Introduction
Two events in the news recently (note that I wrote this article in April 2020) spurred me to write this article. The first is what did Mr Donald Trump, President of the United States, when he told the world that his country was halting funding to the World Health Organization because it “mismanaged and covered up the spread of the virus after it emerged in China”. The second is the opinion by Achal Prabhala and Ellen t’Hoen in the Guardian, on the future of treatment for Covid-19. According to Prabhala and t’Hoen in the Guardian dated Wednesday, April 15, 2020, giant pharmaceutical companies are likely to find a cure for Covid-19, but that, the problem will be access to those drugs by poor countries. I find their warning timely and enlightening at the same, because most poor African countries have folded their arms, waiting upon the West for answers. Prabhala and t’Hoen warn that these answers won’t be cheap, as “pharmaceutical companies will bury treatments in a thicket of patents, making them unaffordable to the world’s poorest.” This discussion seeks to understand how this will happen and, what poor African countries must do in readiness for this inevitability. In this discussion I consider the feasibility of an important alternative: the indigenous knowledge route. I open with some background on the notion of patent and why this subject tends to be controversial, especially in the area of drugs. Thereafter, I discuss indigenous knowledge and why it is important that we must begin to discuss, seriously, issues surrounding it.
Usage of terms
In this discussion, I borrow usage of the term ”herbal medicine” from Padmasiri (2018) who, citing Dan et al., (2010) and World Health Organization (2017), describes it as “herbs, herbal materials, herbal preparations, and finished herbal products that contain active ingredients of parts of plants, other plant materials, or combinations thereof” (p. 476). Thus, this includes food which serves special medicinal purpose in humans.
Padmasiri (2018) also uses the terms “indigenous knowledge”, “traditional knowledge” and “local knowledge” interchangeably to refer to “local knowledge unique to a given culture or a society” (p. 475). I find this convenient. Besides, I use the terms “complementary alternative medicine” and “herbal medicine” or “folk medicine” interchangeably.
I also borrow terminologies from Ozioma and Chinwe (2019) who use “crude drugs of natural or biological origin” to refer to plants, whole or parts, which have medicinal properties. If such drugs are from plant parts with cellular structures―leaf, bark, roots, etc―Ozioma and Chinwe refer to them as “organised drugs” as opposed to “unorganised drugs”―those obtained from acellular portions of plants. Examples of unorganised drugs are gums, balsams, gels, oils, and exudates.
What this discussion is not about
This discussion is not about encouraging people to resort to desperate remedies that can put their lives in great danger. There are conventional mechanisms through which drugs go to ascertain their safety before people begin to absorb them. This discussion is about the need for more thinking and innovation in the context of proven evidence in attempts to complement efforts being done elsewhere.
This discussion is also not about discrediting the patent system. Personally, I appreciate the value of the patent system. For me, without this system, efforts to develop humankind in all areas―pharmaceuticals, engineering, technology, name it―will mean nothing.
Finally, this discussion is not about the spirit aspect of traditional medicine; it is not about “mtsiliko, a medicine that protects against sorcery or theft from houses, granaries and gardens, (or) mphinjiri, a medicine that protects from misfortune, (or) zithumwa, a charm that enables one to acquire desired objects or repel misfortune” (Lwanda, 2005, p. 41).
This discussion is about herbal medicine or crude drugs of natural or biological origin, mineral-based medicines, manual techniques necessary to heal, assuage pain or maintain wellbeing, as a component of traditional medicine; how they can be used in the prevention, diagnosis, improvement or treatment of physical and mental illnesses. Thus, this discussion is about what can happen if our herbal and mineral-based medicines are carefully documented and officially supported by robust scientific research, what can happen if our science can carefully screen these plant products for efficacy and safety, all this in the backdrop of the reality of our context, namely that African economies and scientific knowledge lag those of the West where pharmaceutical patents dictate matters.
Why patents
Before I define patent, let me say something about Japan and her route to industrialisation or modernisation. A story is told of how in 1900 Japan discovered the secret to industrialisation. According to Heath 1997 as cited in Maskus (2000), it all started when Korekiyo Takahashi, first President of Japan Patent Office, visited the United States Patent Office that year, 1900. Upon his return, Takahashi was said to have realised it was patents that made the United States such a great nation. For him, the answer was simply: “We will have patents.”
So what are patents? Well, let me start by defining Intellectual Property (IP) since patent is a document or arrangement that secures one’s IP rights on a certain type of IP.
Intellectual Property and Intellectual Property rights
Bouchoux (2013) proffers a basic definition of Intellectual Property when she starts by demonstrating the three distinct types of property that you or any company can own, namely real property, for example, land or real estate; personal property, i.e. specific items and things that can be identified, for example, jewelry and cars; and intellectual property, i.e. products of mental expression or creativity. Roughly, whatever you produce through your brain constitutes IP.
In the words of Landes and Posner (2003), IP refers to “(expressed) ideas, inventions, discoveries, symbols, images, expressive works (verbal, visual, musical, theatrical), or in short any potentially valuable human product (broadly, “information”) that has an existence separable from a unique physical embodiment, whether or not the product has actually been “propertized,” that is, brought under a legal regime of property rights” (p. 1). Therefore, Intellectual Property is like the physical property we know except that the former, generally intangible, comes from your brain or creativity or a rigorous act of invention or innovation. For the reason, you can assert rights over it, just as is the case with physical property. These rights are called Intellectual Property rights (IPRs). Thus, Intellectual Property Law “regulates the creation, use, and exploitation of mental or creative labour” (Bently & Sherman, 2009, p. 1). These rights thus relate to copyright, patents, trademarks, service marks, commercial names, among others.
According to Sanders and Pugatch (2015), Intellectual Property rights fulfill three basic functions, namely “the ‘creation of competitive markets’ for human, industrial and intellectual creativity that is novel or original, where consumers can make rational choices about which goods or services to buy; ‘insurance’ to innovators, safeguarding the fruits of their labour from abuse by free-riders; and a ‘commercial gateway’ through which innovators can exploit and benefit from their creations” (p. 6). What Sanders and Pugatch mean by this is that, IP rights encourage a culture of creativity and innovation so that the market has a diverse range of products in such areas as technology and creativity, and all consumer goods, including in agriculture. Pharmaceutical companies make drugs; it is all thanks to this system. We read books; it is all thanks to IP, as those writers did that because they were sure their works would be protected and, in turn, reward them for the effort. In short, these rights ensure that those who spend their energy and resources in coming up with original items or expressions are rewarded for their effort.
A patent gives rise to IP rights in the field of invention (new products or processes) and innovation (improved products). Strictly speaking, a patent is a legal document that is given to a person who has used his or mental labour or effort to invent something that is new, that goes a step higher when one applies the technology it introduces, and can be used to solve technical problems. To ensure, people do not just claim invention on anything, there are categories of things from which one cannot claim an invention or over which one cannot assert one’s rights. For example, you can never claim IP rights in terms of patent over that which already exists in nature. There are also rigorous checks to ascertain the invention indeed belongs to you.
Since patents concern new, industrially applicable inventions or processes, their mode of protection is perched on a very high rung or standard. Likewise, the period of protection, the period in which the inventor is allowed to exclude others from using it unless with his or her endorsement through a legal arrangement, is usually 20 years. When the 20 years elapse, anyone can make that product or invention since it now falls in public domain. It is important to stress that although a period of monopoly is 20 years and sometimes over that, patent law, or simply intellectual property law, puts in place a mechanism to ensure the public benefits by it through some legal arrangement, for example, one company can get some licence from the inventor or owner of the invention so that it can produce to benefit some public.
Thus, it could be argued that, whatever the arguments against IP or patents, their long-term benefits far outweigh the short-term protection in the years under which the patent is active. The principle guiding this understanding (of the wider, long-term benefits as opposed to short-term problems created by protection) is referred to as (the principle of) “allocative efficiency”. This principle states that “the long-term benefits flowing to society from the protection granted to a particular class of creators or innovators outweigh the (mainly short-term) costs imposed by the monopolistic structure of the patent grant” (Curci, 2010, p. 5).
Perceived problems with patents for Africa
There are a number of issues with patents that raise a heated debate especially among policymakers in Africa. I should start with issues about drugs because they are a common example of products that are protected by patents.
Some argue that the period of protection through patent, that is, 20 years or more, is prohibitive especially for the economies of the developing countries. Before I answer this question, consider what GlaxoSmithKline, a drug manufacturer, says about what it takes to bring a new drug on the market.
According to GlaxoSmithKline (see “How we discover new medicines” on https://us.gsk.com), it can take up to 15 years to move from a promising idea in the laboratory to a medicine receiving approval from regulators. It adds that, in some cases, it does investigate 5,000 or more different drugs from which only one could reach the testing stage in humans. Perhaps it could make great sense that they would wish to recoup these costs first.
Others have argued that, though at the expiry of a patent, others have the liberty to use the information in the intellectual public domain to make the product for the benefit of their firms as well as the consumer, actual use of such information is not as simple as it sounds especially in the setting of the developing countries. Let us take the example of generic drugs.
Basically, generic drugs are copies of original brand-name drugs. Thus, they are pharmaceutically or therapeutically equivalents, that is, they require same dosage, same methods of administration and so produce the same medicinal effects as the brand-name drugs, that is, the drug by the originator of that drug as a product. Although not always the case, brand names are usually capitalised while generic versions are not. Usually, generic drugs are cheaper than the brand name drugs (although they have the same medicinal effects). This is because, generic medicines do not incur the same development and marketing costs as the brand name or originator company had incurred. This is largely because generic drugs are generally acquired from patents that are out of protection. In some countries, a company that intends to develop generic drugs applies for this a few years before the expiry of the originator’s patent so that as soon as the patent has expired, the generic drug will hit the market.
Thus, despite the opportunities that arise with the falling into public domain of a patent for brand-name drugs, the amount of energy and the costs required of poor countries to develop the generic drugs can be so daunting, many would prefer importation.
Apart from the opportunities expired patents offer countries and firms to produce those drugs as generic drugs, the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) under the World Trade Organization, provides an even flexible route. But still, the procedures or steps required of poor nations to meet the requisites are not as simple for any poor African country. Health Action International (2016) is right on point when it observes that “development of pro-generic medicines policies in low- and middle-income countries is both complex and challenging” (p. 5). One major challenge is capacity on quality and regulation owing to lack of requisite facilities and qualified personnel for quality-assured generic medicines.
Even waiting for a patent to expire carries with it some risks. For example, it is not uncommon, and this against the spirit of Intellectual Property, for some unscrupulous inventors to stash their IP, waiting for someone to make a similar invention, and then sue him or negotiate with him out of court. Such unscrupulous inventors or companies are referred to as patent trolls (Bainbridge, 2009, p. 372). In some cases, some companies or inventors keep improving the original patent, thereby seeking more patents on inventions that resemble each other. In this way, the period of protection is tactfully extended. In other words, if, at the end of 20 years you wanted to exploit the patent, you would find that there are other patents that are still alive that resemble the patent that is about to fall into public domain. This approach of preventing others from exploiting patent through filing or multiple patents over a basic invention is referred to as “ring-fencing” the invention. (Bainbridge, 2009, p. 373).
As a way out, African countries could start with what they already have to develop capacity with simple solutions. One way to do this could be exploitation of traditional medicine. This does not mean Africa would altogether cease from respecting IP rules, as that would be suicidal, but that, as it uses and respects IP on patented drugs, it would explore an avenue that would reduce the burden through this local solution.
Why we tend to underutilise our traditional medicines
A number of reasons has contributed to this. First, western education has tended to stress the power of learning science through western lens. Hewson (2015) tells a story of how a brilliant education policy floundered in South Africa. She writes that, following the coming to power of Nelson Mandela in 1994, the country embarked on reforming the education sector. She writes that among the changes was the introduction of a new and improved curriculum. According to Hewson, thus, in 1997, the South African Government rolled out a revised curriculum based on outcomes-based education policy which “specified that 30% of the science and mathematics curricula should incorporate some of the indigenous knowledge of the vast majority of the children in school, the Africans” (p. 49). What this suggested was that science and mathematics ought to be applicable to one’s immediate environment, that is, “applicable to real-life situations and incorporate the cultures, beliefs, and worldviews (indigenous knowledge) of the diverse cultural groups that make up South Africa” (p. 49).
Hewson observes that this did not work. One reason for this failure was that there had not been wide consultation on the new topics, especially as regards indigenous knowledge, which many had confessed did not know how to teach it (p. 49). I have a gut feeling that such teachers could be of a feeling that indigenous knowledge was perhaps meant to teach learners issues that had nothing to do with immediate needs.
Such a jaundiced perception of traditional knowledge has tended to deprive the African scientist of the link between western science and local solutions for better results and answers. When Japan adopted the intellectual property route for its industrialisation, it did not do so blindly; it assessed what it was it needed to develop itself through IP or specifically, patents. Thus, its IP regime was adopted to encourage industrial development through emphasising (1) technology acquisition from abroad, (2) domestic information diffusion, and (3) innovation developed from already existing inventions or products.
Domestic information diffusion and incremental innovation―innovation developed from already existing technologies, products or inventions―are the missing link in the efforts towards industrialisation by African countries. Domestic information diffusion means using local knowledge to produce that which serves the local population better. Incremental innovation means improving upon an already existing innovation so as to meet the local needs better. While Africa is busy adopting basic science and technology from the West, it fails to diffuse local information or knowledge in it to make it relevant to the African context. At the same time, it fails to use already existing innovation or information available in patent documents and databases to make existing innovation more relevant to Africa’s needs and setting.
Another reason why we fail to make use of traditional resources or herbal medicine can be attributed to the mentality by the so-called educated Africans, who tend to perceive traditional and complementary medicines with suspicion. One can never dismiss this outright, for, in some cases, herbal medicine has been linked to some foolishness or crookedness. For example, it is not uncommon for some herbalists to deceive unsuspecting individuals over both diagnosis and prescription. Thus, it is not uncommon to hear Sing’anga Mbaye claiming that some swelling on one’s leg or arm is as a result of a cup or spoon that was deposited or inserted in him or her through juju while he or she was fast asleep. In some cases, Sing’anga Tapfumaneyi may go to any length, convincing some unsuspecting village woman that the pain that runs from her head to her legs is a lorry Sing’anga Vusi had deposited in her through some spell.
People therefore might not find wisdom in using or supporting herbal medicine. Despite this, the fact remains that even the West itself has come to notice that herbal medicine does offer more than meets the eye. In the introduction to his book, Encyclopedia of herbal medicine, Chevallier (2016), writes that, since he first released the book in 1996, “herbal medicine has gone through unprecedented change (in that) herbs, which have always been the principal form of medicine in developing countries, have again become popular in the developed world, as people strive to stay healthy in the face of chronic stress and pollution, and to treat illness with medicines that work in concert with the body’s defenses” (p. 6). Unfortunately, “one of the most unfortunate ironies of herbal medical practice is that while African medicine consists primarily of herbs and health foods, modern herbal producers and phytopharmaceutical manufacturers seldom, if ever, include African medicinal plants in their lists” (Iwu, 2014, p. 2).
It should be pointed out that most conventional drugs have their origins in herbal medicine. In other words, a good number of important drugs are, in fact, isolated from herbs. The artemether component in Artemether-Lumefantrine or LA, for instance, is an extract from the herb artemisia. As Fung and Wong (2015, p. 329), write, it was Youyou Tu and others in 2011 that discovered the anti-malaria drug artemisinin from the Chinese plant Artemisia annua.
Another reason why Africa has tended to underutilise exploitation of traditional complementary medicine can be explained by the distinction between the mode of inquiry in traditional knowledge and in Western conventional knowledge. According to Mawere (2015), in the former, knowledge is generated by societal members through trial and error in the course of pursuing answers to their problems. In conventional science, experimental design is at the centre. In indigenous knowledge, one often works with what is already available. Many researchers on indigenous knowledge on herbal medicine therefore consider the approach problematic and unscientific. However, this should be considered an opportunity since science or innovation does not work from the blues. In the words of Johnson (2010), “good ideas are not conjured out of thin air; they are built out of a collection of existing parts, the composition of which expands (and, occasionally contracts) over time” (2010, p. 35).
Thus, research on herbal medicine could be easier because it already contains a collection of existing parts which simply requires expansion and improving in terms of safety and efficacy.
Some fear that research and codification of herbal medicine cannot achieve as well as they could because the esoteric aspect that links the community with the spirit world tends to be impenetrable or is accessible to only a few “prominent” stakeholders in that local community (Masango, 2019). If research is carried out outside the base-stand of respect, that is bound to happen. Remember, these resources are held in trust by those stakeholders or local communities as custodians for generations yet unborn (Culture in Development, 2011). I believe approaches that respect and offer concrete promise as regards benefits of such endeavours to both the present stakeholder or communities and the future generations can very easily trigger general openness and willing participation on the side of those custodians.
Law is also said to pose a problem for African nations to take a serious path towards utilisation of herbal medicines. Cavalli (2013, p. 12) presents one dilemma this can give rise to. He cites an example of someone promoting an orange. Cavalli writes that should such a person squeeze some organic oranges, put it in a bottle and sell it to another, that would be lawful. He however warns that it could be a different story if such a person would say ‘drink this yummy orange juice it will prevent you from getting scurvy.’ Cavalli gives two reasons why anyone doing this would be breaking the law, namely that such a person has made a medical claim, as only medical doctors can make such a claim, and secondly, that such a person has made a medical claim that the orange juice has now become medicine. He adds that these would be besides the fact that such a person is not licenced to sell drugs or medicine.
Well-collaborated research would ensure this dilemma is overcome as that will take on board a diversity of professionals, ready to deal with any ambiguities or concerns―medical, legal, name it. What happens in Africa is that most information on traditional medicine was compiled by librarians in their effort to preserve heritage. There is always a limit to which they can claim efficacy of such data without proven science backing them.
The feasibility of the traditional medicine route
First, to borrow from Hoffman and Metcalf (2014), “if traditional cures have been used daily for thousands of years, they probably work or people wouldn’t use them” (p. 21). The same can be said of Africa, namely if our parents survived great pestilences, for example, the influenza epidemic that hit the Malosa area of Zomba in Malawi (then Nyasaland) in 1923 or thereabout, there must have been something that had worked for them then or we would not have been here today. Simply put, there is something promising in the herbals we think are meant only for our cattle and goats.
Traditional medicine or simply herbal medicine, are easy to find, and possibly, easy to process. In fact, there are right where we are. Gregg (2014) must have had this in mind when he observed: “plants provide everything we need to survive on this planet, from food to healing remedies to the raw materials for the clothing we wear and the homes we live in to the air we breathe” (p. 8).
Besides, in some settings in Africa, traditional medicines are the only therapy available (Mahomoodally, 2013). Wambebe (2018), concurs with him, observing that “due to their availability and affordability, the traditional medicines and therapy systems of the developing countries provide health care to the vast majority of these countries’ populations” (p. 3).
This especially makes sense in Africa where the ratio of the traditional healers to population is 1:500, a complete contrast to that of medical doctors to population, that is, 1:40 000 (WHO, 2015).
Affordability should be understood in the context of the policy terrain of most African countries. Poverty in most African countries, in Malawi, for example, is scandalously high. According to the World Bank Malawi Country Environmental Analysis (2019), Malawi is ranked 170 of 188 countries on the global United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Human Development Index (p. 4). The Analysis adds that 70% of the population lives below the international poverty line of USD 190 per capita per day. Citing the Global Hunger Index―Getting to Zero Hunger by the Concern Worldwide US 2016, the Analysis further says “about 20.7% of the people are so poor that they cannot afford to eat a minimum daily recommended food intake, and at least 37% of children under five are chronically undernourished and stunted (low weight for age)” (p. 4). A solution to such a population should therefore be handy, affordable, and assured.
It is also said that “most of the substances used in natural medicine have no damaging side effects, while most chemical medicines have some degree of harmful side effects (though) it is fair to say that some natural products used without proper wisdom can still create harm” (Morse, 2012, p. 17). Perhaps, this is the reason, Davies (2003), proffers the following caution: “In many cases small quantities of herbs are therapeutic, given at the correct dose and in correct proportion of herb within a formula. In larger doses, they are often highly dangerous” (p. xi). Abbott (2014) citing the WHO (2003) waves a similar cautionary flag, observing that “inappropriate use of traditional medicines or practices can have negative or dangerous effects”. The WHO, however, proffers a way forward on this when it notes the need for “further research to ascertain the[ir] efficacy and safety”. In the same vein, African Governments can embark on robust in research on these areas rather than leaving it in the hands of chance or of people who rely on guesswork to arrive at answers.
There also is something special with herbal medicine, as it links us with our environment, enabling us to tap from the genius of nature. They seem to do just about everything from normalising physiological functions gone awry to restoring weakened immunity, settling a turbulent mind and promoting detoxification and rejuvenation (Simon & Chopra, 2000, p. 10). In this way, they proffer a marvelous complement or alternative to conventional medicines.
Herbal medicines could also help protect Africa from some problems associated with laps in the supply chain of the conventional drugs. It should be mentioned that one major problem with pharmaceuticals arises from its voluminous net of its long supply chain. Often, this becomes a perfect habitat for crooks who manufacture and sell counterfeit drugs. According to documented evidence, the extent of this problem is mind-boggling.
According to Aminu, Sha’aban, Abubakar and Gwarzo (2017), the global market for substandard and falsified medicines or simply, counterfeit drugs, hits somewhere US200 billion. The four authors add that up to 70% of the drugs in circulation in some countries in Africa could be counterfeits. Their reasoning is that the recent expansions in industrialisation and trade could offer an answer for the increase in counterfeit drugs. Granted, if anyone would look at the investment figures in research for vaccine and treatment for Covid-19, it would give a picture of what Africa should expect at the end of the day. Thus, besides the problem of accessing such drugs will be the vice of unscrupulous manufacturers who would find a desperate Africa a lucrative market terrain for fake drugs.
Since most drugs will be produced outside Africa, monitoring gaps will hit us hard. In other words, if most such drugs were to be manufactured right within Africa, the problem could have been minimised or cut altogether since monitoring could have been at arm’s length. As things are, we can never tell what happens in those factories outside Africa.
These problems should persuade Africa to resort to that which naturally works better for her. Remember that the patent system was not originally made for Africa. Traditional medicine thus could offer some alternative.
I am not at all against giant pharmaceutical companies recouping their investment by tying their products to patents. As far as I am concerned, this is expected although the question of public interest should persuade them to relax some approaches in the context of the magnitude of problem at hand.
I am conscious to the fact that the patent system allows countries to manufacture such drugs through what are known as compulsory licences, but there are conditions for this, hence the dilemma remains. For example, this can only happen where the giant pharmaceutical company is deliberately starving some parts of the drugs for reasons outside money. This is an impossible prospect, since these drugs will be available but perhaps unaffordable by poor African countries. And even if African countries would push for compulsory licences, do they have the capacity and resources for that? Not at all.
Along this reasoning, some critics have argued that, unlike traditional knowledge which encourages cooperative communalism as the resources belong to all in the community, the patent system encourages competitive individualism (Mawere, 2015). I find such assertions rather strong though I share the idea that products such as herbal medicine or products therefrom could generally cost less to meet this underlying concept―cooperative communalism.
Research and investments in herbal medicine would thus save Africa by ensuring she does what is good for her poor population right within her borders. After all, “many of the prescription medications used today are derived from plants” (Torkos, 2008, p. 1). In fact, the World Health Organization itself (see WHO Global Report on Traditional and Complementary Medicine 2019) considers traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) “an important and often underestimated health resource with many applications, especially in the prevention and management of lifestyle-related chronic diseases, and in meeting the health needs of ageing populations” (p. 5). The WHO thus reports that, by 2018, 98 Member States had developed national policies on T&CM, 109 had launched national laws or regulations on T&CM, and 124 had implemented regulations on herbal medicines. What are African scientists and health researchers and policymakers waiting for? Well, in Africa, we tend to wait for the load to hit in order to spur us into some action. It is a sign that our laws lack anticipation, just as our policies lack the element of strategic intelligence.
Investing in traditional and complementary medicine could also serve Africa in the context of increasing biopiracy. According to Fong and Wung (2015), traditional medicine caught the attention of most researchers in the 1990s with the birth of “bio-prospecting”, that is, “the notion that there are countless active compounds in nature that may prove to be solutions to key challenges affecting modern living (especially in) healthcare” (p. 329).
Controversies over patents made from traditional knowledge resources from Africa are well serialized. Butera (2019), for example, writes about the katempfe and serendipity berries from Africa. According to Butera, the sweetening properties in these berries have been in use by the peoples of Africa generations long ago yet the University of California and Lucky Biotech, a Japanese firm, were granted a patent of the sweetening proteins from these African plants with no attempts whatsoever to share the benefits accrued therefrom with the custodians of these traditional knowledge resources.
Butera (2019) gives another example, namely the granting of patent to Eli Lilly, a pharmaceutical company, on vincristine and vinblastine. These important drugs are derived from rosy periwinkle, a flower that grows traditionally in Madagascar. Butera laments that no benefits from these patented drugs has been shared with the local communities of Madagascar.
Similarly, Bayer, a German pharmaceutical company, is said to have manufactured Glucobay (acarbose), a drug for diabetes, from bacteria harvested from Lake Ruiru in Central Kenya. According to Butera, there has never been any evidence that proceeds from this venture were shared with the Kenyan local communities or the Government of Kenya itself.
All these things happen despite the fact that there is the 1992 Convention on Biodiversity, (which came into force on December 29, 1993), and its supplement―the 2010 Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit Sharing, which entered into force on October 12, 2014. This has also led to further complications where some critics have questioned the patentability of genes. According to Curci (2010), such critics have argued that seeking protection on genes has “reduced the world’s genetic resources (GRs) down to mere property rights, resulting in corporate control over access to food, medicinal technology, and other resources essential to mankind’s health and welfare” (p. 3). This position receives a lot of attention perhaps because protection of such resources is not clear-cut.
In Africa, under the Swakopmund Protocol on the Protection of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Folklore, the African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation (ARIPO) has been given the right legal and policy muscle to protect holders of traditional knowledge against infringement of their rights as well as protecting expressions of folklore against misappropriation, misuse and unlawful exploitation. Malawi is among the 8 contracting states of this Protocol. This Protocol entered into force on May 11, 2015 (See “What is traditional knowledge?” on www.aripo.org). Despite all these encouraging efforts, there is little for most countries to show for it, as the majority of them operate on archaic laws and show little interest in investing in IP.
Thus, instead of making use of the Swakopmund Protocol to develop robust laws and policies on traditional knowledge, they wait upon policy chance. The Swakopmund Protocol proffers an important starting point although it does not address everything since it does not address IP issues pertaining to access to and sustainable use of genetic resources as this is perceived to be an area beyond IP protection hence requires a holistic approach that takes into account environmental issues as stipulated in the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (Culture in Development, 2011, available at www.cultureindevelopment.nl/news/Heritage).
I am not merely advocating documenting of available traditional resources. For me, research that goes beyond merely codification of traditional herbs could serve Africa a great deal as far as issues of availability of medicines and sharing of proceeds from IP derived from her traditional knowledge resources are concerned.
Why waiting upon the West on Covid-19 is a bad leisure
The mantra “African crisis requires African solutions” has become insipid in the context of scanty news on research on emerging problems facing Africa. This is mostly because we always rely on ready-packaged answers from the West for our problems. This is not wrong since adoption of policy solutions from elsewhere is one way experts use to enrich efforts to solve local problems. However, it must be pointed out that, “while these policies may have effectively addressed challenges in the contexts in which they were formulated, success in other (different) contexts is not guaranteed” (Warira, Mueni, Gay, & Lee, 2017, p. 384).
According to the pharmaceutical giant, GlaxoSmithKline, as of April, 2011, the average cost of market entry of a “pharmaceutical product was estimated by Tufts University to be $1.2 billion, including the costs of failure, and only one in three drugs which are brought to market is profitable.” This entails that research, design and development of pharmaceutical products is hugely demanding in terms of investment for research laboratories, trials and even to cater for failure. This means that the majority of African countries are not intellectually and economically equipped to meet the strenuous demands required in the development and monitoring of pharmaceutical products. Since “traditional medicines have the benefit of substantial prior clinical use as well as stronger cultural associations” (Abbott, 2014, p. 4), they could offer the developing world some starting point especially on prevention and wellness and even assuaging pain.
The advent of coronavirus disease has put systems and states on a test, and each one of them has been found wanting. Today, even those countries we all have looked to for progress, look beaten themselves. Everything we see around us seems to stand on some feet of clay. As I write this, the President of the United States, Donald Trump, has announced his country is halting funding to the World Health Organization because the UN body had not acted with vigilance when the pandemic arrived. So, waiting with a bowl in hand does not promise much for African countries.
Second, all the research the West is carrying out on Covid-19 means that there should be a mechanism to compensate them. This is not wrong, because Intellectual Property ensures that those who invest or use their brains to produce something that solves our technical problems be compensated duly so as to encourage them to continue with more such good works―incentive, or to appreciate for the energy and time spent―reward. However, the system of patent will make it so hard for African countries to use drugs or inventions from such research. This is because almost all African countries will come out so bruised, the capacity with which to meet this demand will be almost zero.
Ways through which Africa can utilise Traditional Medicine at this hour
Our forefathers or simply our ancestors lived in a world without conventional medicine (by this I am not suggesting conventional medicines are not important). They relied wholly on traditional medicine. If their knowledge can be subjected to true conventional research, we can document or produce important ingredients that can help assuage the pain of this disease. I stress that this should not mean that people should go out and experiment on traditional medicine on their own. What I am suggesting is that Government should put in place a mechanism through which research can be done on herbs or roots or foods our parents had used when faced with ailments carrying similar symptoms as the disease at hand.
Such research could also consider gathering formal data that could help inform our formal decision making on this problem. For example, interest on patterns of flashpoint (areas) and possible explanations. I could perhaps ask such questions as: (1) Where are more people taken ill, and what could be the possible explanation, and surefire ways to address it?; (2) Could some local environments or conditions be said to be helping reduce, exacerbate or aggravate the situation?; (3) On which days (cold days, rainy days, dusty days, days associated with some occasions, etc. are the numbers rising most?; (4) Knowing that some people live in cluttered homes, huts, etc, what could be the best advice to them (based on their context) to keep the spread to a minimum or cut it altogether?; (5) What local remedies are those in deep villages employing, and are such approaches contributing to something positive at all?; (6) What form of ventilation should be encouraged and why? (7) What type of food should we encourage the people to eat at the moment?; (8) What is being the visible advantage in prevention among those who take recommended glasses of water and on a health regime of exercises in our local context, and so, which should we recommend to the people, and how? (9) In our contexts, who are mostly falling seriously ill, and how can we use this knowledge to avoid more deaths?; (10) What are the most practical preventive measures in our settings (knowing we have urban dwellers, and villagers)? (11) What message should we send to which segment of society―should specific set of messages target specific segment of audience?; (12) What role should those who have something play at this hour to assuage the pain in others (remember, communalism is a component of traditional knowledge)?; (13) Knowing that we have very poor people in our villages who never even manage a tablet of soap, what traditional, natural cleansing material can research offer them in lieu of soap?; (14) How can we take advantage of traditional knowledge to convince our highly superstitious villagers that COVID-19 has nothing to do with witchcraft, that those dying of it have not been bewitched by some elderly scapegoat?; (15) What should debate on COVID-19 in the media incorporate, and why? (16) How are the people dealing with the issue of apprehension or anxiety, and how best should we approach this issue?
Asking questions based on our local context to get the better of a situation is a component of Traditional Knowledge, that is, the prevention facet.
Conclusion
The advent of Covid-19, as an example of a wicked or mind-boggling problem, must challenge Africa to invest seriously in robust local innovations or solutions. Use of herbal medicine as a component of Traditional Knowledge offers a feasible option. Africa can back herbal medicine with scientific findings and use it as a complementary route to conventional medicine. The advantage with this is that a lot of research on the therapeutic nature and, in some cases, the known efficacy of some herbal medicine, has already been done. Eventually, Africa itself can begin to patent medicinal products obtained from this noble endeavour. Imagine through such endeavours Malawi arrives at some wonderful traditional medicine, one whose efficacy is eventually proven by the laboratory world in the West! We could turn ourselves the richest nation on earth. Intellectual Property makes people dream this much. Through such dreams, they invent, innovate and create to arrive at great solutions, changing the course of history. We must never fold our arms waiting for the West always.
References
Abbott, R. (2014). Documenting traditional knowledge. World Intellectual Property Organization.
Aminu, N., Sha’aban, A., Abubakar, A., & Gwarzo, M.S. (2017). Unveiling the peril of substandard and falsified medicines to public health and safety in Africa: Need for all-out-war to end the menace. MA@POC, 1(1), e145-e154. Open Access. Wichtig International.
Bainbridge, D.I. (2009). Intellectual property, 7th ed. Harlow: Pearson Longman.
Bently, L., & Sherman, B. (2009). Intellectual property law, 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bouchoux, D.E. (2013). Intellectual property: The law of trademarks, copyrights, patents and trade secrets, 4th ed.. New York, Delmar: Cengage Learning.
Butera, M.B. (2019). African traditional knowledge and expressions of folklore: Rethinking Swakopmund Protocol as a model law and sui genesis system. Posted Tuesday, September 3, 2019. Strathmore Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Technology Law (CIPIT) Blog. https://blog.cipit.org/2019/09/03/african-traditional-knowledge
Cavalli, M. (2013). Reversing disease naturally: Natural non-toxic remedies and forbidden cures they do not want you to know about. Rossendale Books. www.rossendallebooks.co.uk
Chevallier, A. (2016). Encyclopedia of herbal medicine, 3rd ed. New York: DK Publishing.
Culture in Development (2011). Article on “Swakopmund Protocol on the Protection of Traditional Knowledge and Expressions of Folklore”. Posted February 27, 2011. Available at www.cultureindevelopment.nl/news/Heritage
Curci, J. (2010). The protection of biodiversity and traditional knowledge in international law of intellectual property. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davies, J.R. (2003). The complete home guide to herbs: natural healing and nutrition. Crossing Press.
Fung, H., & Wong, C. (2015). Exploring the modernization process of the traditional medicine: A Triple Helix perspective with insights from publication and trademark statistics. Social Science Information, 54(3). 327-353. Retrieved April 9, 2020 from https://www.sagepub.com doi:10.1177/0539018415577504
GlaxoSmithKline. (2011). Global public policy issues: GlaxoSmithKline’s position. GlaxoSmithKline Government Affairs, Public Policy and Patient Advocacy.
Gregg, S. (2014). Complete illustrated encyclopedia of magical plants: A practical guide to creating healing, protection, and prosperity using plants, herbs and flowers. Beverly, MA: Fair Winds Press.
Health Action International (2016). Policy options for promoting the use of generic medicines in low- and middle-income countries. A Report by Kaplan, W., Wirtz, V., Ewen, M., Vogler, S., & Laing, R. Licence: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by-nc/4.0/
Hewson, M.G. (2015). Embracing indigenous knowledge in science and medical teaching. Cultural Studies of Science Education 10. Heidelberg: Springer.
Hoffman, M., & Metcalf, E. (2014). Reader’s Digest 1,801 home remedies. South Broadway: The Reader’s Digest Association, Inc.
Intellectual property global economy (u.d.). pp. 143-170. The Institute for International Economics. Available at http://www.iee.com
Iwu, M.M. (2014). Handbook of African medicinal plants, 2nd ed. Boca Raton: CRC Press, Francis & Taylor Group.
Johnson, S. (2010). Where good ideas come from: The natural history of innovation. New York: Riverhead Books.
Landes, W.M., & Posner, R.A. (2003). The economic structure of intellectual property law. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Lwanda, J. (2005). Politics, culture and medicine in Malawi. Kachere Theses no. 6. Zomba: Kachere Series.
Mahomoodally, M.F. (2013). Traditional medicines in Africa: An appraisal of ten potent African medicinal plants. Article review. Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine. 1-11. Retrieved April 17, 2020 from http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/617459 Hindawi Publishing Corporation.
Masango, C.A. (2019). Indigenous knowledge codification of African traditional medicine: Inhibited by status quo based on secrecy? Information Development. 1-12. https://doi:10.1177/0266666919853007
Maskus, K.E. (2000). Intellectual property rights in the global economy. Washington DC.: Institute for International Economics.
Mawere, M. (2015). Indigenous knowledge and public education in Sub-Saharan Africa. Africa Spectrum, 50(2), 57-71. Retrieved April 9, 2020 from https://www.africa-spectrum.org
Morse, R. (2012). The detox miracle sourcebook: Raw foods and herbs that complete cellular regeneration. Prescott, Arizona: One World Press.
Ozioma, E.J., & Chinwe, O.A.N. (2019). Herbal medicines in African traditional medicines. Book Chapter. Retrieved April 9, 2020 from http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.80348
Padmasiri, G.R. (2018). Management of indigenous knowledge in Sri Lanka, with special reference to indigenous medicine. Information Development, 34(5). 475-488. Retrieved April 9, 2020 from https://www.journals.sagepub.com
Prabhala, A., & t’Hoen, E. (2020). Opinion. We’ll find a treatment for coronavirus―but drug companies will decide who gets it. Posted Wednesday, 15 April, 2020, 07:55 EDT. Retrieved Wednesday April 15, 2020 from www.theguradian.com
Sanders, A.K., & Pugatch. M.P. (2015). Europe’s capacity for innovation. In A. Jolly (Ed.). The handbook of European intellectual property management: Developing, managing and protecting your company’s intellectual property, 4th ed, pp 3-10. London: KoganPage.
Simon, D., & Chopra, D. (2000). The Chopra Center herbal handbook: Natural prescriptions for perfect health. New York: Three Rivers Press.
Torkos, S. (2008). The Canadian encyclopedia of natural medicine. John Wiley & Sons Canada Ltd.
Wambebe, C. (ed.). (2018). African indigenous medical knowledge and human health: Research development and delivery. Boca Raton: CRC Group, Taylor & Francis Group.
Warira, D., Mueni, E., Gay, E., & Lee, M. (2017) Achieving and sustaining evidence-informed policy making: Effective communication and collaboration can go a long way. Science Communication 39(3), pp. 382-394. Retrieved from https://www.journals.sagepub.com/home/scx doi : 10.1177/1075547017710243
What is traditional knowledge? Available at www.aripo.org
World Bank (2019). Malawi Country Environmental Analysis (2019). Report No. AUS0000489. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.
World Health Organisation (2015). WHO traditional medicine strategy 2014-2013. A presentation by Dr Zhang Qi. Global health history seminar on traditional medicine and Ayurveda. WHO-HQ, Geneva, March 19, 2015.
World Health Organization (2019). WHO global report on traditional and complementary medicine. Geneva World Health Organization. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO
No comments:
Post a Comment