Ghimire, Barizah, N., Soeparna, I., & Van der Borght, K. (2021): Plant variety protection law and farmers’ rights to save, exchange and breed seeds: the case of Indonesia
Ghimire, Barizah, N., Soeparna, I., & Van der Borght, K. (2021). Plant variety protection law and farmers’ rights to save, exchange and breed seeds: the case of Indonesia. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 16(9), 1013–1025.
While the laws based on the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV Convention) have been questioned frequently for their negative impact on farmers, there have been suggestions that Indonesia should accede to the UPOV Convention 1991. Indonesia has already enacted a Plant Variety Protection (PVP) law closely aligned to the Convention.
A study was carried out in two villages in East Java, Indonesia exploring issues experienced by farmers in relation to PVP rights of seed companies. This qualitative study involved consultations of and discussions with individual farmers, representatives from farmers’ association and local experts. The study shows the prevalence of a strong mechanism protecting PVP rights, a constant surveillance by enforcement authorities, and threats of prosecution to farmers by seed companies, resulting in the imprisonment of some. This has intensified fear among farmers and has led to self-disciplining by auto-limiting their freedom to breed and exchange seeds, thus confirming the interpretation of breeders’ rights as rights of seed companies and not of farmers.
This article reviews the impact of the UPOV-based laws and presents the major findings of the study, discussing the current UPOV-based Indonesian PVP law which impedes the farmers’ ability to exchange and breed seeds. Building upon this analysis, the article urges Indonesia not to accede to the UPOV Convention; rather, it should amend its current laws to strengthen the position of farmers in the regime of PVP law.
Muzaka (2021): Stealing the common from the goose: The emergence of Farmers' Rights and their implementation in India and Brazil
Muzaka. (2021). Stealing the common from the goose: The emergence of Farmers' Rights and their implementation in India and Brazil. Journal of Agrarian Change, 21(2), 356–376.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 1MB).
The emergence of Farmers' Rights in international law is closely related to the “seed wars” at the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) during the 1980s. Recognizing the plant innovations of farmers everywhere, these rights represented a countervailing measure against increasing pressures to protect commercial plant breeders' rights around the world. Nearly three decades later, the intellectual property rights of plant breeders, internationally recognized and legally binding, are stronger than ever, while Farmers' Rights are facing increasing threats from the continuing spread of industrial agriculture and biotechnologies. The present article seeks to make two contributions: first, embedding the emergence of Farmers' Rights in a historical analysis, it conceptualizes them not simply as a new category of rights, but as a specific manifestation of the conflictual entwinement of capitalism and plant genetic resources fomented in the geopolitical context of the 20th century. Second, focusing on India and Brazil, it analyses the different manner in which the state in both has played a crucial role in restricting the real freedoms of traditional farmers. While farmers' “interests” are routinely preyed upon to justify various policies, their overall effect promises to deepen the ongoing process of farmers' dispossession and separation from their basic means of production: the seed.
Oguamanam, Chidi (2018): Plant Breeders’ Rights, Farmers’ Rights and Food Security: Africa’s Failure of Resolve and India’s Wobbly Leadership
Oguamanam, Chidi. (2018). Plant Breeders’ Rights, Farmers’ Rights and Food Security: Africa’s Failure of Resolve and India’s Wobbly Leadership. Indian Journal of Law and Technology, Forthcoming , Ottawa Faculty of Law Working Paper No. 2018-17.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 389KB).
Since 2000s, Africa and India severally rejected the notion that UPOV’s 1991 standard of Plant Breeders Rights (PBRs) is the only route to fulfill their obligations under Article 27 of the TRIPs Agreement. Objecting to the exclusive focus of the UPOV regime on formal plant breeders, African countries, insisted on a holistic approach to plant breeders’ rights to include protection for rights of communities, farmers and their indigenous knowledge, innovation and practices. Consequently, under the African Union’s (AU) auspices, Africa proposed the Model Law for the Protection of the Rights of Local Communities and Breeders, and for Regulations of Access to Biological Resources. Self-evidently, the law not only recognizes the centrality of the smallholder indigenous and local community farmers on the continent’s food production, it also underscores the interconnections of biodiversity conservation, farmers’ rights, traditional knowledge, access and benefit sharing over genetic resources within then emergent international regimes. Nearly two decades after, Africa’s resolve has proven to be fickle. The continent has reversed itself and fully embraced the UPOV regime. At about the same time as the Model Law, India enacted the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, 2001 – an instrument consistent with the spirit of Africa’s Model Law. Both regimes take into account the role of local farmers as the backbone of agricultural innovation, food production and food security in the developing world, including Africa and India, thereby further enhancing the idea of farmers’ rights in food and agriculture law and policy. This Article juxtaposes the circumstances around Africa’s failure of resolve and India’s wobbly experience over farmers’ rights. It calls attention to farmers’ rights as a site for a missed and yet potentially redeemable opportunity for both Africa and India to advance South-South solidarity for food security.
Barizah, N. (2018): Protection of Farmers Rights through a Sui Generis System in Indonesia
Barizah, N. (2018). Protection of Farmers Rights through a Sui Generis System in Indonesia. Proceedings of the International Conference on Law, Governance and Globalization 2017 (ICLGG 2017). International Conference on Law, Governance and Globalization 2017 (ICLGG 2017), Surbaya, Indonesia.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 1MB).
The recognition and protection of farmers' rights has not been a top priority in the determination of agricultural policy in the agrarian country of Indonesia, whereas most of the Indonesian population is farmers (38.07 million). Trade liberalization in agriculture promoted by the World Trade Organization (WTO) also makes farmers increasingly marginalized particularly with the existence of UPOV Convention 1991. The UPOV Convention 1991 provides a strong protection to breeders' rights and limits the rights of farmers which have been recognized previously. Consequently, farmers are not free from fear, threats in innovation and creation, especially in maintaining their local wisdom of storing, buying, swapping and splitting the seeds. Such conditions will ultimately threaten food security in Indonesia. Whereas public international law has laid the foundation for the protection of farmers’ rights and ordered the state to regulate it in its national law. This paper aims to analyze how should Indonesia national law recognize and protect farmers’ rights to support food sovereignty. This paper offers a sui generis system for the protection of farmers’ rights based on fair and equitable principles.
Bisht, Mehta, P. , Negi, K. , Verma, S. , Tyagi, R. , & Garkoti, S. (2018): Farmers' rights, local food systems, and sustainable household dietary diversification: A case of Uttarakhand Himalaya in north-western India
Bisht, Mehta, P. , Negi, K. , Verma, S. , Tyagi, R. , & Garkoti, S. (2018). Farmers' rights, local food systems, and sustainable household dietary diversification: A case of Uttarakhand Himalaya in north-western India. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 42(1), 77–113.
The farmers and rural communities, world over, have contributed greatly in management of agrobiodiversity including plant genetic resources for food and agriculture (PGRFA). It is well accepted now that the efforts of farming communities in creation, conservation, exchange, and enhancement of PGR should be recognized and strengthened. Farmers' access and rights over seeds are considered an essential component of food sovereignty. In the present article, we discuss the aspects of farmers' rights, the community level seed systems, food sovereignty and the potential of farmer household production and dietary diversification in combating malnutrition and community health promotion with regard to farming communities of Uttarakhand hills in north-western India. Salient findings of two case studies, on farmers' varieties documentation and registration, and the potential of local food systems in addressing community health and nutrition were used to particularly showcase the nutritional contribution of native foods in the context of sustainable food-based approaches to community health and nutrition. Further, the need of a proactive alliance was suggested between local communities and their key allies collaboratively creating a research and advocacy agenda in support of agrobiodiversity and the revival of local food systems and landscapes within the broader framework of food sovereignty.
Peschard, Karine (2017): Seed wars and farmers' rights: comparative perspectives from Brazil and India
Peschard, Karine. (2017). Seed wars and farmers' rights: comparative perspectives from Brazil and India. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 44(1), 144–168.
Drawing on interviews with Indian and Brazilian farmers’ rights activists, lawyers, agronomists and plant breeders, this article aims at better understanding how farmers’ rights are protected on paper and implemented on the ground in these two countries. It is shown that India has adopted an ownership approach to farmers’ rights, while Brazil leans towards a stewardship approach. Based on an examination of the progress made in enforcing these rights, it is further argued that the stewardship model adopted by Brazil is more conducive to the realization of farmers’ rights. Finally, the author demonstrates how farmers’ rights provisions in the Brazilian and Indian legislations represent fragile gains that could be curtailed by several bills currently under discussion in the field of seed and plant variety protection.
Gauchan, Devendra (2016): Farmers’ rights in South Asia’s IPR regime
Gauchan, Devendra. (2016). Farmers’ rights in South Asia’s IPR regime. Trade Insight 12(4), 32-36.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 404KB).
After a short introduction to the history and content of farmers’ rights, the article delves into the implementation of intellectual property rights (IPR) in South Asia and explains how they are connected to farmers’ rights. It ends with a note on the need to maintain awareness when enforcing IPR policies to ensure that farmers are not discouraged from sharing genetic resources and traditional knowledge in biodiversity conservation.
Peschard, Karine (2014): Farmers' rights and food sovereignty: critical insights from India
Peschard, Karine. (2014). Farmers' rights and food sovereignty: critical insights from India. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 41(6), 1085-1108.
Farmers' access to and rights over seeds are the very pillars of agriculture, and thus represent an essential component of food sovereignty. Three decades after the term farmers' rights was first coined, there now exists a broad consensus that this new category of rights is historically grounded and imperative in the current context of the expansion of intellectual property rights (IPRs) over plant varieties. However, the issue of their realization has proven so thorny that even researchers and activists who are sympathetic to farmers' rights now express growing skepticism regarding their usefulness. In this article, I explore this debate through a case study of India's unique Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights (PPV&FR) Act. Based on an analysis of advances and setbacks in implementing the PPV&FR Act and a discussion of other relevant pieces of legislation, I argue that the politics of biodiversity and IPRs in India in recent years has been characteristic of the cunning state, and that this has seriously compromised the meaningful implementation of farmers' rights.
Plahe, Jagjit Kaur (2009): The Implications of India's Amended Patent Regime: sTRIPping away food security and farmers' rights?
Plahe, Jagjit Kaur. (2009).The Implications of India's Amended Patent Regime: sTRIPping away food security and farmers' rights?. Third World Quarterly 30(6), 2009, p. 1197-1213.
In this article the Indian government's policy response to the TRIPS agreement is analyzed and the implications of this response for food security and farmers examined. The author argues that TRIPS has become one of the most controversial WTO agreements and that this is due to its wide and far-reaching mandate and complex socioeconomic implications. It is also argued in the article that the changes made in the Indian Patents Act in response to TRIPS will compromise the food sector and the rights of small-scale farmers, by conferring strong rights on upstream agents who use biotechnology to produce propriatary agricultural inputs. The author writes that these agents now can exert monopoly price control over agricultural products for 20 years and have the right to determine under which conditions farmers and researchers can use patented processes and products. The article also outlines some policy options the Indian government can make use of to tighten the scope of patentability in the food sector.
Andersen, Regine and Winge, Tone (2009): The Plant Treaty and Farmers' Rights: Implementation Issues for South Asia
Andersen, Regine and Winge, Tone. (2009). The Plant Treaty and Farmers' Rights: Implementation Issues for South Asia. Kathmandu: South Asia Watch on Trade, Economics & Environment (SAWTEE). (PDF, 898KB)
This discussion paper looks into the contents of the Plant Treaty with a particular focus on Farmers’ Rights. The paper also looks at the challenges from other international agreements such as the CBD, the TRIPS Agreement and UPOV; the state of negotiations with regard to Farmers’ Rights; and prospects for their realization in developing countries in general and South Asia in particular. In addition, as India's law on plant variety protection and Farmers’ Rights is an example of the most advanced legal recognition of Farmers’ Rights at the national level, the paper also analyses various issues concerned with this Act before deriving conclusion and recommendations with regard to options available for the realization of Farmers’ Rights.
Lewis-Lettington, Robert J. (2008): Access and Benefit Sharing Laws in South Asia: Enforcement, Implementation and Monitoring Challenges
Lewis-Lettington, Robert J. (2008). Access and Benefit Sharing Laws in South Asia: Enforcement, Implementation and Monitoring Challenges. (Research Brief: Farmers' Rights, No. 2, 2008). Kathmandu, Nepal: SAWTEE.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 285KB).
Access to genetic resources and sharing of the benefits arising out of their use are a complex, and sometimes controversial, concept. When the usefulness of this concept to agriculture became part of economic development thinking as far back as the 1960s, discussions on issues surrounding genetic resources began in forums such as the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The temperature of such discourse increased significantly in the 1980s, as the science of modern biotechnologies advanced rapidly in a number of areas and created a wide array of new, commercially significant uses for genetic resources. In the present context, the international legal framework for access and benefit sharing (ABS) consists of two closely related instruments: the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), 1992 and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA), 2001. The possibility of a third instrument, an agreement on farm animal genetic resources, is being widely mooted and a potentially more detailed interpretation of the CBD’s access provisions is under consideration in the context of discussions for an international regime on ABS. This research brief has been prepared to highlight the basic structures for ABS established by the CBD and the ITPGRFA, and to identify some of the key enforcement, implementation and monitoring challenges associated with such ASB structures for South Asian countries. The brief aims to assist South Asian countries in finalizing the access instruments that most of them are currently considering in draft form and, at a minimum, to assist stakeholders with an interest in ABS issues in contributing to the shaping of the implementation of their national systems.
Adhikari, Kamalesh (2008): Intellectual Property Rights in Agriculture: Legal Mechanisms to Protect Farmers' Rights in Nepal
Adhikari, Kamalesh. (2008). Intellectual Property Rights in Agriculture: Legal Mechanisms to Protect Farmers' Rights in Nepal. Kathmandu: Forum for Protection of Public Interest (PRO PUBLIC) and South Asia Watch on Trade, Economics & Environment (SAWTEE).
Download the pdf here (PDF, 450KB).
This book deals with equity aspects of the commercialization of agricultural biodiversity, and the issue of protecting farmers' rights to plant varieties and related knowledge, in the light of the global policies to promote the application of biotechnology in agriculture and the possible implications of intellectual property rights (IPRs) for farmers in Nepal. It emphasizes the need to protect farmers' rights in the plant variety protection law that Nepal must implement as part of its obligation and commitment under the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Some important legal measures that Nepal can implement to protect farmers' rights with regard to IPR-protected plant varieties are suggested. The book also deals with measures that are crucial for recognizing farmers' rights over farmer-developed varieties and related knowledge.
Nagarajan, S., Yadav, S. P. & Singh, A. K. (2008): Farmers' variety in the context of Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001
Nagarajan, S., Yadav, S. P. & Singh, A. K. (2008). Farmers' variety in the context of Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001. Current Science, 94(6).
This article deals with the issues of Farmers' Varieties in the context of Indias Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001. It states that Farmers' Varieties are products long traditions, evolved in farmers own fields from a non-descriptive heterogeneous land race. According to the authors the yardstick of DUS for Farmers' Varieties needs a fresh look, so that a pragmatic procedure to register Farmers' Varieties under the PPV&FR Act, 2001 can be developed. For crops with high within-field variations and which behave as a population or land race, fresh research efforts is in the authors' opinion necessary to purify them. Considerable research is also deemed necessary to understand the farmers' perception of a variety, and the reasoning behind why they permit a certain degree of floating variation in these varieties.
Ramanna, Anitha (2006): Farmers' Rights in India. A Case Study
Ramanna, Anitha. (2006). Farmers' Rights in India. A Case Study. (FNI Report 6/2006). Lysaker, Norway: The Fridtjof Nansen Institute.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 582KB).
The case study provides an overview of the state of Farmers' Rights, and opinions of over forty stakeholders in India including farmers, NGOs, industry and government representatives, on the prospects for the further realization of Farmers' Rights. India's law on plant variety protection and Farmers' Rights is unique in that it simultaneously aims to protect both breeders and farmers.
The study analyses the achievements, barriers and limitations of India's approach. One of the findings is that the attempt to evolve a multiple rights system could pose several obstacles to the utilization and exchange of plant genetic resources among farmers. India has framed a unique legislation, but still faces the task of implementation, without any clear consensus among the various stakeholders on how to achieve these rights. This should serve as a signal internationally that establishing legislation is insufficient to effectively promote Farmers' Rights. An international mechanism is urgently required to promote some level of consensus on defining and implementing these vital rights. If the global community does not face up to the challenge of unambiguously articulating Farmers' Rights, what has been achieved so far in the battle to establish these rights may be lost. Such a loss would be heavy for farmers in India and other developing countries which need Farmers' Rights to protect their livelihoods, secure their access to resources, protect their rights to seeds, and, above all, lift them out of poverty.
Ravi, S. Bala (2004): Manual on Farmers' Rights
Ravi, S. Bala. (2004). Manual on Farmers' Rights. Chennai: M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation.
This manual has been developed as a tool for the implementation of the Indian Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act of 2001, with regard to farmers' rights. It is the first manual for practitioners with regard to the realization of farmers' rights in a country.
After an introduction explaining the background of intellectual property rights and Indian relations with the WTO, the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act is presented. On this background, the concept of farmers' rights is presented and defined in terms of nine components: (1) farmers' rights to seed, (2) farmers' rights to register traditional varieties, (3) farmers' rights to reward and recognition, (4) farmers' rights to benefit sharing, (5) farmers' rights to compensation for the loss of registered varieties, (6) farmers' rights to compensation for undisclosed use of traditional varieties; (7) farmers' rights to the seeds of registered varieties; (8) farmers' rights for receiving services; and (9) farmers' rights to protection against innocent infringement. Finally, the manual explains how to proceed in registering farmers' varieties and how local political bodies can contribute in these efforts in line with the new Indian legislation.
Brahmi, P., Saxena, S. & Dhillon, B.S. (2004): The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act of India
Brahmi, P., Saxena, S. & Dhillon, B.S. (2004). The Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act of India. Current Science, 86(3).
This article provides an overview over the new legislation on the protection of plant varieties and farmers' rights in India with a view to its effective implementation.
It finds that the Act appears to be an effective sui generis system for intellectual property rights, and that it provides a balance between plant breeders' and farmers' rights. The authors conclude that it will affect the national food and nutrition security.
Ramanna, Anitha & Smale, Melinda (2004): Rights and Access to Plant Genetic Resources under India's New Law
Ramanna, Anitha & Smale, Melinda. (2004). Rights and Access to Plant Genetic Resources under India's New Law. Development Policy Review, 22(4).
This article offers a detailed analysis of farmers' rights, as provided for in India's 2001 Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act. The authors find that the multiple rights system provided in this legislation aims to distribute rights equitably, but may pose the threat of an 'anti-commons tragedy' - with too many parties independently possessing the right to exclude others from utilizing a resource.
As a result of the ownership approach in the new legislation, farmers and farming communities may seek to exclude each other from access to traditional crop genetic resources. If under-utilization of plant genetic resources is the result, the Act will have negative consequences for sustaining crop productivity and thus for the welfare of the very farming communities it seeks to compensate, the authors emphasize. Developing countries in the process of formulating farmers' rights must not overlook the need to promote the exchange of agricultural resources, and all countries must make concerted efforts to ensure that emerging intellectual property rights regimes do not restrict stakeholder access to plant genetic resources, the article concludes.
Cullet, Philippe & Radhika Kolluru (2003): Plant Variety Protection and Farmers' Rights - Towards a Broader Understanding
Cullet, Philippe & Kolluru, Radhika. (2003). Plant Variety Protection and Farmers' Rights - Towards a Broader Understanding. Delhi Law Review, 24, p. 41-59.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 315KB).
This article analyses India's various legislation relevant for plant breeders' and farmers' rights. Among the conclusions is that these acts are not homogeneous. As for farmers' rights, the signals point in different directions, and much more needs to be done to coordinate policies.
According to the authors, a broader conception of farmers' rights needs to be established. Such rights should be conceived as a positive mechanism that give to traditional knowledge holders property rights and therefore full control over their knowledge. Other actors involved in agrobiodiversity management, including beneficiaries at large, should also have duties towards the promotion of food security. While giving control to individuals and local communities over genetic resources, farmers' rights should not exclude anyone with similar rights from the use of these resources. Finally, they should provide a solid basis for equitable benefit sharing. The authors conclude that farmers' rights contribute to making the legal system fairer, and that promoting the recognition of farmers' rights can make an enormous contribution to food security.
Adhikari, Ratnakar & Kamalesh Adhikari (Eds.) (2003): Farmers' Rights to Livelihood in the Hindu-Kush Himalayas
Adhikari, Ratnakar & Adhikari, Kamalesh (Eds.). (2003). Farmers' Rights to Livelihood in the Hindu-Kush Himalayas. Kathmandu: South Asia Watch on Trade, Economics and Development.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 1MB).
South Asia Watch on Trade, Economics and Development (SAWTEE) has been carrying out a project on farmers' rights in the Hindu-Kush region. Various publications have been produced, of which this book is central. With contributions from distinguished experts in South Asia, it explains the political and economic context for farmers' rights in the region, and discusses farmers' rights in the context of human rights - as a right to food. It highlights legal and institutional mechanisms for the realization of farmers' rights, the importance of farmers' rights for sustainable agriculture, and reports from roundtable discussions with experts and consultations with farmers on the realization of farmers' rights.
Sahai, Suman (2003): India's Plant Variety Protection and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001/ Sahai, Suman (2001): Plant Variety Protection and Farmers' Rights Law/ Sahai, Suman (2000): Farmers' Rights and Food Security
Sahai, Suman. (2003). India's Plant Variety Protection and Farmers' Rights Act, 2001. Current Science, 84(3).
Sahai, Suman. (2001). Plant Variety Protection and Farmers' Rights Law. Economic and Political Weekly.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 64KB).
Sahai, Suman. (2000). Farmers' Rights and Food Security. Economic and Political Weekly, 35(11).
In a number of articles, Suman Sahai examines and comments on the Indian Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act of 2001.
In one of the final drafts before the bill was adopted, she found that provisions on the sale of seeds by farmers would threaten India's food security and thereby it's national security (2000). Her 2001 article, written after the adoption of the Act, analyses the Act, and finds that it recognizes farmers as conservers of the agricultural gene pool and as breeders, and provides for rights for rural communities. Improvements were are needed, but the major challenge would be to identify an international platform on which it would be possible to interact with other countries regarding the protection and promotion of farmers' rights in India and elsewhere. India should work along with other developing countries to evolve an alternative to Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants, which she deems inappropriate to the needs of developing countries. In her 2003 contribution, she deepens her analysis of the inappropriateness of the Union as a platform for international recognition of plant breeders' as well as farmers' rights in developing countries.
Shiva, Vandana (1996): Agricultural Biodiversity, Intellectual Property Rights and Farmers' Rights
Shiva, Vandana. (1996). Agricultural Biodiversity, Intellectual Property Rights and Farmers' Rights. Economic and Political Weekly, 31(25).
This article provides insights into the process prior to the adoption of the Indian Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act of 2001.
Vandana Shiva describes two lines of development: (1) legislative efforts to meet the requirements of the TRIPS Agreement with regard to plant genetic resources and (2) the prospects for farmers' rights in India. She presents evidence of influence from the USA and from transnational corporations on the introduction of intellectual property rights to plant varieties in India. After showing how international agreements may affect national efforts to realize farmers' rights, she goes on to discuss various approaches to imposing legislation on farmers' rights in India. Farmers' rights are not a privilege or a concession, nor are they merely a fund. Farmers' rights are based on the past, present and future contributions of farmers to the global genetic pool, as breeders as well as conservers, and they are collective rights. Farmers' traditional knowledge should be recognized, not only the genetic material they produce. Their role as custodians of genetic resources should likewise be respected. Farmers' rights should also include ecological security and food security, Shiva concludes.
Swaminathan, M.S. (Ed.) (1995): Farmers' Rights and Plant Genetic Resources. Recognition & Reward: A Dialogue
Swaminathan, M.S. (Ed.). (1995). Farmers' Rights and Plant Genetic Resources. Recognition & Reward: A Dialogue. Madras: Macmillan India Limited.
This book contains the proceedings of the fifth meeting in the Dialogue series, which was held at Madras 28-31 January 1994. Both the presentations and the discussions from the meeting have been included in the book. The purpose of the dialogue was to develop practical methods of recognizing and rewarding tribal and rural men and women for their contributions to the conservation and development of plant genetic resources. There was agreement among the participants that their contributions deserve due recognition. In this book many aspects of the issue of Farmers' Rights are discussed, and draft legislation is suggested that is meant to contain transparent and implementable procedures for recognizing Farmers' Rights and rewarding farmers. The book particularly deals with the situation in India and among the issues discussed are an IPR system for landraces, plant breeders' rights, conservation and use of genetic resources, sui generis systems, and the drafting of legislation addressing the issue of plant breeders' rights and Farmers' Rights.