Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
The San were approached by a group of
Hoodia
growers (the South African
Hoodia
Growers Association) who were cognizant of their obligations to share
benefits with the San under the CBD. In March 2006, an agreement was concluded
allocating the San an effective 6% of the value of
Hoodia
sold by South African
Hoodia
growers. After a further year of negotiations between the San, the South
African
Hoodia
Growers Association and another substantial group of
Hoodia
growers (the Cape Ethno-botanical Growers Association), as well as the provincial
environmental government agencies (being the bodies responsible for all grow-
ing and CITES permits), a comprehensive benefit-sharing agreement was con-
cluded between the San and the newly formed Southern African
Hoodia
Growers
Association on 15 March 2007.
This agreement, which initially brought the San a modest R24 per dried kilogram
of
Hoodia
exported (to be renegotiated after one year, in the light of unpredicta-
ble prices), had the aim of securing a transparently managed
Hoodia
market, with
all role players committed to best practices as set out in the agreement. The San
peoples were to provide two directors out of the seven that would run the organiza-
tion. The agreement, although negotiated in South Africa, was drafted in such a way
as to welcome and enable the participation of
Hoodia
growers from neighbouring
Namibia and Botswana in due course. However, the bureaucratic difficulties of gov-
ernment approval being required for any benefit sharing have prevented this second
agreement from generating any income for the San so far: at the time of writing,
having become dormant, it is awaiting renegotiation. It is worth noting that during
2009, the San reached agreement with the Nama people in Namibia, who are also
acknowledged holders of traditional knowledge regarding the
Hoodia
, on the terms
of their sharing of the benefits of
Hoodia
sales in that country. They concluded a
benefit-sharing agreement with the
Hoodia
Growers Association of Namibia on 8th
December 2010, along the lines of the precedent set in South Africa.
4.6.3 Analysis of the San
Hoodia
Case
As many analyses of the case have described (Wynberg
2004
: 859-864), the
negotiations between the CSIR and the San secured the 'consent' of the San
ex
post facto
, which could wryly be termed 'post-informed consent'. On a formal
level, the 2003 benefit-sharing agreement between the San and the CSIR was
legally concluded with the South African San Council, thereby securing consent.
However, upon analysis of the situation behind the discreet veil of the formal legal
agreement, and of the differentiated, scattered and vulnerable state of the San peo-
ples, one can reasonably ask at what stage the community could be said to have
fully consented.
WIMSA has a constitution that complies with Western notions of governance
and accountability, demonstrating the democracy, transparency and fiscal respon-
sibility that donor funders expect of their beneficiaries. The WIMSA board of
trustees is elected from the San leadership of each country - currently only South
