and more common since this information is typically dispersed throughout several households, localities, and even across international borders.

So far, a variety of producers have benefitted from the sale of products with GI labels, especially in industrialised nations, mostly in Europe. Prominent ones of GIs are champagne, scotch whiskey, feta cheese, and Harris tweed. The creation of traditional foods, clothing, medicines, and handicrafts by locals utilising regional ingredients and cultural traditions may be eligible for registration as a geographical indicator. When products have gained goodwill because of their origins, a formal identification of their origin by a GI can increase or retain market worth in terms of inflated prices. Although these international treaties, some instances of biopiracy using plants produced in India have been reported (often those with medicinal properties).

In a few instances, the Indian government took control and brought the cases to court, winning the right to cancel the copyrights in the process. But assembling evidence to demonstrate previous art—that is, the product's earlier existence—and demonstrate that the information has existed in the public domain for a long time—in some cases since antiquity—and is thus not novel—is a laborious, expensive, and time-consuming procedure. The fact that paralegals don't have sufficient access to past knowledge on the TK of nations with abundant biodiversity is another factor in the improper issuance of patents.

Pre-Registration Challenges

The licensing of these items is frequently promoted, encouraged, supported, and sponsored by outside organisations, according to a literature analysis. Local companies in underdeveloped countries generally lack the resources to navigate the intricate processes of GI registration applications and brand management without assistance from outside groups (e.g., state governments, civil society organizations, donors, etc.).

The case research shows that Process and identify of bio-cultural goods is not without its difficulties for producers, who then face additional difficulties after registration. With assistance from the Rajasthan Urban Development Authority, UNIDO sponsored and enabled the establishment of Kota Doria. Some state governments, including those in Himachal and Punjab, have taken the initiative to encourage and make it easier for a variety of items to be registered as GIs. A recent application for Cinnamomam Tamala, a species that grows from 1,500 to 2,700 meters above the sea level, was submitted with UNDP India's assistance to collectors and farmers of herbal medicines in the Himalayan state of Uttarakhand.

It is a naturally present herb that aids in the management of diabetes and is also used as a spice in many Indian recipes. In seven regions of the state, UNDP educated and organised local cinnamon farmers and collectors about the benefits of registering this well-known plant, especially in light of its unique therapeutic characteristics. The Uttarakhand Tejpatta Utpadak Samiti (Uttarakhand Cinnamomum Growers' Association), a collective made up of collectors and cultivators from these seven districts, was established as a result of this. 4,000 growers and collectors who will be listed as legitimate personnel if the plant receives a GI are represented by the group. This is perhaps the first GI in the natural goods area.

The registration process often takes a while and necessitates legal counsel and finances further than the reach of the majority of small producers. The challenges small farmers experience during the registration procedure are best shown by the Navara rice story. The expenses in the pre-registration sequence include those for mobilising farmers, registering a body that will pertain for GI registration, and hiring a legal expert to establish the case. The latter requires a significant amount of time to assemble record management evidence to show that the product originates from a specific geography and has distinctive characteristics of that location.

Additionally, if the matter is challenged, the cost multiplies since many trips to the Appellate Board are required if someone objects to the registration of a product. If a GI application is not disputed, it typically takes between one and two years to be accepted once it has been submitted. For instance, the Basmati rice case has been pending for more than six years as a result of several objections. Five years passed in the Feni lawsuit until the GI was eventually obtained by the state government and the Bottlers and Distillers' Federation.

In contrast, the small-scale farmers in the Navara Rice Growers' Association invested their own resources and borrowed funds to apply for the GI registration. In addition, knowledge of GIs and the GI registration processes amongst small producers is limited, which can pose a key challenge and requires investments of time and resources to build knowledge and capacity.^[4] This suggests that small producers of biocultural products are getting less government support for GI registration, even though this is where support is most needed and where GIs have the most potential for supporting traditional knowledge and biocultural heritage.

Post-Registration Challenges

The suppliers are not assured to get advantages from the simple registration of biocultural items for GI. For the GI to really be effective, there are considerable expenses associated with the post-registration phase, such as trying to make sure the GI gets acknowledged in the industry and looked for by customers, as well as the expenses of enforcement and oversight. For instance, GI owners could need to spend money on attractive packaging, advertising, promotion, and awareness. Once more, for marketing, product development, and market formation, smaller manufacturers and less wealthy communities frequently need the assistance of outside organisations (government, non-government, and donor agencies).

Many knowledge based keepers in India, like those who make traditional Kota Doria sarees, have the abilities necessary to create a product with distinctive qualities but lack the finances to buy the materials needed to thread or construct it. They consequently depend on dealers and intermediaries to provide them with natural resources, who then pay them salary or labour fees on a piece rate and sell the finished goods for them.

The GI Act created a regulation and supervisory structure to guarantee the preservation of the rights of the authorized parties, but in most of the nation, the mechanism is essentially non-existent. To encourage a propensity to seek it out in the markets, lower the likelihood of substitutability, and maybe pay more for it, investment is also required in growing consumer knowledge of a GI and what it denotes in terms of distinctive product features. When customers are unaware of the benefits of buying GI items, they frequently choose to buy knockoffs or goods that are mislabeled as GI products. The GI company's registered users, who may include makers, suppliers, craftsmen, or even retailers, suffer a loss as a consequence. According to the results of this study, most prospective buyers of biological goods, particularly those from the middle and upper classes, are unaware of the idea of GI or what the label on certain items signifies in regards to quality, source, etc.

Many knowledge based keepers in India, like those who make traditional Kota Doria sarees, have the abilities necessary to create a product with distinctive qualities but lack the finances to buy the raw materials needed to thread or construct it. They consequently depend on dealers and intermediaries to provide them with natural resources, who then pay them salary or labour fees on a piece rate and sell the finished goods for them.

However, having a GI doesn't really ensure that any gains would be distributed to small farmers or those who retain traditional knowledge. Rewards, such as increased earnings, may not reach producers due to the current structure of supply chains and the character of trade agreements.

Many knowledge based keepers in India, like those who make traditional Kota Doria sarees, have the abilities necessary to create a product with distinctive qualities but lack the finances to buy the raw materials needed to thread or construct it. They consequently depend on dealers and intermediaries to provide them with natural resources, who then pay them salary or labour fees on a piece rate and sell the finished goods for them.

Knowledge may be conserved, but dealers and intermediaries profit financially from GI classification. In the instance of Kota Doria, it is evident that the women workers who operate as small producers or artisans have been forced to rely on the master weavers for the selling of their goods and as a result have gotten less financial assistance from the GI. The majority of goods that meet the requirements for registration underneath the GI Act start with biological resources. The main components of biological and cultural goods that are suitable for GI registration are seeds, medicinal, aromatic, and dyeing plants, non-timber forest resources, and plants used for these purposes.

Educators, professionals, and non-governmental organisations are looking at the idea of certifying medicinal herbs and other non-timber forest resources as GIs due to the restricted options in current law. This option is provided by the GI Act under Class 31 of the Fourth Schedule since that qualifies the object as a natural plant. Following GI registration, there will likely be a rise in demand for these items, which will put further strain on the perhaps limited natural resource employed to create them. Since none of these goods have been registered in this category, there is currently no proof that GI products pose a harm to conservation. However, there is a wealth of information about species that have been lost or are in danger because of over-extraction for commerce.

Therefore, for GIs to be effective as a tool to safeguard TK and biodiversity, the sustainable collection, use, and cultivation of the biological resources employed are prerequisites. The production of agricultural resources that are in decline, such as traditional crop types or animal breeds, might be improved by greater demand, improving their sustainability. Modularizing growing methods for important species or creating checks and equilibrium via the use of certification labels in conjunction to GIs, such the Good Field Collection Practices or the Forest Stewardship Council, are alternative ways to assure overall sustainability of the collections.

One application had been made for the first time for a natural plant named Kala jeera by the Department of Science and Technology of the state of Himachal Pradesh in 2014, in addition to the one submitted through UNDP for a GI on a plant in 2015. When cooked, veggies and lentils are seasoned with this non-timber forest resource. The state is also attempting to encourage the growth of Kala jeera. Because these plants are usually collected by extremely underprivileged indigenous tribes, who are probably unaware of both the GI Act and its potential benefits and also who lack the resources to file a request for GI registration, there may not be as many GI implementations in the classification of naturally occurring substances.

Traditional knowledge has the tremendous ability to solve the emerging problems of mankind. Exploiting this information is extremely valuable and must be balanced with security, promotion, and sharing of benefits. Traditional knowledge can be called the latest member of the IP family. However, decisions on tackling this child must be taken into consideration of several factors. India has moved forward and built a repository of its age-old information, which is updated periodically, but the requirement for a legal document is becoming increasingly urgent on an international level. The question of interest can be the integration of conventional information structures with a current IPR system.

A sui generis law is commonly put forward as a possible solution to better protect traditional knowledge, but before a law is enacted, policies and proposals such as the National IP Policy, Digital India, and Startup India will protect the traditional knowledge system. It would not be incorrect to mention that this generation will need to preserve the valuable information of a dying generation so as to ensure the future of the species and human race.

Views are personal.