4. The Potato Park Inter-Community Agreement
for Benefit Sharing
As discussed in the previous section, one of the main means by which the Potato Park has strengthened
customary norms and traditional institutions, both in their relationships with external partners and internally, is
through the development of an inter-community agreement for equitable benefit sharing.
The Inter-community Agreement is a broad outline for benefit sharing that includes all benefits received by the
Potato Park, directly or indirectly derived from its biocultural resources. It is an innovative document, as it is
based primarily on customary norms and practices identified by the communities. It reveals the true nature of
these norms, which are not static, but constantly adapt to the changing environment (as do the components
of a biocultural system). As such, these norms are able to respond to new situations, like those related to
access to genetic resources under international frameworks, and to incorporate and adapt, when necessary,
the principles, norms and tools of national and international legislation. Additionally, the Agreement provides
a mechanism to protect and preserve traditional knowledge associated with biological resources and to
strengthen the cultural identity of the communities.
4.1 Methodological approach for developing the agreement
Research carried out by the Potato Park communities, with the support of ANDES and IIED as key partners,
concluded that, in order to ensure the effectiveness of resource-use and TK agreements, ‘bottom-up’ benefit
sharing mechanisms are required. Such mechanisms are also conducive to efforts aimed at the alleviation
of poverty, and are effective in providing protection against future impoverishment. ‘Bottom-up’ approaches,
by facilitating the generation and distribution of benefits in a fair and equitable way, resonate with local
expectations, community needs, traditional values, and customary practices. To this end, a number of guiding
principles that constitute the basis of the customary legal and institutional system of the communities were
identified. In the case of the Quechua communities of the Potato Park, these benefit sharing mechanisms
are based on customary norms that guide traditional practices of reciprocity and allow for income equality
and redistribution of wealth among the communities. These principles have been essential in maintaining
the Quechua economy, but are also central to defining rules of justice and to regulating new benefit sharing
situations, particularly in the context of multi-community arrangements. In order to develop the Intercommunity Agreement for Benefit Sharing, it was necessary to identify these norms but to also, working
with the communities, see which norms were relevant to regulating the benefits associated with biocultural
systems, and identify new mechanisms that needed to be incorporated.
The first step was determining the methodology. Defining and implementing a methodological framework
constituted a major challenge due to the lack of previous experiences from which lessons could be drawn,
and the great variability of the contexts and situations related to access to collective biocultural heritage
and specific issues related to genetic resources and traditional knowledge. One of the biggest hurdles was
designing a participatory process that was culturally sensitive and, at the same time, could combine Western
and Indigenous tools and involvement. Another obstacle was articulating the results of the research in a
concrete way that could respond to the specific needs of the communities, while also contributing to achieving
cultural and environmentally sound development beneficial to the communities, their environment, and their
livelihoods. Finally, linking written national laws with the oral systems of Andean society proved to be a
difficulty in and of itself.
The participatory methodology sought to address these challenges. The ultimate approach, designed by
ANDES in collaboration with Indigenous researchers of the Park, was termed an ‘emancipatory methodology,’
because not only did it involve Indigenous researchers in its design, but its implementation was also led by
the communities of the Park and included the use of Indigenous methods and technologies, combined with
contemporary or mainstream participatory investigation methods. The Indigenous methods employed included:
the use of myths, prophecies, and drawings; as well as several culturally-attuned courses of action, such as
research work, horizontal training, Indigenous-based education, and strengthening of local governance. The
research questions were addressed in local study groups facilitated by community technicians.
Community Biocultural Protocols
7