Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Justice as Procedure and Recognition
With regard to procedural justice, fi rst, doubts must be expressed to what
extent the process can be characterized as participatory. For example, in
Namibia only a handful of all the interviewees knew about the Hoodia
benefi t-sharing agreement; the vast majority of the people interviewed
had never heard about it, let alone had their opinion been sought prior
to signing the agreement. The interviewees in Namibia who have heard
about the agreement could be described as the “elite” San—that is, the
individuals who have been elected as representatives of the community in
organizations like the San Council and the Working Group of Indigenous
Minorities in Southern Africa (WIMSA). The situation in South Africa
was slightly better. The community members who were interviewed knew
about the agreement, but the majority complained that their opinion was
not sought prior to signing it. They lamented the lack of communication
between the “elite” San and the majority of the community. None of the
community members interviewed was able to relate any details of the
contents of the agreement. For example, they did not know that the royal-
ties are to be shared equally between the San in South Africa, Namibia,
Botswana, and Angola; they did not know for what purposes the Hoodia
was going to be used; they were not aware that Pfi zer had pulled out of
the deal; nor were they involved in the new negotiations between CSIR
and Unilever.
Apart from being nonparticipatory, the process can also be criticized
for its failure to create an environment that could have assisted the San
in their negotiations. As confi rmed by Wynberg's (2004a, 2004b) obser-
vations, communities dealing with bioprospecting and benefi t-sharing
agreements require legal and strategic assistance in dealing with these
issues. This has been clearly absent in the case of the Hoodia agreement.
Only a few people were selected to represent the interests of their
communities and they lacked the appropriate knowledge and skills for
effective negotiation of intellectual property rights and benefi t-sharing
agreements. During the fi eldwork, people who are part of the Hoodia
Trust Fund complained that they were not adequately trained by the
CSIR to manage the project and the potentially high amounts of money
that could be accrued once the Hoodia product is commercialized. Stories
were told that it took them two years to open a bank account and none
of the Hoodia Trust Fund members had any knowledge of accounting.
They further complained that their requests for training and assistance
were denied by the CSIR. Complaints were also voiced about their
(non-San) representatives, that they have no clear understanding what
