Abstract
Until recently, local innovation capacity and management practices and institutions developed by local communities through their traditional knowledge have received little attention. This chapter illustrates not only the results of scientific research into innovation systems but also on how local communities, through their participation with GMCL in a network of supportive partnerships, can draw knowledge for others and combine this with their own and generate innovations in their local practices. In this chapter we refer to the concept of “capacity” as capacity to use the traditional ethnomedicine knowledge in a way that it enhances socio-economic development of local communities. We define this new concept of capacity with the term “ethnomedicine capacity”. The innovation that we shall describe in the chapter consists in the capacity of local stakeholders to use the traditional knowledge, and in particular ethnomedicine, in a way to boost income generation, local health practices and environmental conservation. We shall define the innovative processes through which this capacity is created and reinforced as a “capacity development” process.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
In the neoclassical economics tradition, innovation is understood to be induced by the relative scarcity (hence, price) of factors. It follows that there is a lineal input/output relationship between agricultural research, development of technology and its dissemination, and at the end, adoption by farmers leading to economic and social effects and impacts. This paradigm of lineal knowledge diffusion has been criticized for its failure to understand the source, nature, and dynamics of most innovations processes, in particular, in the context of developing countries, as well as for failing to pay sufficient attention to the distributional or equity issues related to innovation.
- 2.
This initiative has resulted in the setting up of a network of 55 Medicinal Plant Conservation Areas (MPCA) across different forest types and altitude zones in these five states of peninsular India. The most important purpose of this network of MPCAs is that it serves as the gene bank of medicinal plant resources of the region. The network of MPCAs captures the inter and intra specific medicinal plant diversity of peninsular India. The MPCAs capture around 2,000 medicinal plant species, which represent 50% of the medicinal plant diversity of the five states, and significantly includes over 75% of the RED Listed Species of these states. For all the MPCA sites, detailed floristic studies on medicinal plant diversity, including the threatened, traded, and endemic plants, have been undertaken.
- 3.
In herbal medicine, standardization refers to providing processed plant material that meets a specified concentration of a specific “marker” (that is to say a substance used as an indicator of a biologic state) constituent.
- 4.
Sevayoor in Tamil means ‘Place of Service.’ This place was named such, also because of the long-standing inspiration of the founding team of the CCD to build a rural community centre, where local resources and traditional skills will give the solutions to all the needs of the community, as well as the neighbourhood.
- 5.
In Tamil culture, the Adi Perukku day is especially significant for farming communities. On this day, starts the entire process of preparing the soil for ploughing and sowing, amidst fervent prayer and celebrations. Adi is the Tamil Month, and Perukku means to increase or proliferate. Ventures started on this day are said to prosper. Hence, it was decided that the annual Kalasam fest would also be held on this day.
- 6.
Each Kalasam group has not more than 20 members and elects 2 leaders. Every village can host different Kalasams according to the numbers of villagers who wish to be involved.
- 7.
The cluster is the next outer circle to the Kalasam group in the Mahakalasam structure. The representatives from the Kalasam groups join together to form the cluster level consultative committee. Around 25 Kalasam groups come together to form the cluster at the parent-village level. The cluster level consultative committee is the intermediary entity and maintains the communication between the Mahakalasam (Planning), and the Kalasam groups (Execution).
- 8.
The Federation is the outer-most entity of the Mahakalasam structure and maintaining most of the communication with external entities like individuals, banks, NGOs and other external organizations. Five clusters have come together to form a Mahakalasam Federation.
References
Ahuja, G. (2000). The duality of collaboration: inducements and opportunities in the formation of interfirm linkages. Strategic Management Journal, 21(3), 317–343.
Aspin, D. N., & Chapman, J. D. (2000). Lifelong learning: concepts and conceptions. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 19(1), 2–19.
Bourdieu, P. (1997). What makes a social class? On the theoretical and practical existence of groups. Berkeley Journal of Sociology, 3(2), 1–17.
Castells, M. (2000). The rise of the network society (2nd ed.). Malden: Blackwell.
Clark, N. G. (1990). Development policy, technology assessment and the new technologies. Futures, 2(5), 913–931.
Clark, N. G. (1995). The interactive nature of knowledge systems: some implications for the third world. Science and Public Policy, 22, 319–331.
Clark, N. G. (2002). Innovation systems, technology assessment and the new knowledge market: implications for Third World development. Journal of the Economics of Innovation and New Technologies, 11, 353–368.
Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. The American Journal of Sociology, 9(4), 95–120.
Cooke, P., & Wills, D. (1999). Small firms, social capital and the enhancement of business performance through innovation programmes. Small Business Economics, 13(3), 219–234.
Cousins, B. J., & Earl, L. M. (1992). The case for participatory evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1(4), 397–418.
Duncan, P., & Thomas, S. (2000). Neighbourhood regeneration: resourcing community involvement. Bristol: Policy Press/Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Easterby-Smith, M., Burgoyne, J., & Araujo, L. (1999). Organizational learning and the learning organization, Development in theory and practice. London: Sage.
Edquist, C. (2001). Innovation policy: a systemic approach. In D. Archibugi & B. A. Lundvall (Eds.), The globalizing learning economy (pp. 219–237). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ekboir, J., & Parellada, G. (2002). Public-private interactions and technology policy in innovation processes for zero tillage in Argentina. In D. Byerleee & R. G. Echeverria (Eds.), Agricultural research policy in an era of privatization (pp. 137–154). Wallingford: CABI Publishing.
Fowler, A. (1997). Striking a balance. London: Earthscan.
Hall, A., & Clark, N. (1995). Coping with change, complexity and diversity in agriculture: the case of rhizobium inoculants in Thailand. World Development, 23(9), 1601–1614.
Hall, A., Bockett, G., Taylor, S., Sivamohan, M. V. K., & Clark, N. (2001). Why research partnerships really matter: innovation theory, institutional arrangements and implications for developing new technologies for the poor. World Development, 29(5), 783–797.
Hall, A., Sulaiman, R., Clark, N., Sivamohan, M. V. K., & Yoganand, B. (2002). Public-private sector interaction in the Indian agricultural research systems: an innovation systems perspective of institutional reform. In D. Byerleee & R. G. Echeverria (Eds.), Agricultural research policy in an era of privatization (pp. 155–176). Wallingford: CABI Publishing.
Luloff, A. E., & Swanson, L. (1995). Community agency and disaffection: enhancing collective resources. In L. Beaulieu & D. Mulkey (Eds.), Boulder investing in people: the human capital needs of rural America (pp. 351–372). Boulder: Westview Press.
Lusthaus, C., Adrien, M. H., & Perstinger, M. (1999). Enhancing organizational performance. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.
Ma, Z. (2002). Social capital mobilization and income returns to entrepreneurship: the case of return migration in rural China. Environment and Planning, 3(4), 1763–1784.
Morris, M. H. (2000). The power of ethnic entrepreneurship. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 5(2), 12–27.
Mueller, S. L., & Thomas, A. S. (2001). Culture and entrepreneurial potential: a nine country study of locus of control and innovativeness. Journal of Business Venturing, 1(6), 51–75.
Narayan-Parker, D. (2000). Voices of the poor: can anyone hear us? New York: World Bank, Oxford University.
Oyelaran-Oyeyinka, B. (2005). Systems of innovation and underdevelopment: an institutional perspective. UNI-INTECH Discussion Paper no. 2005-1, Maastricht, United Nations University, Institute for New Technologies
Pant, M. (2000). Intra-household allocations patterns: a study in female autonomy. Indian Journal of Gender Studies, 7(1), 93–100.
Peterson, R. (1988). Understanding and encouraging entrepreneurship internationally. Journal of Small Business Management, 26(2), 1–8.
Pushpangadan, P. (2002). Traditional knowledge and folklore – a benefit sharing model experimental in India. Conference organized by the Commission on Intellectual Property Rights at London, 21–22 Feb
Putnam, R. D., Leonardi, R., & Nanetti, R. Y. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2001). Handbook of action research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G., & Smith, B. (1999). The dance of change: the challenges to sustaining momentum in learning organizations. New York: Doubleday.
Spielman, D.J. (2005). Innovation systems perspectives on developing-country agriculture: A critical review. ISNAR Discussion Paper 2, Washington: IFPRI
UNDP. (1996). Capacity assessment and development. New York: UNDP.
Wilkinson, K. P. (1991). The community in rural America. New York: Greenwood Press.
Zeigler, D., Brunn, S., & Johnson, J. (1996). Focusing on Hurricane Andrew through the eyes of the victims. Area, 28(2), 124–129.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Torri, M.C., Herrmann, T.M. (2011). Ethnomedicine, Capacity Development, and Innovation System Through GMCL. In: Bridges Between Tradition and Innovation in Ethnomedicine. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1113-6_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1113-6_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-1112-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-1113-6
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)