Food security may be a myth
Joginder Singh
FOOD security is an issue over which every nation should be concerned as it has serious repercussions on economic, social and political stability. It is all the more important for poor countries.

Sea buckthorn’s status gets boost
K.L. Noatay
CHHARMA, or sea buckthorn, has always been considered a humble shrub of the Himalayas. However, new scientific uses are being found for it now. Its scientific name being Hippophae rhamnoides, it is a somewhat larger sibling of Hypophae salicifolia. The local people, however, do not differentiate between the two species and call them both by the same regional names like chharma, tsarama, dharchuk, tarwa, or tirku.

Animal census in October
NEW DELHI: After six years, India will conduct a fresh census of livestock, including all domestic animals, from mid-October.

Amend law to patent traditional knowledge
P. K. Vasudeva

AFTER patenting neem and turmeric (haldi), the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has granted patent on the usage of pigeon pea (arhar) and ngali nut oil. The European Patent Office (EPO) has granted patent to a new variety of wheat to Monsanto. Though there will undoubtedly be fresh uproar over the patenting of Indian products, yet we must understand the reasons behind the patenting of Indian products by foreign countries.

Nowhere in the world, not even the US, can patents be granted for discoveries. There has to be an inventive step, an element of novelty, non-obviousness and utility.

The best evaluation of inventiveness is not by patent offices, but by competitors. Hence, third-party objections are the best checks against unwarranted patents. However, in the US, third-party objections are not solicited before granting patents. Patents can only be challenged (and even revoked, as in the case of turmeric and neem) after they have been granted.

If the World Trade Organisation (WTO) has unified norms on intellectual property rights, why should procedures not be globally standardised in the agreement of Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)? This is especially important because tests of inventiveness have progressively weakened in the US and broad patents have also been granted to therapeutic processes. Indian parties have obtained patents in the US on the therapeutic properties of bovine urine.

Traditional knowledge is in the public domain and should, therefore, not qualify for patents. This is indeed what happened with turmeric and might well have occurred with pigeon pea extracts and ngali nut oil. However, the USPTO does not recognise prior art unless it is in a written form like we have written scriptures on medicinal plants in Athur and Yajur Vedas. This is a matter that has already been taken up bilaterally with the US. But for resolution of the issue, there has to be a database and computerisation of traditional knowledge. While creating a database of knowledge handed down orally is difficult, this constraint is responsible for many of India's patent-related problems.

While existing traditional knowledge is not patentable, increments to knowledge can indeed be patented, as they are in the US. The database of the National Innovation Foundation (NIF) demonstrates that India is not lacking in such incremental addition to traditional knowledge.

It is paradoxical that despite two amendments to the Indian Patent Act 1970-amendment 1999 and 2002, such inventive components of traditional knowledge cannot be patented in India. This means that small innovators have to file for patents in the USPTO, with higher application fees and transaction costs.

This is one of the reasons that the Central Institute of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants and Go-Vigyan Anusandhan Kendra have jointly obtained a US patent on cow urine, whereas it could have been avoided if an "increment to traditional knowledge" clause were inserted in the Indian Patent Act 2002 amendment.

While cow urine may have therapeutic properties, it still does not satisfy the "novelty" and "non-obviousness" tests, because its use is well known in rural India. The US patent laws require prior art to be documented in a written form.

Traditional knowledge cannot be patented if documented under the TRIPS agreement of the WTO. That is why neem and haldi products when patented by the USPTO were revoked once India proved that these were the products of Indian traditional knowledge.

One of the major issues needing resolution is the protection of traditional knowledge under a new "sui generis" system. While disclosure of the source of knowledge or material in the patent application is an acknowledgement of their use, it does not provide for a reward system the to owner of that property.

The patenting of cow's urine is a different case as what has been patented is a drug composition that has cow's urine distillate and an antibiotic. This shows that there is an attempt on the part of western pharmaceutical giants to exploit Indian biodiversity and traditional knowledge.

Dr R. A. Mashelkar, Director-General of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and Secretary, Science and Industrial Technology, has repeatedly emphasised that there is much for India in the intellectual property rights. However, exploitation requires a patent culture and tie-ups, because commercialisation cost are significant.

The CSIR has already undertaken the documentation of traditional knowledge so that MNCs are not able to patent Indian biodiversity. It is paradoxical that traditional Indian knowledge can be patented in the US and not in India. Once the documented by the CSIR is complete, India will not only bask in the golden past but also ensure that the western world is not able to patent Indian knowledge.

In 1996, India managed to stall the famous patent on the "use of turmeric in wound healing". However, the country is unable to stop the patenting of other uses of turmeric.

After having successfully challenged neem, turmeric and basmati patents, the Delhi-based Research Foundation for Science Technology and Ecology (RFSTE) has now proposed to challenge the patent recently granted to Monsanto for a new wheat variety. The application for the patent was filed in 1991.

Vandana Shiva, Director of RFSTE, says the patent would be challenged on the ground that there is nothing novel about the variety as it has been developed by crossbreeding an Indian variety that had been bred, conserved and grown by farmers over the centuries.

The government should extend all-out support to this organisation. Efforts should also be made to make the third amendment to the Indian Patent Act 1970 to automatically patent documented traditional knowledge so that foreign countries do not steal the right to Indian biodiversity.

Food security may be a myth
Joginder Singh

FOOD security is an issue over which every nation should be concerned as it has serious repercussions on economic, social and political stability. It is all the more important for poor countries.

In India, till the ’80s, foodgrains production increased much faster than the growth of population. For example, the production increased at a compound growth rate (CGR) of 4.3 per cent in the ’50s, 2.5 per cent in the ’60s, 2.3 per cent in the ’70s and 2.9 per cent in the ’80s, whereas the comparable growth rate of population was around 2.2 per cent. This made the food situation comfortable. The per-capita availability of foodgrains was only 409g/ day in 1961, which increased to 510g in 1991.

Apart from meeting the domestic requirement, foodgrains production came to be surplus, available for export. This was possible due to the contribution of research and extension workers, procurement policies, streamlining of the inputs’ supply system and, above all, the receptiveness of farmers to new technology.

Now we have reached a stage at which we have to be very careful in formulating policies to manage foodgrains in the country, without bringing about significant shifts in the overall economic system. The surpluses may be temporary and illusory. In the absence of a far-sighted policy, we may land into a food problem again if the following considerations are not given due weightage:

—It is a matter of concern that till the ’70s, the contribution of area shift towards foodgrains was substantial, which appears to have reached a saturation point today. Therefore, increase in production has to come mainly from per-hectare productivity growth, which would have to at least match the growth of population.

—Between the ’60s and the ’80s, even though the rate of increase of foodgrains production came down, it was still higher than the rate of increase of population. During the ’90s, the population growth was 1.93 per cent per annum while the annual compound growth rate of foodgrains production fell to 1.86 per cent.

There is a fear of further decline in the growth of foodgrains production due to problems of sustainability and the ongoing diversification efforts in the high-potential areas like Punjab, Haryana and Uttar Pradesh. Interestingly, Punjab, having just 1.5 per cent of the geographical area, contributes about 13 per cent to foodgrains production. However, it is now finding it difficult to sustain the existing level of production owing to problems such as decline in the water table, pest resistance in crops, or deteriorating soil health.

—For about 15 years at a stretch since 1988-89, weather has been favourable for agricultural production. A single year of drought in 2002-03 reduced the foodgrains stocks by about 10 million tonnes (from 58 million tonnes in January 2002 to 48 million in January 2003).

We have to be cautious of such possibilities and should not put food security at stake on flimsy grounds.

—The food stocks lying in godowns for a couple of years need to be checked for quantity and quality before we declare a surplus of foodgrains. There have been allegations of scams in the record-keeping regarding the quantity as well as the quality of stocks.

—Even today 26 per cent of the people are below the poverty line. They remain under-nourished in spite of various programmes to streamline food distribution amongst the poor. We have to consider their increasing requirements that would result from their economic uplift, as and when it happens.

Sea buckthorn’s status gets boost
K.L. Noatay

CHHARMA, or sea buckthorn, has always been considered a humble shrub of the Himalayas. However, new scientific uses are being found for it now. Its scientific name being Hippophae rhamnoides, it is a somewhat larger sibling of Hypophae salicifolia. The local people, however, do not differentiate between the two species and call them both by the same regional names like chharma, tsarama, dharchuk, tarwa, or tirku.

Phenology: Chharma is a fairly large bush. Its main stem is 5 or 15 cm thick and its overall height is 2 or 4m. The bark is greyish brown with prominent vertical fissures. Some shoots are modified as spines as a natural protection. The leaves are lanceolate or obtuse at times. These are 2-5 cm long and 6-10 mm wide. The roots constitute a thick net that goes down deep, making the plant an excellent soil binder.

The plant generally flowers during June-July. Male flowers emerge in clusters at the base of new shoots while the female ones are pedicellate clusters. Their colour is orange to red. The fruit is like a miniature orange, 8 or 12mm across.

Habitat: Sea buckthorn comes up naturally at altitudes between 2000 and 4500m above sea level in sandy or marshy river beds, slopes touching river banks. Geographically the natural habitat starts from Afghanistan and runs up to China.

Utility: The chharma fruit is very sour. However, villagers make tasty chutney or jam out of it. The stem of the plant being woody and hard, weighs about 20kg to a cubic foot. The size being small it is of little use as timber, but is good fuel wood.

The bush as a whole is a good fencing material. The foliage is valued as fodder when other sources are not there. The roots fix nitrogen and prevent soil erosion. The fruit fetches Rs 15-20 per kg in local markets. The seed sells for Rs 80-100 per kg.

Apart from these traditional uses, chharma is gradually becoming important as a medicinal plant. Scientists recommend the fruit as a source of vitamins A, B, C and K, proteins, organic acids, carbohydrates, flavonoides, and minerals like iron, cobalt, and molybdenum. The fruit and roots are being used in nearly 200 valuable products such as medicines, cosmetics and health/food products.

Ayurvedic and Unani physicians, too, find its fruit and roots of medical use. Allopathic practitioners use chharma derivatives for treating coronary disorders and or reducing cholesterol deposits. In fact, research scholars are now hoping to develop a miracle anti-cancer herbal pill from its berries.

Workshops: The first international workshop on sea buckthorn was held at Beijing, China, in1995. Indian scientists organised a similar national inter-university workshop at Keylong in 1998. Yet another global workshop on the plant was held in Delhi in 2000. At the last workshop it was agreed to collaborate with all interested national and international universities and institutes to evolve an advanced technology on its propagation and exploitation.

Indian scientists, particularly those of Y.S. Parmar University of Forestry and Horticulture, Nauni, have initiated special action plans to promote the cultivation of sea buckthorn as an economic crop on vacant slopes, inter-spaces in agricultural holdings, and dry riverbeds in the high-altitude cold desert. It is also learnt that Defence Research and Development Organisation scientists are conducting trials on developing a pill out of chharma fruit to ward off hunger among soldiers stranded in wilderness.

Animal census in October

NEW DELHI: After six years, India will conduct a fresh census of livestock, including all domestic animals, from mid-October.

According to provisional data compiled during the 1997 census, India's livestock population almost doubled from 292.8 million in 1951 to 498.33 million.

Bihar, Himachal Pradesh, West Bengal and Dadra and Nagar Haveli did not conduct the last census.

"The data for these regions have been projected on the basis of annual growth rates of animal population in these states, which is more than the national annual growth rate," the Animal Husbandry Department of the Agriculture Ministry has said.

The final report of the Livestock Census 1997, which took into account animals, including cows, buffaloes, horse, camel, sheep, goat, mules, donkey, dogs and rabbits, is expected by November. — IANS