WHO OWNS INFORMATION?

2.1 Relevance to botanical studies

This chapter is mainly concerned with the ownership of information, and with agreements about ownership. This topic is particularly relevant if you are engaged in an ethnobotanical survey where information is obtained from local people. But it is also relevant in other instances, such as when an expatriate scientist is working with a national scientist, a situation that might occur in almost any area of botanical research.

Before going on to the question of professional ethics for botanists and how agreements between different parties may be made, a brief account should be given about the flow of information between people or organisations or both. It is when information is passed on to others that the question "who owns information?" may arise.

2.2 Information flow: two situations

Two situations of information flow can be compared, the first when information is exchanged freely, the second when it is not.

In the first situation people exchange information freely with others and the question of ownership of the information may not arise at all. Suppliers of information may not be completely altruistic in their motives but do not expect any immediate reward for the information they pass on. Perhaps they in turn may benefit by receiving information at some point. This is the way people and communities commonly learn from one another; it helps them to cope better with their lives and to find solutions to problems. In the context of this book several examples can be given. For instance, a village community in one area may benefit from knowledge about certain crop species passed on by a village community elsewhere. At another level, such a community may benefit from international knowledge of plants -- perhaps held in a large database of some kind. Examples in this case might be information derived from individual research projects on particular fuelwood trees, or on plants with certain medicinal properties. A further example might be information on the global or regional conservation status of a plant species, this being useful to someone working locally.

In principle, scientific progress is also based on the free flow of information. It can be noted in passing that science is a special form of knowledge. It is powerful because it advances theories to account for observations, and then deliberately seeks negation of these theories through experiments and statistical tests. In short, science advances by testing hypotheses, accepting those that meet certain criteria, and rejecting those that do not. It is consequently an important tool for helping to solve the world's problems, and scientific knowledge -- the product of this hypothesis-testing process -- is very valuable.

However, although scientific knowledge may be accepted as true (at least according to the criteria used) the direction science takes is influenced by cultural values. For example, in the western-influenced world much scientific research is directed towards commercial interests. Therefore the way science is directed brings up cultural and ethical issues that need to be taken into account.

In the second situation information is not freely exchanged and can be equated with power; that is, whether deliberately or not, the so-called owner (or owners) of information exercises some kind of control over others. Some examples are given below.

Suppose that data are collected by a conservation body on the status and distribution of certain species of plant, and that local people have given information on where the plants are found. Then, at a later stage, suppose the information is used by the conservation body to advocate the legal protection of certain species and areas of habitat; this then leads to conservation management of areas of land, some of which is used by the same people who gave the information on the plant species. In this example, therefore, information has been used in a way that will affect (perhaps adversely) the lives of these local people, yet they have unwittingly contributed to the information that has resulted in the land-use change.

In other cases information partly or wholly obtained from local people may be used to make money. For instance, local knowledge of the medicinal values of plants could be obtained by a pharmaceutical company, and this knowledge could then be used to make new drugs. Similarly, information on local varieties of crops or domestic animals might be used by plant or animal breeders. The organisations who obtain this type of information may then privatise the information in modern legal systems -- for instance in patents and in plant breeders' rights. Hence, those organisations who rely on the free flow of information from local people may restrict the flow themselves.

Another example would be a case where a research worker obtains information from local people (or perhaps from a local scientist) and then uses this purely for his or her own benefit without full acknowledgement being given to those who provided the information.

These two situations show contrasting attitudes to information; in one case it is free and does not really belong to anyone, while in the other it is equated with money, power or influence. Problems are particularly likely to arise when these two attitudes clash, as may happen, for example, when local people work with outsiders of some kind. Under these circumstances it is important that the relationships between local people and others (in this case research workers) be understood, and that agreements between both parties be made.

2.3 The value of partnerships

For community development and conservation one of the key relationships can be between the scientific research worker and the local people. A partnership can be formed with the following kinds of contributions:

From the local person (or people): Local knowledge, often detailed, about the uses (including the preparation of plant-derived substances and dose rates) and management of certain plants; also able to recognise local, immediate, problems.

From the research worker: Access to wider knowledge and scientific methods; also able to see broader, longer-term issues (e.g. values of local plant species or habitats in a regional or global perspective).

In order to arrive at an effective partnership, researchers need to be aware of the main features of local knowledge, namely:

(a) As already mentioned, local people have detailed knowledge of the local environment (types of organisms, uses and methods of management).

(b) Types and amounts of knowledge are not uniform within the community; some people are specialists -- for instance, craftworkers, herbalists, hunters, etc.

(c) Some knowledge may be regarded as sacred or secret, and should be respected by research workers.

(d) Some knowledge may be unique and have possible commercial value (e.g. certain medicinal plants); this will call for special attention by research workers.

Bearing in mind these points, agreements can then be developed between research workers and local people.

2.4 Guidelines for agreements

There may be national laws requiring permission to be granted before knowledge can be obtained from local people, but in any case there are ethical considerations to take into account. It is therefore essential that agreements are negotiated between research workers and local people (and national scientists if appropriate) so that all parties know where they stand. Detailed guidelines for forming agreements are given in the first book of this series (Martin, 1995). Some of the main points may be summarised as follows:

(a) Agreements between research workers and local people:

As regarding approaching a community: give an honest account of your intentions and say why you want to carry out the work, what the data requirements are and how you plan to conduct the study.

As regards the results of the study: explain how the results will be made available, giving full acknowledgements for contributions, and respecting any sensitive topics. If necessary, the results should be returned to the community in a form that can be understood.

As regards compensation: this can take various forms, from payment of individuals for skills and services rendered to assistance given to the whole community -- for instance, help to allow it to develop further skills and knowledge. Special arrangements may have to be made regarding commercially valuable information, and legal contracts may have to be drawn up protecting Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs). It should be noted that IPRs for local people have to be defined in terms of the community (or communities) as there is no identifiable "inventor" as such.

(b) Agreements between foreign research workers and national scientists:

A number of points are listed by Martin (1995) about etiquette and about various practical matters. As regards information, it is important to reach agreement on how the results will be written up and made available, and to follow through on these agreements after leaving the field.

It is of interest that in at least one part of the world local people have given a broad overview of the issues about which they are concerned. This overview was made by the Coordinating Body for the Indigenous Peoples' Organizations of the Amazon Basin and the main proposals made by this body are described by Martin (1995). Amongst these proposals are a number of areas where partnerships between research workers and local people could help to provide suitable information -- for example, as regards management of natural resources and for community development.

In conclusion, the question "Who owns information?" raises a number of ethical matters which botanists need to be aware of before embarking on projects involving either local people or national scientists. However, if these issues are understood, and suitable agreements can be made, then the collaboration between research workers and local people (or national scientists, or both) can be productive and yield information both of scientific value and of long-term value to the community.