final project
TRANSCRIPT
INTRODUCTION
Pain and physical sufferings are as old as life. Living beings undergo the wear and tear due to the
harsh aspects of the surroundings. But with the convergent evolution of many species together,
they learnt to remove their ailments with the help of the other species. With time, man learned
the healing potential of the plants and brought them to his use. This practice evolved into various
systems of medicines. With villages and cities going farther from the forests, home of the wild
herbs, collection and transportation of medicinal plants became a paid job. As civilisations
developed and progessed, the trade of medicinal and aromatic plants evolved. Even today, the
task of trading crude drugs is multifarious. It includes collection, grading, transportation and
distribution1.
Medicinal plants are the richest bio-resource of drugs for traditional systems
of medicine, modern medicines, nutraceuticals, food supplements, folk
medicines, pharmaceutical intermediates and chemical entities for synthetic
drugs. Aromatic plants are a source of fragrances, flavors, cosmeceuticals,
health beverages and chemical terpenes.
Evolving Trends In Utilization Of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants
The beneficial effects of the medicinal plants in health care can be well judged from the WHO
estimate that around 80% of the world population uses them in some form or the other2. The
people using them are mostly those living in the remote or marginal areas and rural and
indigenous people who depend heavily on the natural resources of their surrounding environment
for their health care needs. These people, over the centuries have developed a wealth of
knowledge about the ecology, botany and uses of the diverse medicinal flora of their region. This
has given rise to the thriving traditional systems of medicine, specifically in Asia and Europe.
These are extensively practised in India as Ayurveda, Unani, Siddha and Tibetan systems. The
Chinese system of traditional medicine is the predominant system of healthcare in China, Japan
and Vietnam. The European countries of Germany, France, Spain, Italy, United Kingdom and
Bulgaria have their own traditional systems of medicine that are very much in use in these
1
countries. In addition, Africa and the South American countries like Brazil also have their own
traditional medicines to cater to the requirements of their people. The drugs are administered by
the practitioners or healers who have the ancient knowledge of the plants and the formulations.
The practitioner formulates the drugs from a single plant or a mixture of several plants using a
specific method and time of:
1. Collection of plant/plant parts
2. Preparation of drug
3. Administration of the drug
The efficacy of the drug depends upon the above crucial factors.
It is important to note that Homeopathy and modern medicine have their roots in medicinal
plants. The compounds derived from medicinal plants form the ingredients of analgesics,
antibiotics, heart drugs, laxatives, anti-cancer agents, ulcer treatments, contraceptives,
decongestants, hormones, diuretics and anti-parasitic drugs among others. Thus, the myriad uses
of medicinal plants in the traditional and modern medicines ensure that their importance cannot
be ignored. The importance accredited to them is reflected in the recent upsurge in the demand
for herbal remedies in the international market. This is partly fuelled by the recognition of plant-
based drugs in the policies of United States and UK. These countries have set up National
Institutes and departments of complementary and alternative medicines (CAM) that are
investigating the scientific basis of the efficacy of traditional medicines.
Senna used in various marketed formulations SAFI- A Unani medicine
2
In the past decade, following change in the trends of utilization of MAPs have been observed:
Increased Use of Traditional Medicines as a means of Health Care:
The medicinal plants form the basis of the traditional systems of medicine. Ayurveda, Siddha &
Unani medicines are based mainly on plants, widely used in India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan
& Srilanka3. As already stated, the World Health Organisation (WHO) estimated that 80% of the
population of developing countries relies on traditional medicines, mostly plant drugs, for their
primary health care needs. Also, modern pharmacopoeias still contain at least 25% drugs derived
from plants and many others which are synthetic analogues built on prototype compounds
isolated from plants. Demand for medicinal plant is increasing in both developing and developed
countries due to growing recognition of natural products, being non-narcotic, having no side-
effects, easily available at affordable prices and sometime the only source of health care
available to the poor. Medicinal plant sector has traditionally occupied an important position in
the socio cultural, spiritual and medicinal arena of rural and tribal lives of India.
The number of plant species used in different systems of medicine
0500
100015002000250030003500400045005000
Systems of Medicine
No
. of p
lan
t sp
ecie
s
Graph showing the number of plant species used in the practise of different systems of medicines.
3
As per an estimate of 2002, demand of medicinal raw drugs in the country is 2.72 lakh tons as
against supply of 1.20 tons9. The top ranking medicinal plants, in terms of their demand status
are as under:
Introduction of different products in Consumer Market
Nutraceuticals4- A nutraceutical is a food with a medical-health benefit, including the
prevention and treatment of disease. Such foods also commonly are referred to as
functional foods, signifying they and/or their components may provide a health benefit
beyond basic nutrition. Examples include fruits and vegetables as well as fortified or
enhanced foods. While all foods are functional in that they provide nutrients,
nutraceuticals contain health-promoting ingredients or natural components that have a
potential health benefit for the body. “Functional” attributes of many traditional foods are
being discovered, while new food products are being developed with beneficial
4
components. Today, researchers have identified hundreds of compounds with functional
qualities, and they continue to make new discoveries surrounding the complex benefits of
phytochemicals (non-nutritive plant chemicals that have protective or disease preventive
properties) in foods.
Nutraceutical containing the herb Echinaceae
MOST COMMONLY USED NUTRACEUTICALS
Class/Components Source Potential Benefit
Flavonoids
Flavonols Onions, apples, tea, broccoli Neutralize free radicals,
which may damage cells;
bolster cellular antioxidant
defenses
Isothiocyanates
Sulforaphane Cauliflower, broccoli,
cabbage, kale, horseradish
May enhance detoxification
of undesirable compounds
and bolster cellular
antioxidant defenses
Phenols
Caffeic acid, ferulic acid Apples, pears, citrus fruits,
some vegetables
May bolster cellular
antioxidant defenses; may
contribute to maintenance of
vision and heart health
Plant Stanols/Sterols
Stanol/sterol esters Fortified table spreads, stanol May reduce risk of coronary
5
ester dietary supplements heart disease
Polyols
Sugar alcohols (xylitol,
sorbitol, mannitol, lactitol)
Some chewing gums and
other food applications
May reduce risk of dental
caries (cavities)
Prebiotics/Probiotics
Lactobacilli, bifidobacteria Yogurt, other dairy and
nondairy applications
May improve gastrointestinal
health and systematic
immunity
Phytoestrogens
Isoflavones (daidzein,
genistein)
Soybeans and soy-based
foods
May contribute to
maintenance of bone health,
healthy brain and immune
functions; for women,
maintenance of menopausal
health
Soy Protein
Soy protein Soybeans and soy-based
foods
May reduce risk of coronary
heart disease
Sulfides/Thiols
Dithiolthiones Cruciferous vegetables May contribute to
maintenance of healthy
immune function
Organic products5- ‘Organic’ is a relatively new term that has entered the market. Botanical
medicines are perceived by the public as a preferable alternative to extensively prepared or
synthetic medicines, and thus in order both to present a more ‘green’ image and to steal a march
over the competitor, the concept of ‘organic’ production of pharmaceutical raw materials has
undoubtedly become widespread. At government and supra-government level there are in place
regulations on what may be described as organic and many organizations that monitor producers,
traders and manufacturers who handle materials of this description. These products for marketing
must be certified by ECOCERT6 in compliance with US National Organic Standard and
6
equivalence with Regulation (EEC) 2092/91. Certainly, valerian root and senna pods are
amongst those organic pharmaceutical products available. In spices and herbs there has been a
substantial demand for materials that carry this cachet. Following are the ‘organic’ products
which are popular with the customers overseas: Fragrant Mushroom, Black Fungus, Dry
Date, Chinese gooseberry, Chinese Wolfberry, Ginkgo biloba Leaf.
A list7 of marketed ‘organic’ products is under:
Organic fennel seeds Organic Tilia tuan Szysz
Organic star anise Organic Rubus saxatilis L
Organic Cortex eucommiae Organic angelica
Organic oregano Organic milkvetch root
Organic wild mint herb Organic largehead atractylodes
rhizome
Organic chinese magnolia vine Organic common yam rhizome
Organic siberian ginseng Organic radix scutellariae
Organic baikal skullcap root Organic Radix rehmanniae
Organic balloonflower root Organic fleeceflower root
Organic ginkgo leaf Organic Toona sinensis
Organic valeriana rhizome Organic heartleaf houttuynia herb
7
Health Care Products- Products such as tooth paste, hair oils and soaps use medicinal
plants as ingredients. They are incorporated in the products after suitable extraction, For
example amala, peppermint, bhringaraj, lemongrass, Citronella and Zanthoxyllum oils
are used in this purpose.
Product containing Emblica officinalis ‘Infant’s gripe water’- contains anise oil
Aromatherapy- Aromatherapy provides treatment through the stimulation of the sense
of smell using pungent materials. The vital element in his treatment is the essential oil
extracted from the plants. Essential Oils such as Aretemisia, Jatamansi, Sunpati,
Sugandhwal, Juniper and Zanthoxyllum etc.
Herbal Drinks- Natural & health food shops such as herbal teas, medicated drinks,
tonics, etc.
8
Herbal Cosmeceuticals- Certain cosmetics contain plant extracts or aromatic oils known
to have suitable dermatological effects. They contain essential oils as perfumes. For
example, aloe vera is used for its skin moisturizing properties. Ginkgo biloba and
Centella asiatica are used as anti-cellulite products.
Miscellaneous- Various plants possessing either essential oils or have medicinal values
are used for flavouring foods. This is done to enhance the taste of food. For example,
commonly used cooking ingredients are bay leaves, mint, Rosemary, Lemongrass,
Thyme, Basil, etc. Some other food additives include: Juniper berry oil for blending
alcoholic beverage, Chiraita for bitter taste in beverages, etc.
Essentials oils used for a number of purpose are depicted in the figure8 below:
OTC Herbals: Increasing global trend of herbal market9:
Herbals drugs, unless they are adequately standardised in the allopathic way, are almost without
any scope of getting prescribed in the western countries. On the other hand, in the developing as
well as underdeveloped countries, where the norms are not so strict and also the modern system
is yet to completely dominate over the traditional systems, the scope of their marketing is better.
Whenever the global trend of the herbal market is discussed, although in the first place it seems
9
to be concerned about the quantitative increase or decrease in the demand and supply status of
herbal materials; the actual emphasis is on the value of trading. It is in this latter context that the
role of western countries becomes important as the value of trading becomes significantly higher
with respect to the marketing in these countries. The countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America
see greater scope in earning valuable foreign exchange through export of their plant wealth to the
western countries. Although lack of standardisation in the allopathic way creates difficulty for
the herbal drugs in getting a govt nod in the west, the hope lies in the OTCs. OTC or Over the
Counter drugs can be purchased without doctor's prescription, and hence these items have a
comparatively better scope of marketing. Following are some of the top ranking OTCs used in
the west:
World-wide consumption pattern of medicinal plants has noticed some remarkable changes
towards the latter half of the last century, thanks to the highly disturbed and/or artificial lifestyle.
The latest pattern is based on the consumption pertaining to two major categories of end use,
as under:
10
Pharmaceutical Industry & Research:
Plant products in dried form or in the formulation of Ayurvedic medicines are tried in the
pharmaceutical industries for the research purposes with the target to use plant products in the
form of extracts, alkaloids, glycosides in modern medicines. For this, phytochemical screening of
plants for the isolation of new drugs for various diseases is done.
Examples of new drugs isolated from such screenings include Taxol from Taxus baccta,
Valepotriates from Valeriana Spp, Vincristin from Vinca rosea.
Evolving Trends In Trade Of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants
Medicinal and aromatic plants (MAPs) are produced and offered in a wide variety of products,
from crude materials to processed and packaged products like pharmaceuticals, herbal remedies,
11
teas, spirits, cosmetics, sweets, dietary supplements, varnishes and insecticides. The use of
botanical raw material is in many cases much cheaper than using alternative chemical
substances. As a consequence, there is an enormous demand in botanicals – for domestic use and
for commercial trade – resulting in a huge trade on local, regional, national and international
level.
In the past decade, we have seen some of the following revolutions in the
trade practices of medicinal plants:
Value Addition of Crude Drugs to Extracts: Medicinal and aromatic
plants (MAPs) are traded as such in bulk from many developing countries
for further value addition in developed countries. The developing
countries nowadays, carry out the extraction procedures inland before
export. This adds to the value of product which further is benefited in the
forex of the country. The first step in the value addition of MAP
bioresources is the production of herbal drug preparations (i.e. extracts),
using a variety of methods from simple traditional technologies to
advanced extraction techniques. This involves employment of techniques
like maceration, decoction, and steam distillation for essential oils.
Medicinal plants are extracted using suitable techniques. The product so
formed is called a ‘semi-processed product’. The dried and clean plant
material free from foreign organic matter substitutes or adulterants is
powdered and extracted with a suitable solvent like pure ethyl alcohol or
methyl alcohol or solvents diluted with water in a percolator for cold
extraction or in a Soxhlet extractor under reflux for hot extraction. The
extracts are distilled under reduced pressure at low temperatures to
remove the solvent and the concentrated extracts are spray dried. These
extracts can be also standardised to a required strength of the
active/marker compounds. This simple or semi-processing of the
medicinal plant material adds to the value many fold.
12
Advantages of Inland Semi-processing of crude drugs:
Semi-processing is usually beneficial for both the exporting merchants as
well as the importing party. This procedure is usually done near the head-
quarters from where the drug is to be sold to the bigger merchants or
near the ports from where the drug is to be trans-shipped. The major
merit points of the semi-processing are:
It adds to the value of the drug. As compared to the meager labour
that is involved in sorting and grading, the profits incurred in return
to it are higher.
The profit gained in the return of the value-addition is in terms of
foreign currency. Hence it is a way of increasing national forex.
It decreases the bulk of the drug and hence decreases the freight
cost that shall be incurred from the importer and ultimately
affecting the cost of the final product. In case of extracts, since the
active principles of the drug have been isolated as extracts, the
weight of the drug decreases tremendously with the quality
remaining same.
With the development of standardized extracts, the obligation of the
buyer to check the authenticity and quality of the drug decreases.
Since it is the active principle which is of concern and if the label
states the standardized composition of the extract then all what the
buyer must verify is the claim of the company or simply selecting
the products from a reputed company.
13
Collected Drug
Sorting
Grading
Packing into bales or bags
Finished Crude Drug
Collected Drug
Sorting
Grading
Packing into bales or bags
Finished Crude Drug
Figs. Stages of semi-processing of materials
Contractual Farming10: Contract farming is becoming an increasingly important aspect of
agribusiness, whether the products are purchased by multinationals, smaller companies,
government agencies, farmer cooperatives or individual entrepreneurs. As noted above, the
approach would appear to have considerable potential in countries where small-scale
agriculture continues to be widespread, as in many cases small-scale farmers can no longer
be competitive without access to the services provided by contract farming companies. It
must be stressed, however, that the decision to use the contract farming modality must be a
commercial one. It is not a development model to be tried by aid donors, governments or
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) because other rural development approaches have
failed. Projects that are primarily motivated by political and social concerns rather than
economic and technical realities will inevitably fail.
Advantage for Farmers- The prime advantage of a contractual agreement for farmers is that
the sponsor will normally undertake to purchase all produce grown, within specified quality
and quantity parameters. Contracts can also provide farmers with access to a wide range of
14
Collected Drug
Sorting
Grading
Extraction
Semi-processed Product
Standardisation
Collected Drug
Sorting
Grading
Extraction
Semi-processed Product
Standardisation
managerial, technical and extension services that otherwise may be unobtainable. Farmers
can use the contract agreement as collateral to arrange credit with a commercial bank in order
to fund inputs. Thus, the main potential advantages for farmers are:
provision of inputs and production services;
access to credit;
introduction of appropriate technology;
skill transfer;
guaranteed and fixed pricing structures; and
access to reliable markets.
15
Fig. 3: A Contract Farming Framework
16
WHO specifies guidelines on Good Agricultural and Collection Practices (GACP) for
medicinal plants: Traditional medicines, particularly herbal medicines, have been
increasingly used worldwide during the last two decades. Unfortunately, the number of
reports of patients experiencing negative health consequences caused by the use of herbal
medicines has also been increasing. Analysis and studies have revealed a variety of reasons
for such problems. One of the major causes of reported adverse events is directly linked to
the poor quality of herbal medicines, including raw medicinal plant materials. It has therefore
been recognized that insufficient attention has been paid to the quality assurance and control
of herbal medicines. Hence, World Health Organization (WHO) has developed a series of
technical guidelines relating to the quality control of herbal medicines of which these WHO
guidelines on good agricultural and collection practices (GACP) for medicinal plants are the
latest. The guidelines provide a detailed description of the techniques and measures required
for the appropriate cultivation and collection of medicinal plants and for the recording and
documentation of necessary data and information during their processing. It is aimed to "to
provide technical support for development of methodology to monitor or ensure product
safety, efficiency and quality, preparation of guidelines, and promotion of exchange of
information”.
e-Trade5- The pace of trading has increased with the developing
technology. As the demands of world increased, the traders kept the
required pace by trading through the latest technology like fax,
telephonically or internet. Traders have placed their brochures on internet
which makes their reach wider and even allow the buyer to perform a
comprehensive market survey. Just with a single click, one can either
shop for a herbal product or place an order in bulk for a crude drug to be
utilized in his industry.
17
Fig.: Homepage of www.greentrade.net, an online trading site for medicinal
plants
18
Role of Globalisation in Trade of MAPs
Globalisation basically attempts at establishing more or less a uniform order in the world
pertaining to trade and economic activities9. The endeavour to swiftly enforce such a kind of
effort has been facilitated from various directions and in various forms, by some international
agencies like the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. Treaties like the General
Agreement on Trade and Tariff (GATT) have become the legal means though which this is
implemented.
Globalisation has created opportunity for the marketing of several products from the developing
and underdeveloped countries, in the western countries. For instance, China's textile business has
been increased substantially in the international market.
However, the apprehension in the third world countries regarding the consequences of
globalisation is based on the fact that the concept of globalisation was basically put forward by
the rich and developed countries of the west in the interest of their own market economy and
political strategy. Free market and free trade were supposed to be the two key slogans of this
globalisation movement; and the developed countries were supposed to be the major
beneficiaries as they intended to take advantage of the relaxations in the regime of different
developing as well as under-developed countries so as to exploit the markets and resources of
such countries in their interest. In fact, globalisation has been seen and felt as a strategy of
recolonising the third world countries.
Commercialisation and commodification of not only the resources, but also the value systems
related to them, have been the ultimate outcome of globalisation. For instance, the country can
now be ready to sell some of its resources, which were earlier not supposed to be saleable given
their strategic-,socio-cultural-, or any other importance, if an alluring price is offered for the
same. Such a price is normally offered by multinational/trans-national companies (MNCs/TNCs)
as their currency has a greater purchase value than ours.
As regards medicinal plants in particular, the impact was supposed to have all or any of the
following forms:
Increase in export/import of raw drugs
19
Increase in the domestic and international business of traditional medicines manufactured
from the raw drugs.
Significant increase in research on the bio-chemical and clinical performances/properties
of med. plants.
Significant increase in patenting of herbal products.
Boost to the phytochemical industry.
20
Marketing Channels
The flow of marketing of medicinal plants is quite long. The location of the cultivation area is
relatively far from the traditional herbal medicine industries and the farmers' incapability to
perform direct transaction with the parties from the traditional herbal medicine industries make
them run the business with distributors. The farmers of medicinal plants at the research area sell
their products in fresh form to the distributors in the village. The farmers associated in a group –
although the number is not big – sell their products directly to traditional herbal medicine
industries that have already established business partnership with them. Apart from selling their
products to the distributors, the farmers also sell them to traders who prepare their own
composition of herbal medicine. These traders process their own ingredients and prepare them in
the form of powder and sell it to door-to-door herbal medicine sellers.
The marketing channels are widespread nationally as well as internationally. There is a large
network of traders which are latticed by different echelons of traders, collectors and distributors.
These marketing channels can be classified into two types: domestic and international type.
Marketing Channels
Domestic Channels International Channels
Marketing Channels
Domestic Channels International Channels
A. Domestic Channels
As described in an article on trade in Nepal12, MAPs harvested for commercial purpose are
carried away from the villages and district headquarters and are sold to the traders and
middlemen in bigger markets. Currently local collectors bring products harvested from near by
forests and pastures to village level traders and/or district level traders who stockpile the material
and resell it to wholesalers. The wholesalers often place orders for specific products with the
21
local/district traders or come to the areas directly to arrange the purchase of the products. The
wholesalers then supply the products to markets of India. Many buyers are commission agents.
The main demand for medicinal plants comes from big herbal companies and pharmaceutical
concerns. These firms generally buy from traders or middlemen. Wholesalers come from time to
time to trading towns and road heads – the major collection points in the hills. They have
agreements with shopkeepers who, in turn, are in touch with a network of village based traders
and collectors throughout the less accessible parts of the country. Several medicinal plant
wholesalers use the same network of middlemen to buy material and sell on to their contacts in
other countries. The figure below illustrates general market channel for MAPs in Domestic
Market.
22
B. International Channels
In international market MAPs are traded under the “Herbs and Spices” category and they follow
the same trade structure and distribution channels of herbs and spices. Very few dealers and
brokers deal exclusively with medicinal herbs. In recent years direct trade between
producers/exporters in developing countries (mainly medium and large scale) and processors in
consuming countries is increasing. The MAP trade is highly dependent on mutual trust and
confidence between the suppliers and the processors. The major herb processors as well as large
trading companies establish close relationships with their main suppliers through visits and
provide technical assistance services on such matters as harvesting and production. International
marketing functions through four major trading participants: importers, processors, wholesalers,
and retailers. The Figure shows market channels for MAPs in international markets.
23
24
MAP Trade- Global Trade Figures
Global Trade of Medicinal Plants 13
Product: Medicinal plants HS Code: 1211
General Trade: In the period 2001-2009, the reported annual global export of medicinal plants
amounted on average to 575307.8 t valued at US$ 1.4 billion. A main feature of the international
trade is the dominance of only few countries: about 80% of the worldwide imports and exports
are allotted to only 14 countries (above 2%) each, with the temperate Asian and European
countries dominating.
Exports: It is evident that the global trade of medicinal plants has increased tremendously. With
the figure in value as US $ 1.054 billion in 2001, it is nearing to double in 2009 with US $ 1.801
billion in 2009.
EXPORT VALUE- The data below retrieved from www.trademap.org shows the total export
values of the leading exporters of the world.
Table: Export figures in value of medicinal plants from 2001-2010
Exporte
rs2001* 2002* 2003* 2004* 2005* 2006* 2007* 2008* 2009* 2010*
'World
105479
0
106124
7
111175
2
126640
9
131287
1
141884
7
171379
9
184806
9
180111
8 N.A.
'China 199702 215274 225744 263103 286127 326191 418239 449994 476773
62544
2
'USA 78891 74132 78003 96322 88952 93444 113954 85850 125169
14357
2
'German
y 53047 58698 77020 86185 84673 96043 106941 122903 114080 N.A.
'India 78632 68725 64938 61452 76755 84020 113124 130486 106291 N.A.
'Canada 46818 52101 53472 59868 69902 85280 90502 72414 90365
11837
3
'Hong
Kong,
China 127033 125312 92628 108209 85921 73610 67215 73536 71392 N.A.
'Poland 14817 21889 27935 35828 47893 44891 60122 75704 67715 N.A.
25
'Republic
of Korea 47832 21515 32370 55304 45058 50989 54408 58731 67267 80928
'Egypt 17915 18743 23451 63756 51551 N.A.
'France 44023 45202 54515 59935 58408 58342 47962 54004 46481 45677
*Export values in thousand US Dollars
On the export side, China heads the list of the world’s top 12 countries of export with global
share of 26.5% in 2009. It exported annually on average about 192,618 t of medicinal plants in
the period 2001-2010, which is nearly one-fourth of the total global exportation of medicinal
plants. This figure is more than four times as high as the quantities exported from India, and
more than three times as high as those exported from Germany and the USA. Further important
exporters are Canada and Hong Kong. From 2004 to 2009 the total world’s exports increased by
55% from 523,159t to 549,595 t.
Total Value of exported medicinal plants from 2001-2009
0
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
1400000
1600000
1800000
2000000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Val
ue
(in
th
ou
san
d U
S D
oll
ars)
The graph above shows the global export values from 2001 to 2009. As is evident, the total
export value has increased from US$ 1.054 billion in 2001 to US$ 1.801 billion in 2009. In this
time duration, China has been the leading exporter of medicinal plants.
26
Exported value of five countries in years 2001-2009
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Val
ue
of
exp
ort
s (i
n t
ho
usa
nd
US
Do
llar
s)
China
USA
Germany
India
Canada
EXPORT QUANTITIES- With respect to the export quantities, the trend of export of medicinal
plants is as under.
Table: Export figures in quantities of medicinal plants during 2001-2010Exporte
rs
2001* 2002* 2003* 2004* 2005* 2006* 2007* 2008* 2009* 2010*
'World 0 0 0 52315
9
58951
4
58742
3
62684
8
0 54959
5
'China 16918
3
150344 16829
1
17488
9
20483
5
20189
4
24156
1
188249 20001
8
22692
0
'India 49150 45786 43459 42144 50946 46348 50912 50545 48525
'Mexico 17490 23734 28981 32373 38226 40406 41881 38425 30575
'Egypt No
Quanti
ty
12201 13883 43503 19065
'German
y
13644 14597 17264 18776 15943 19439 18262 17961 17674
'Poland 10639 13032 14470 15308 18629 11104 18058 18274 16023
'USA 16172 12586 11758 15934 16203 12169 11371 No
Quantit
y
14117 14507
'Morocco 10220 10747 9432 11253 10365 12134 13766 12818
'Pakistan 9487 9005 9510 10185 11127 11049 10988
'Hong
Kong,
China
31163 31050 24213 20209 18262 13587 11789 11208 10505
'Chile 11906 No
Quantit
y
No
Quanti
ty
12530 11444 11238 11296 12779 10405 10383
27
'Indonesi
a
7657 6502 5669 6027 9009 5901 10567 7640 10213
*values shown are in tonnes
Bar Diagram of exporting quantities in the years 2004-2009
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
600000
700000
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Exp
ort
ing
Qu
anti
ties
(in
to
nn
es)
World
China
India
SHARE IN GLOBAL EXPORT VALUE:
Table: Share in values in world’s exports (percent):
Exporte
rs2001,% 2002,% 2003,% 2004,% 2005,% 2006,% 2007,% 2008,% 2009,%
'China 18.9 20.3 20.3 20.8 21.8 23 24.4 24.3 26.5
'USA’ 7.5 7 7 7.6 6.8 6.6 6.6 4.6 6.9
'German
y 5 5.5 6.9 6.8 6.4 6.8 6.2 6.7 6.3
'India 7.5 6.5 5.8 4.9 5.8 5.9 6.6 7.1 5.9
'Canada 4.4 4.9 4.8 4.7 5.3 6 5.3 3.9 5
'Hong
Kong,
China 12 11.8 8.3 8.5 6.5 5.2 3.9 4 4
'Poland 1.4 2.1 2.5 2.8 3.6 3.2 3.5 4.1 3.8
'Republic
of Korea 4.5 2 2.9 4.4 3.4 3.6 3.2 3.2 3.7
'Egypt 1.7 1.8 2.1 3.4 2.9
'France 4.2 4.3 4.9 4.7 4.4 4.1 2.8 2.9 2.6
28
Share in values in world's exports in Year-2009
'China 'United States of America 'Germany'India 'Canada 'Hong Kong, China'Poland 'Republic of Korea 'Egypt'France 'Mexico 'Belgium'Singapore 'Chile 'Morocco'Spain 'Italy 'Bulgaria'Chinese Taipei 'United Kingdom 'Peru'Albania 'Turkey 'Austria'Netherlands 'Hungary 'Pakistan'Nepal 'Australia
Share of China in value in world exports 2001-2009
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Sh
are
in
valu
e in
wo
rld
's e
xp
ort
s(%
)
GROWTH VALUES: The data below shows that Norway has shown the maximum growth in
value in 2009-2010 that is 156%. This is followed by South Africa with the growth of 127%.
Ethiopia had shown 44 times growth in 2005-2006.
Table: Export figures growth in value:
Exporte
rs
2001-
2002,
%
2002-
2003, %
2003-
2004, %
2004-
2005, %
2005-
2006, %
2006-
2007, %
2007-
2008, %
2008-
2009, %
2009-
2010, %
'Norway 0 237 175 46 -92 55 13 -49 156
'South
Africa 58 21 -76 78 -9 11 -23 -41 127
'Ethiopia -14 -68 -100 4400 868 0 -66 82
'Colombi 34 121 77 86 7 -2 5 21 60
29
a
'Thailand -15 -33 -3 -6 55 -36 253 17 60
'Czech
Republic 10 49 -4 8 8 35 32 -5 48
'Paragua
y 187 -15 9 23 6 -23 33 14 34
'China 8 5 17 9 14 28 8 6 31
'Canada 11 3 12 17 22 6 -20 25 31
'Brazil 17 18 -19 -8 27 36 42 -42 24
'Singapor
e 8 -33 33 -18 8 39 -3 -23 23
Growth in export values seen during the years 2009-2010
020406080
100120140160180
'Nor
way
'Sou
th Afric
a
'Eth
iopia
'Colo
mbia
'Thail
and
'Cze
ch R
epub
lic
'Par
agua
y
'Chin
a
'Can
ada
'Bra
zil
'Sing
apor
eGro
wth
in
ex
po
rt v
alu
es
(%)
Three trade centres: USA, Germany and Hong Kong
The high ranking on both the export and import side in highlights the USA, Germany and Hong
Kong (China HK SAR) as important trade centres in the MAP trade. All three countries show
both high import and high export quantities.
The USA imported on average 46,353 t of medicinal plants valued at 208 million US$ in the
period 2001-2010. The export amounted to 12,481 t, a value of 97 million US$. The striking
difference in the value of the imported and exported commodity shows that the USA imports
mainly plant raw material or at least little processed products, but on export the degree of
processing is increased.
Germany imported on average 44,750 t per year valued at 125 million US$; 15,356 t of a value
of 88 million US$ was exported. Similar to the USA the value of the exported commodity is
much higher than the imported one showing that Germany imports mainly plant raw material or
30
at least little processed products, but that on export the degree of processing is increased. Similar
to the USA, Germany is importing medicinal plants from all over the world; during the period
2001-2009 imports originated in at least 1421 countries. Bulgaria is Germany’s most important
source country, showing average exports of 5,220 t, followed by India with 4,240 t and Poland
with 3,850 t. Further, Germany imported on average more than 2,000 t of this commodity from
the following countries: Sudan, Chile, Hungary, Egypt and China. Although Germany exported
this commodity to 147 countries, 75% of the exports went to only 12 countries, of which Austria
is the most important buyer, followed by Switzerland, the USA and Italy. Amongst these 12
countries, only one non-European country, the USA, is listed and in the investigated period eight
of them were EU Member States, to which 52% of the German exports were sold. In all, not less
than 75% of the exports were destined to European countries. Germany is an important hub of
commerce in the intra-European trade, in particular acting as a link between the markets of
eastern and southeastern Europe and those of western and central Europe, supplying mainly EU
Member States with this commodity.
The third trade centre, Hong Kong, is acting mainly in the east- and southeast-Asian trade. Each
year, it imported on average 44,183 t valued at 170 million US$ and exported on average 19,109
t of a value of 91.6 million US$. In contrast to the USA and Germany, 92% of the imports were
exported. These exports were mostly re-exports, a fact that is pointed out by the comparable
prices on export and import. Further, 80-90% of the country’s imports are from a single country,
namely China (85% in 2003), the remaining from Indonesia, Canada, the Republic of Korea,
India and Thailand. The exports have been destined to many countries all over the world, with
preference to east- and southeast-Asian countries; in 2003 the export share of this commodity to
the latter amounted to 86%; about 50% were destined to other Asian countries, 10% to China and
to Korea, 6% each to the USA and to Canada.
Imports: The average net imports of all countries highlight the consumer and the source
countries of medicinal plants. Important consumer countries show high positive net imports,
main source countries stand out with high negative net imports. Accordingly, Japan is the most
important consumer country, the net imports exceeding on average 46,200 t in the period 1991-
2003. Japan is followed by the USA, the Republic of Korea and Germany, their average net
imports ranging between ca 31,500 t and 38,000 t. A further European country, France, belongs
31
to the world’s major consumer countries, with average net imports of 14,200 t. Consumer
countries generally import raw material or at least partly-processed material that is mainly
processed in the country’s enormous industry to, e.g., extracts, aromas, teas, cosmetics or
(phyto-) pharmaceuticals, and then either sold as finished products on the domestic market or
exported as such. On the other side, China as by far most the important supplier of the raw
material to the world’s medicinal and aromatic plants market. India is following on second place.
IMPORT VALUES:
Table: Import figures of value (in thousand US Dollars) of medicinal plants:
Importer
s2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
'World
110954
5
114776
8
126034
2
137784
3
140607
6 1538226 1788611 1983846 1931123
'USA 148216 147131 161300 174524 188697 216257 247601 276112 254121
26816
3
'Hong
Kong,
China 170477 176720 165891 179955 144051 158400 179051 175035 175893
'Germany 75338 79011 104334 117425 120137 136927 154250 169683 171818
'Japan 107007 118994 117378 114230 106582 105260 117982 148516 146042
16902
1
'Viet Nam 10937 7898 8851 8448 7019 7260 8674 9207 93270
'France 52873 51824 52249 59867 58370 70211 80010 93901 79520 81591
'Singapore 26799 33556 47983 43675 50457 62021 83149 77109 71484 87908
'Canada 33834 36057 42644 46528 52338 56761 50885 63573 67336 71251
'Chinese
Taipei 52366 39351 45592 48080 71190 55034 69829 60512 65807 79874
'Italy 40593 43038 46704 49331 51403 55003 66796 75640 58266
'United
Kingdom 34427 34416 44195 46449 49599 53736 51173 52950 53845 63046
'Malaysia 30693 31995 31946 37731 40413 41424 53273 47554 50591
32
Import Values of Top Five Importers of Medicinal Plants
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Imp
ort
Val
ues
(in
tho
usa
nd
US
Do
llars
)'United States of AmericaHong Kong, ChinaGermanyJapanVietnam
The countries of temperate Asia are responsible for 41% of the annual global imports and around
40% of the annual global exports. Europe’s share of the global import is one third. Regarding
single countries the import share of the USA is 13-14% and of Germany 8.9% and Japan 7.6%
each. In 2001-2010, USA has overcome Hong Kong (= China HK SAR) in being the most
important importer of medicinal plants with an annual average import of approximately 60,043 t.
It is followed by the Germany with an average import of about 46,353 t and Hong Kong with
44,183 t a year. Chinese Taipei follows on 4th place, importing on average 38,257 t per year.
India stands at sixth position with an average import of about 16,141t.
IMPORT QUANTITIES:
Table: Import figures of quantities (in tonnes) of medicinal plants:
Importers 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
'World 0
46200
4 497449
51385
9
53637
9 546802 543369 553047 0
'United States
of America 55737 54699 59009 57279 59929 57690 67387 67904 60303 60499
'Germany 39011 42495 46748 45842 49096 51488 47177 45467 49853
'Hong Kong,
China 33000 37398 38975 45106 46781 45886 50325 52741 47438
'Chinese
Taipei 39361 40709 42742 36295 40228 38024 36916 31513 37694 39092
33
'Viet Nam 3984 3098 5173 2151 1797 1829
No
Quantity
No
Quantity 36118
'India 7156 8196 12510 13342 15265 17404 19523 22040 29833
'China 22857 23182 19921 29201 36241 25784 19327 28241 26887 38021
'Japan 29601 29897 30911 29123 26685 26224 28432 29224 26049 27540
'France 26620 23390 19618 23020 20735 21037 18381 18507 16580 17932
'Spain 11586 11721 13607 13749 16318 16905 15711 20836 14600
'Malaysia 14900 10256 10292 11188 12746 11651 11831 9287 12639
Imported Quantities of Top Five Importers in 2001-2009
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Imp
ort
ed Q
uan
titi
es (
in t
on
nes
)
'United States of AmericaGermanyHong Kong, ChinaChinese TaipeiVietnam
SHARE IN VALUES:
Share in values in world’s imports (percent):
Importers 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
'World 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
'USA’ 13.4 12.8 12.8 12.7 13.4 14.1 13.8 13.9 13.2
'Hong
Kong,
China 15.4 15.4 13.2 13.1 10.2 10.3 10 8.8 9.1
'Germany 6.8 6.9 8.3 8.5 8.5 8.9 8.6 8.6 8.9
'Japan 9.6 10.4 9.3 8.3 7.6 6.8 6.6 7.5 7.6
'Viet Nam 1 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 4.8
'France 4.8 4.5 4.1 4.3 4.2 4.6 4.5 4.7 4.1
'Singapore 2.4 2.9 3.8 3.2 3.6 4 4.6 3.9 3.7
'Canada 3 3.1 3.4 3.4 3.7 3.7 2.8 3.2 3.5
'Chinese
Taipei 4.7 3.4 3.6 3.5 5.1 3.6 3.9 3.1 3.4
34
'Italy 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.8 3
'United
Kingdom 3.1 3 3.5 3.4 3.5 3.5 2.9 2.7 2.8
'Malaysia 2.8 2.8 2.5 2.7 2.9 2.7 3 2.4 2.6
'Republic
of Korea 4 3.7 3 2.9 3 3.5 3.1 2.7 2.6
'Spain 2 2.3 2.7 2.5 3 3.3 2.9 3 2.6
'Belgium 1.9 1.8 2 2.3 2 2.1 2.4 2.6 2.5
'China 4 4.2 2.6 3.3 2.3 1.4 1.9 2 2.1
'Netherlan
ds 1.7 1.9 2.2 2.1 2 2.1 1.9 1.8 1.9
'Switzerlan
d 1.6 1.8 1.9 1.9 2 2.1 2 2.4 1.7
'India 0.6 0.8 0.9 1 1.3 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.7
Share in Value in world's imports in 2001-2009
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Sh
are
in V
alu
e (%
)
USAHong Kong, ChinaGermanyJapanVietnam
35
Share in Value of World's Imports in Year-2009
13.2
9.18.9
7.6
4.8
4.1
3.7
3.5
3.4 3 2.8 2.6 2.62.62.5
2.11.91.71.7
1.61.2
1.1
1.1
0.90.7
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.58.8
'United States of America 'Hong Kong, China 'Germany 'Japan'Viet Nam 'France 'Singapore 'Canada'Chinese Taipei 'Italy 'United Kingdom 'Malaysia'Republic of Korea 'Spain 'Belgium 'China'Netherlands 'Switzerland 'India 'Mexico'Poland 'Russian Federation 'United Arab Emirates 'Australia'Austria 'Czech Republic 'Ireland 'Brazil'Thailand
Share of India in World's Import Values in Years 2001-2009
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Sh
are
in V
alu
e (%
)
India stands at 19th position in 2009 in world’s import values. As is seen in graph, India’s export
value has increased during the course of 2001-2009. Its net import values had been 0.6% in 2001
and 1.7% in 2009. This indicates the self-sufficiency of the country due to its natural heritage.
36
GROWTH IN IMPORT VALUES: Malawi’s imports have grown to four times in 2009-2010.
Also in 2003-2004, it showed a growth of ten times in 2003-2004.
Table: Importers’ growth in values
Importer
s
2001-
2002,
%
2002-
2003,
%
2003-
2004,
%
2004-
2005,
%
2005-
2006,
%
2006-
2007,
%
2007-
2008,
%
2008-
2009,
%
2009-
2010,
%
'Malawi -100 1000 -91 300 75 29 -89 400
'Botswana 231 -30 -19 487 -93 33 69 -30 184
'China 10 -34 41 -28 -35 64 17 -1 76
'Iceland 2 65 -16 6 -3 10 3 -20 58
'Colombia -24 32 -9 26 1 32 7 -1 52
'Zambia -63 -33 800 -50 167 154 56 94 51
'Republic
of Korea -4 -11 4 6 27 4 -3 -7 49
'United
Republic
of
Tanzania 63 -15 127 -12 23 1363 132 -85 48
'Thailand -1 22 12 -1 8 10 13 10 46
'Sri Lanka 1 2 32 29 14 55 30 -21 34
Top 10 Countries in Imported Growth Values in 2009-2010
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
'Malawi 'Botswana 'China 'Iceland 'Colombia 'Zambia 'Republicof Korea
'UnitedRepublic ofTanzania
'Thailand 'Sri Lanka
Imp
ort
ed
Gro
wth
Va
lue
s(%
)
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the analysis of the foreign-trade statistics of 110 countries of the commodity medicinal
plants (HS 1211) for the period 2001-2010 the following conclusions may be drawn:
37
• The trade in medicinal plants is dominated by only few countries. Twelve countries make up ca
80% of both the exports to and the imports from the world market.
• Three international trade centres for botanicals can be recognized, Germany for the intra-
European, the USA for North and South America, and Hong Kong for east and southeast-Asian
markets.
• The main acting countries in the botanicals trade may be clearly divided into on the one hand
consumer countries with high positive net imports and on the other hand source countries with
high negative net imports: Japan, the USA, the Republic of Korea, Germany and France are the
world’s biggest consumer countries while China, India, Mexico, Bulgaria, Chile, Egypt,
Morocco and Albania are the world’s leading source countries for this commodity.
• In general, the major markets are in the developed countries, while the bulk of the botanicals
are exported from developing countries.
• The bulk of internationally traded botanicals is not or only little processed and of wild origin.
• Source countries export mainly raw plant material, often of wild origin; the benefit for it is
relatively low. The processing, i.e. the value-adding takes mainly place in consumer countries
and trade centres. The prices on export support both.
• The benefit in the source countries is relatively low; the main profit is achieved in only few
consumer countries.
• For international demand, wild MAP resources are not used evenly across the world.
Exploitation is confined to only few regions, which may easily lead to overexploitation.
38
Global Trade of Ginseng
Product name: Ginseng HS Code: 121120
The Asian/Chinese/Korean ginseng is Panax ginseng. The American species is P. quinquefolius.
This product is under CITES regulation. Ginseng is one of the most favoured commodity for
trade. Its trade is within a few countries; a country exporting Korean ginseng is the importer of
the American species. Canada has been the leading exporter of ginseng in 2009 and 2010 with its
exports being nearly one-third of the global exports. China is the second major exporter with
total exports of 2991 t in 2009.
EXPORT QUANTITIES:
Table: Quantities (in tonnes) of Ginseng exported:
Exporters 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
'World 14357 14562 8461 12430 8748 7954 9700 0 10839
'Canada 2235 2275 1498 1370 2522 2773 2887 2671 3431 3022
'China 4594 4683 3631 3607 3026 2690 2854 2864 2991 2862
'Pakistan 21 1827 289 606 916 1437 1686
'Hong Kong,
China 4308 3667 1747 2402 1032 802 584 867 1144
'Republic of
Korea 271 200 194 357 243 242 310 267 397 440
'USA 515 502 498 423 248 324 450
No
Quanti
ty 383 443
'Poland 0 0 0 13 1 9 242 195 159
'Nepal 13 123
'Senegal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 120
'Indonesia 24 0 61 2 523 48 451 66 119
'Chinese
Taipei 9 13 17 20 36 48 55 45 45 43
'Democratic
People's
Republic of
Korea 12 24 11 31 23 38 11 6 30
'France 54 45 41 54 27 39 33 40 30 55
39
World Trade of Ginseng
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
16000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Tra
de
in Q
uan
titi
es (
in t
on
nes
)
Export of Ginseng by Top Five Countries in 2001-2009
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Exp
ort
Qu
anti
ty (
in t
on
nes
)
'CanadaChinaPakistanHong Kong, ChinaRepublic of KoreaUSA
As is evident from the graph, China was the leading exporter of ginseng in the first half of
decade. But after 2005, Canada’s export quantities started leading till present.
40
SHARE IN GLOBAL EXPORT VALUES:
Table: Share in value in world’s exports:
Exporter
s2001,% 2002,% 2003,% 2004,% 2005,% 2006,% 2007,% 2008,% 2009,%
'Canada 19.3 20.8 23.6 19.2 28.8 31.6 30.4 27.6 30
'Republic
of Korea 18.3 7.8 14 21.3 20.3 19.7 18.1 22.9 23
USA 11.2 14.8 19 13.6 11.5 15.1 18.5 8.2 16.8
'China 21.1 24.4 21.5 20 18.9 15.7 16.5 21.7 15.9
'Hong
Kong,
China 25.5 25.2 16.8 20.1 13 9.5 7.9 9.9 7.5
'Chinese
Taipei 1 1.6 1.7 1.1 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.1 3.5
'Poland 0 0 0 0.1 0 0.2 1.1 1 0.8
'Republic
of Korea,
Democrat
ic 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.6
'Pakistan 0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4
'Germany 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.9 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.3
'Singapor
e 0.2 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.4 1.3 0.5 0.2 0.3
'Belgium 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0.2
'France 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.2
'Japan 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2
It is evident from the table and the pie-chart below that ginseng export markets are mainly under
Canada, Republic of Korea, USA, China and Hong Kong (each has export share of more than
5%). The same countries are also seen importing ginseng.
41
Share in value in world's exports of top five exporters in 2001-2009
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Sh
are
in v
alu
e (%
)CanadaRepublic of KoreaUSAChinaHong Kong, China
Share in value of different countries in world's exports in 2009
'Canada 'Republic of Korea 'United States of America'China 'Hong Kong, China 'Chinese Taipei'Poland 'Democratic People's Republic of Korea 'Pakistan'Germany 'Singapore 'Belgium'France 'Japan 'Netherlands'Indonesia 'Italy 'Malaysia'United Kingdom 'Senegal
UNIT VALUE OF GINSENG
Table: Unit value of ginseng in US Dollars per tonne
Exporter
s 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
'World 15969 15815 24662 19731 23360 29490 29019 25768
'Canada 19837 21104 32838 34373 23347 26730 29626 24820 24405 37650
'Republic 154642 89340 150113 146319 170424 190847 163942 206307 161466 175486
42
of Korea
'United
States of
America 49887 67785 79633 78827 94899 109099 115982 122527 142745
'China 10524 11978 12368 13630 12767 13719 16312 18189 14811 19905
'Chinese
Taipei 260333 276231 202647 132900 221111 201729 217600 218800 218867 234419
'Singapor
e 46182 111200 54385 30154 81222 156000 170125 87000 55923 71667
'France 14426 24400 17537 17204 26444 22692 23576 24975 17567 13800
'Japan 141000 145900 153625 148000 147286 142500 149333 154200 160333 183000
'United
Kingdom 30500 23000 16000 13154 23800 17000 37800 29000 31400 29500
'Brazil 2435 2613 16000 10000 6500 6000 17875
'Thailand 419 8000 7500 6000 2571 126 4500 7000 6250
It is evident from the graph that USA’s ginseng has been the most valued one for the past
decade. Its unit value increased from US$ 49,887 per tonne in 2001 to nearly three times in 2010
i.e. US $ 142,745 per tonne. Prices of Chinese and Canadian ginsengs have remained steady and
approximated the global average.
EXPORT VALUES:
Table: Export value figures (in thousand US Dollars) of ginseng:
43
Exporters 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
'World 229271 230300
20866
5
24525
1 204350 234560 281484 240548 279284
'Canada 44336 48012 49192 47091 58881 74123 85529 66294 83733
11377
8
'Republic
of Korea 41908 17868 29122 52236 41413 46185 50822 55084 64102 77214
'USA 25692 34028 39657 33344 23535 35348 52192 19683 46928 63236
'China 48345 56093 44908 49163 38632 36904 46555 52093 44300 56968
'Hong
Kong,
China 58519 57938 34971 49252 26485 22366 22268 23742 20955
'Chinese
Taipei 2343 3591 3445 2658 7960 9683 11968 9846 9849 10080
'Poland 0 0 0 184 11 449 3033 2387 2151
'Democrati
c Republic
of Korea 503 672 892 1719 1653 1376 583 466 1625
'Pakistan 6 729 109 211 370 539 996
'Germany 1000 1115 1703 2237 1158 1555 1282 1320 843
Total Exports of Ginseng made in years 2001-2009
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Val
ue
of
Exp
ort
s (i
n t
ho
usa
nd
US
Do
llar
s)
44
Export values of ginseng of major exporters in years 2001-2010
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Va
lue
of
Ex
po
rts
(in
th
ou
sa
nd
US
Do
lla
rs)
CanadaRepublic of KoreaUSAChina
The net exports of Canada were valued to be US$ 113,778 thousand which is the maximum
recorded so far. Following are Korea, USA and China.
Export Values of Ginseng from India in years 2001-2010
-500
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Exp
ort
val
ues
(in
th
ou
san
d U
S D
oll
ars)
Imports:
IMPORT QUANTITIES:
45
Table: Import figures of quantities (in tonnes) of ginseng:
Importers 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
'World 12426 13218 9330 11720 9123 8275 8731 8770 9053
'Hong Kong,
China 5131 5309 3579 3639 3080 2760 2224 3168 2621
'Chinese
Taipei 1171 1112 1413 1286 1750 1741 1886 1219 1544
'Viet Nam 21 7 18 13 13 20
No
Quantit
y
No
Quantit
y 669
'Japan 625 876 938 854 612 743 604 851 662
'United States
of America 477 439 501 625 652 897 828 622 511
'Egypt 80 134 148 48 369
'Italy 282 381 294 343 211 216 127 420 351
'China 2868 2557 973 1756 525 169 228 338 326
'Germany 139 159 183 328 75 180 298 159 309
'Canada 97 101 127 172 232 273 281 253 225
'Malaysia 256 292 210 342 341 342 288 210 216
Import Quantities of Major Importers of Ginseng In 2001-2009
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Imp
ort
Qu
anti
ties
(in
to
nn
es)
Hong Kong, ChinaChinese TaipeiVietnamJapan
46
Import Quantities of Ginseng of Major Exporters of ginseng in 2001-2010
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Ex
po
rt Q
ua
nti
tie
s (
in t
on
ne
s)
CanadaUSAChinaRepublic of Korea
IMPORT VALUES:
Table: Import value (in US Dollars) of ginseng imports:
Importers 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
'World
23136
5
23393
9 219338
24872
4
19961
3 211653 244904
22844
8 227245
'Hong
Kong,
China
12664
5
13379
0 123153
13441
2 97337 103081 116860
11316
7 116825
'Chinese
Taipei 20772 8745 13449 13728 28732 19391 33957 22167 25208 27975
'United
States of
America 10386 10476 13125 20641 19117 32686 25663 18146 16066 17112
'Japan 12661 15350 17272 15647 10108 11249 12975 19591 14571 21554
'China 33982 30921 14493 22348 8515 5940 5433 6798 9588 16165
'Singapore 4763 8576 8026 6612 6585 7029 8477 5922 7635 10180
'Canada 4133 4409 6796 6882 9095 11589 7081 8151 7464 8325
'Viet Nam 457 167 555 446 440 692 741 654 5564
'Malaysia 3266 3196 3023 3407 4063 4082 6250 5031 4259
'Italy 3960 4845 7080 8253 2922 3456 3005 9521 3924
'Germany 1800 1887 2459 3838 870 1982 4068 3382 3767
Of the total imports of US$ 227245 thousand made in 2009, nearly 50% imports have been made
by Hong Kong followed by Chinese Taipei, USA, Japan and China. In the pie-chart below, it is
evident that these account for the three-fourths of the global share of value in ginseng imports.
47
Total imported value of ginseng in 2001-2009
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009Imp
ort
Val
ues
(in
th
ou
san
d U
S D
oll
ars)
Import values of ginseng of major importers in 2001-2009
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Imp
ort
Va
lue
s (
in t
ho
us
an
d U
S
Do
lla
rs)
Hong Kong, ChinaChinese TaipeiUSAJapanChina
SHARE IN IMPORTS’ VALUE:
Table: Share in value in world’s imports:
Importe
rs2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
'Hong
Kong,
China 54.7 57.2 56.1 54 48.8 48.7 47.7 49.5 51.4
'Chinese
Taipei 9 3.7 6.1 5.5 14.4 9.2 13.9 9.7 11.1
'USA 4.5 4.5 6 8.3 9.6 15.4 10.5 7.9 7.1
'Japan 5.5 6.6 7.9 6.3 5.1 5.3 5.3 8.6 6.4
'China 14.7 13.2 6.6 9 4.3 2.8 2.2 3 4.2
48
'Singapor
e 2.1 3.7 3.7 2.7 3.3 3.3 3.5 2.6 3.4
'Canada 1.8 1.9 3.1 2.8 4.6 5.5 2.9 3.6 3.3
'Viet
Nam 0.2 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 2.4
'Malaysia 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 2 1.9 2.6 2.2 1.9
'Italy 1.7 2.1 3.2 3.3 1.5 1.6 1.2 4.2 1.7
'German
y 0.8 0.8 1.1 1.5 0.4 0.9 1.7 1.5 1.7
'Belgium 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.8
'Republic
of Korea 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.9 0.6 0.8 0.6
'Indonesi
a 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.5
'United
Kingdom 0.4 0.6 1.2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.5
'Macao,
China 0 0.1 0 0 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.5
Share in Value in World's Imports ofMajor Traders in Ginseng in years 2001-2009
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Sh
are
in V
alu
e (
%)
Hong Kong, ChinaChinese TaipeiUSAJapanChinaCanada
49
Share in Value of Ginseng Importersin world's ginseng imports in 2009
51.4
11.1
7.1
6.4 4.23.4
3.3
2.4
1.9
1.7
1.7
0.8
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.20.1
0.1
0.1
0.11.8
'Hong Kong, China 'Chinese Taipei'United States of America 'Japan'China 'Singapore'Canada 'Viet Nam'Malaysia 'Italy'Germany 'Belgium'Republic of Korea 'Indonesia'United Kingdom 'Macao, China'Spain 'France'Poland 'Egypt'Netherlands 'Australia'Philippines 'Myanmar
UNIT VALUE OF GINSENG IMPORTS:
Table: Unit value of ginseng imports: in US Dollars per tonne
Importers 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
'World 18619 17699 23509 21222 21880 25577 28050 26048 25103
'Chinese
Taipei 17739 7864 9518 10675 16418 11138 18005 18185 16326 21976
'Japan 20258 17523 18414 18322 16516 15140 21482 23021 22011 23531
'USA 21774 23863 26198 33026 29321 36439 30994 29174 31440 30503
'China 11849 12093 14895 12727 16219 35148 23829 20112 29411 43454
'Singapore 52922 54624 56922 53756 50654 58091 79224 58634 58731 73237
'Canada 42608 43653 53512 40012 39203 42451 25199 32217 33173 47034
'United
Kingdom 16421 20448 11593 13032 23068 16390 25425 26633 21396 10108
'Republic
of Korea 11661 11857 13727 12802 7455 7442 9708 12993 12542 17239
'France 12351 14161 19953 17029 16107 9295 6704 20100 18106 29821
'Australia 13353 14000 21300 25455 9960 20727 19467 20545 19167 30364
'Thailand 23667 36500 4128 2647 5238 10556
50
'Switzerlan
d 17081 15304 12385 12129 10974 12587 17827 21451 48500 24750
'South
Africa 6600 6400 4571 6000 5333 8000 9000 10200 22200 13857
'Turkey 8000 8500 23000 13750 12333 17000 18000 22000
'Chile 9000 26000 15000 22667 21500 3000
Unit values of imports of major trading countries in2001-2010
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011Years
Un
it V
alu
e (U
S D
oll
ars
per
to
nn
e)
USAChinaCanadaRepublic of KoreaWorld
It is evident from the graph that the unit value of imports of Canada has fluctuated a lot. On an
average, the global unit import value has a steady and slight increase from US$ 18,619 per tonne
in 2001 to US$ 25,103 per tonne in 2009.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the analysis of the foreign-trade statistics of the commodity ginseng (HS 121120) for
the period 2001-2010 the following conclusions may be drawn:
• The trade in ginseng is dominated by only few countries. The countries exporting one species
are involved in import of other. This has been attributed to faith and demand of the people of one
country in the therapeutic value of the species of other country.
51
• The main acting countries in the ginseng trade may not be clearly divided into only exporters or
importers.
• The bulk of internationally traded ginseng is cultivated variety from America.
• American variety is sold at a higher price than the Asian varieties.
Global Trade of Liquorice:
Product name: Liquorice HS Code: 121110
Liquorice is obtained from rhizomes of Glycyrrhiza glabra. More than two-third of all
formulations contain liquorice. The polysaccharides in the drug are quite useful. Liquorice is
very popular in the Chinese medicine
The main varieties are var. typica, var. glabra(Spanish), var. glandulifera (Russian), var.
violaceae(Persian) and var. uralensis(Asiatic).
Exports:
52
EXPORT QUANTITIES:
Table: Trade Figures of Quantities of Liquorice: HS Code: 121110
Exporters 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2009
'World 0 0 0 0 28751 29865 7610 3420
'Morocco 0 0 0 200 0 558 2117
'Indonesia 38 58 104 570 573 285 412 947
'Ukraine 0 6 14 42 8 12 115 205
'Syrian
Arab
Republic 999 1140 1824 714 1924 1780 1038 72
'Uzbekistan 2159 2810 3741 4863 3727 3924 586 70
'Cameroon 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
'Canada 0 0 170 7 0 4 0 0
'Sri Lanka 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
'China 3902 4248 3178 3510 2908 3450 0 0
'France 41 2580 1332 84 13 563 0 0
'Germany 326 361 451 425 301 454 0 0
'Afghanista
n
No
Quantit
y
No
Quantit
y
No
Quantit
y 0
'Albania 134 0 184 21 0 4 0 0
'Azerbaijan 4350 5364 6011 5390 4153 3560 0 0
'Australia 540 335 150 121 0 185 0 0
Export Quantities of the leading liquorice exporters in2001-2009
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2009
Exp
ort
Qu
anti
ties
(in
to
nn
es)
Morocco
Indonesia
Ukraine
Syrian Arab Republic
As is observable from graph above, Syrian Arab Republic is one of the major exporters of
liquorice in the past decade. But in 2009, Morocco has made the maximum exports by quantity
i.e. 2117 tonnes.
53
Export Quantities of the former leading exporters of liquorice in 2001-2009
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2009
Exp
ort
Qu
an
titi
es (
in t
on
nes)
France
Germany
Azerbaijan
Australia
UNIT VALUE OF LIQUORICE:
Table: Unit values in US Dollars per tonne of liquorice exports
Exporters 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
'South Africa 353 6000 2000 3273 13000 16500
'Singapore 333 432 1094 2189 6205 1258
'Australia 1476 1033 627 702 0 946
'Turkey 874 569 827 935 1089 1153
'Thailand 8467 1700 725 805 746 800
'United Kingdom 30000 43000 32500 34200 21857 57000
'United States of
America 3443 3515 2352 1462 2244 2506
'Uzbekistan 534 593 561 561 550 766
'Yemen 525 507
54
Unit value of highly valued liquorice of the former exporting countries
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006Un
it v
alu
e (i
n U
S D
oll
ars
per
to
nn
e)
Australia
Thailand
UK
USA
An analysis of the unit values in the graph above states that from 2001-2006, Australia’s
liquorice has fetched the highest export prices.
SHARE IN VALUE IN GLOBAL EXPORTS:
Table: Share in value in world’s exports :
Exporter
s2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
'Morocco 0 0 0 0 1.3 0 24.1 53.2 74.1
'Indonesia 0.1 0.2 0.2 1.5 1.7 0.8 16.3 16.5 16.5
'Ukraine 0 0 0.1 0.1 0 0 2.5 11.3 5.7
'Syrian
Arab
Republic 4.6 4.3 7.6 3.1 7 6.1 15 0 2.4
'Uzbekista
n 4.5 5.9 8.2 9.8 7.4 10.6 5.8 9.4 1.2
'Cameroo
n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2
'Canada 0 0 1.1 0.2 0 0.2 0 0 0
'Sri Lanka 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.2 0 0
'China 28.4 26.5 22.2 25.7 22.8 27.6 0 0 0
'Colombia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
55
Share in value in world's exports of present leading exporters in 2001-2009
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Sh
are
in v
alu
e (%
)
Morocco
Indonesia
Ukraine
Share in value in world's exports in 2009of exporting countries
74.1
16.5
5.72.4 1.2
0.2
'Morocco
'Indonesia
'Ukraine
'Syrian Arab Republic
'Uzbekistan
'Cameroon
In 2009, Morocco has made the major exports i.e. 74.1% followed by Indonesia, Ukraine, Syrian
Arab Republic, Uzbekistan and Cameroon indicating that in this year exports were made by six
countries only.
EXPORT VALUES OF LIQUORICE:
Table: Export values in thousand US Dollars of liquorice
Exporters 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
'World 25523 28472 25473 27779 27758 28405 6241 5787 6418
'Morocco 0 0 0 359 0 1506 3078 4753
'Indonesia 33 53 55 422 470 224 1017 957 1058
'Ukraine 0 7 18 41 10 10 157 654 368
56
'Syrian Arab
Republic 1179 1220 1946 848 1937 1729 934 0 151
'Uzbekistan 1152 1667 2098 2729 2048 3007 361 546 74
'Cameroon 0 0 0 0 0 0 14
World exports' value from 2001-2009
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009Exp
ort
Val
ues
(in
th
ou
san
d U
S D
oll
ars)
IMPORT QUANTITIES OF LIQUORICE:
Table: Imported quantities in tonnes of liquorice
Importers 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
'World 0 0 0 0
3020
4 30016 0 5259 1989
'Indonesia 41 20 21 32 30 56 2589 2945 1761
'Morocco 68 111 102 27 72 103 117 106
'Ukraine 6 35 54 104 73 35 183 683 70
'Germany 707 805 865 1088 1017 1232 0 0 0
'Greece 9 3 5 0 0 2 0 0 0
'Hong
Kong, China 256 129 58 36 14 34 0 0 0
'Israel
No
Quantity
No
Quantity
No
Quantit
y
No
Quantit
y 1465 775 0 0 0
'Italy 638 516 406 454 619 549 0 0 0
'Japan 1945 2016 1352 1751 1481 1527 0 0 0
'Kazakhsta
n 0 0 80 172 130 71 442 0 0
'Republic of
Korea 3663 4117 3170 3408 2914 2736 0 0 0
57
Total import quantities of liquorice in 2005-2009
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Imp
ort
Qu
anti
ties
(in
to
nn
es)
Import quantities of the major importers of liquorice in2001-2009
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Imp
ort
Qu
anti
ties
(in
to
nn
es)
IndonesiaMoroccoUkraineGermanyKorea
Indonesia is also one of the major exporting countries of liquorice and in 2007-2009 it has also
been the major importer. As will be seen even below, Indonesia and Morocco have done the
major imports of liquorice both in value and volume.
58
IMPORT VALUES OF LIQUORICE:
Table: Import values: (in thousand US Dollars) of liquorice
Importers 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
'World 29047 28228 30856 36234 33934 31556 8275 6570 2334
'Indonesia 35 16 6 41 12 165 3228 3970 2019
'Morocco 70 158 154 52 136 211 272 187
'Ukraine 3 19 26 69 58 35 134 546 74
'Viet Nam 0 0 58 32 165 321 459 0 33
'Germany 1242 1189 1155 1802 1851 1801 0 0 0
'Hong
Kong, China 693 319 243 85 79 147 0 0 0
'Ireland 86 152 219 305 0 0 0 0 0
'Israel 1473 1753 2341 2604 3222 1704 0 0 0
'Italy 566 468 528 582 820 848 0 0 0
'Japan 4372 4501 3069 4020 3468 3874 0 0 0
'Republic of
Korea 4573 4755 3445 3670 3464 3813 0 0 0
Total import values of liquorice in 2001-2009
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009Imp
ort
val
ue
(in
th
ou
san
d U
S D
oll
ars)
59
Share in values of liquorice importsby major importers
8%3%
88%
1%
'Indonesia
'Morocco
'Ukraine
'Viet Nam
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the analysis of the foreign-trade statistics of the commodity liquorice (HS 121110) for
the period 2001-2010 the following conclusions may be drawn:
• The trade in liquorice is dominated by only few countries. The countries exporting one species
are involved in import of other. This has been attributed their involvement in the semi-processing
of the liquorice roots.
• The main acting countries in the liquorice trade are Morocco and Indonesia in 2006-2009.
60
Global Trade of Essential Oils
Product: Essential oils; resinoids; terpenic by-products etc HS Code: 3301
Table: Export trade Indicators of Essential Oils
Code Product label
Trade Indicators
Exported value
2009 (USD
thousand)
Trade
balance 2009
(USD
thousand)
Annual
growth in
value
between
2005-2009
(%, p.a.)
Annual
growth in
quantity
between
2005-2009
(%, p.a.)
Annual
growth in
value
between
2008-2009
(%, p.a.)
Annual growth
of world
imports
between 2005-
2009 (%, p.a.)
'TOTAL All products 12367690752 -282425344 6 -23 6
'330129 Essential oils, nes 846388 -102051 10 -2 -17 12
'330190
Conc&aqueous distls of
essentl oils;terpenic
by-prods of essentl oils 438363 24546 14 0 -19 8
'330113 Essential oils of lemon 302711 -33416 15 -1 -1 16
'330112 Essential oils of orange 188043 12902 7 0 -9 3
'330124
Essential oils of
peppermint 175494 9478 10 6 -22 7
'330119
Essential oils of citrus
fruits, nes 170226 -20460 10 6 -15 12
'330125
Essential oils of other
mints 144478 -31396 18 10 -20 8
'330130 Resinoids 71243 29398 -4 -9 2 0
'330121
Essential oils of
geranium 64905 51570 64 -41 -4
'330123
Essential oils of
lavender or of lavandin 815 -848 -69 -13 -10 -65
'330122 Essential oils of jasmin 789 -1965 -53 -59 -39
'330111
Essential oils of
bergamot 334 -3161 -75 -19 -13 -45
'330126 Essential oils of vetiver 5 -954 -88 -94 -57
'330114 Essential oils of lime -1280 -71
It is observable from the table that all essential oils have done the trading worth USD 12367
billion in 2009. The average growth in value has been 6% p.a. in between 2005-2009. Of all the
products covered under HS Code 3301, Essential oil, nes HS Code 330129 has done the most of
the business. Its export values had been worth USD 846 billion. It is followed by the HS Code
61
330190 that is the concentrated and aqueous distillates of essential oils and terpenic by-products
of essential oils whose export values had been USD 438 billion. The next commodity with
maximum exports is Essential oil of lemon (HS Code 330113) showed a quite high growth of
15% in 2005-2009. Its export values had been USD 302 billion. Essential oil of geranium (HS
Code 330121) showed a maximum growth of 64%. Its export values had been USD 64.9 billion
with a positive trade balance.
Share of different essential oils inexport values of 2009
35%
18%
13%
8%
7%
7%
6%
3%
3%0%0%0%0%0%
'330129 '330190
'330113 '330112
'330124 '330119
'330125 '330130
'330121 '330123
'330122 '330111
'330126 '330114
62
Trade balance of different essential oils in 2009
-120000
-100000
-80000
-60000
-40000
-20000
0
20000
40000
60000
'330
129
'330
190
'330
113
'330
112
'330
124
'330
119
'330
125
'330
130
'330
121
'330
123
'330
122
'330
111
'330
126
'330
114
Tra
de
ba
lan
ce
US
D
The graph above shows that nine out of twelve essential oils covered under HS Code 3301 had
negative trade balance in 2009.
Table: Import trade Indicators of Essential Oils
Code Product label
Trade Indicators
Imported value
2009 (USD
thousand)
Trade
balance 2009
(USD
thousand)
Annual
growth in
value
between
2005-2009
(%, p.a.)
Annual
growth in
quantity
between
2005-2009
(%, p.a.)
Annual
growth in
value
between
2008-2009
(%, p.a.)
Annual growth
of world exports
between 2005-
2009 (%, p.a.)
'TOTAL All products 12650116096 -282425344 6 -23 6
'330129 Essential oils, nes 948439 -102051 12 1 -22 10
'330190
Conc&aqueous distls of
essentl oils;terpenic
by-prods of essentl oils 413817 24546 8 2 -16 14
'330113 Essential oils of lemon 336127 -33416 16 -1 4 15
'330119
Essential oils of citrus
fruits, nes 190686 -20460 12 7 -18 10
'330125
Essential oils of other
mints 175874 -31396 8 3 -13 18
'330112 Essential oils of orange 175141 12902 3 -2 -10 7
'330124
Essential oils of
peppermint 166016 9478 7 -3 -14 10
63
'330130 Resinoids 41845 29398 0 -7 -16 -4
'330121
Essential oils of
geranium 13335 51570 -4 314 14 64
'330111
Essential oils of
bergamot 3495 -3161 -45 73 -56 -75
'330122 Essential oils of jasmin 2754 -1965 -39 147 -53
'330123
Essential oils of
lavender or of lavandin 1663 -848 -65 125 41 -69
'330114 Essential oils of lime 1280 -1280 -71 20 166
'330126 Essential oils of vetiver 959 -954 -57 -18 -88
The data analysis shows that there has been decrease in import values of essential oils of
geranium, bergamot, jasmine, lavandin, lime and vetiver.
Annual growth value between 2005-2009 of different essential oils
-80
-70
-60-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
010
20
30
'3301
29
'3301
90
'3301
13
'3301
19
'3301
25
'3301
12
'3301
24
'3301
30
'3301
21
'3301
11
'3301
22
'3301
23
'3301
14
'3301
26
Gro
wth
val
ue
(% p
.a.)
Global Trade of Peppermint Oil
64
Product: Peppermint HS Code: 330124
Peppermint oil is obtained from leaves of Mentha piperita (Labiatae). Commercially, it is
obtained from the cultivated varieties of M. arvensis.
Exports:
EXPORT QUANTITIES: As is seen in the graph below, India is the largest exporter of
peppermint oil in the world with respect to quantity. It has maintained this position throughout
the decade except in 2005 and 2006 when USA’s export quantities exceeded. Its exports have
been 3302 tonnes of the total global exports of 7179 tonnes approximating 49% of the exports. It
is followed by USA and Singapore whose exports are 2476 t and 307 t respectively.
Table: Export quantities of peppermint in 2001-2010
Exporters 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
'World 9175 11408 10485 7263 6523 7287 10875 10589 7179 N.A.
'India 2945 4431 3956 3001 2508 2469 5320 5030 3302 N.A.
'United
States of
America 2071 2675 2511 2205 2674 3220 3792 3804 2476 2138
'Singapore 231 471 165 164 241 419 701 655 537 384
'United
Kingdom 392 378 312 388 294 236 384 287 307 242
'France 214 287 154 197 247 239 223 229 140 121
'Germany 155 98 76 86 98 179 174 163 140
'Chile 17
No
Quantit
y
No
Quantit
y 31 26 32 33 34 29 33
'Denmark 71 63 118 61 6 5 5 2 28 N.A.
'Ecuador 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 25 N.A.
'Spain 41 8 23 18 27 18 33 30 22 N.A.
*N.A.-Figures Not Available
65
Export quantities of peppermint global and in three major countries in 2001-2009
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Exp
ort
qu
anti
ties
(in
to
nn
es)
World
India
USA
Singapore
EXPORT VALUES: With respect to export values, USA has made the maximum exports. These
have summed to US$ 96 million followed by India and then Singapore.
Table: Export values (in thousand US Dollars) of peppermint oil from 2001-2010.
Exporter
s2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
'World 151096 181995 172346 130214 128631 166029 227476 225563 175494 N.A.
'United
States of
America 58410 77730 73226 67382 77750 96679 114033 108889 96083 85780
'India 20555 32861 32526 26444 26911 34300 69648 71137 40086 N.A.
'Singapore 4422 3036 2614 2603 3834 9653 18896 18746 14088 6048
'United
Kingdom 7892 7368 5829 6304 5246 6210 8482 8071 9173 7137
'France 3781 4590 3340 5649 4142 4922 5374 5412 4269 4153
'Germany 2418 1583 1463 1912 2219 3840 4153 4531 4245 N.A.
'Chile 395 603 1266 742 604 760 903 1138 1250 1111
'Switzerla
nd 806 637 1069 1223 640 812 796 860 959 778
'Egypt 30 30 144 718 N.A.
'Spain 298 104 382 376 392 334 745 631 631 N.A.
66
EXPORT UNIT VALUE: The most valued peppermint oil is that of Switzerland whose unit
value was US$ 64,833 in 2010.
Table: Export unit value (in US Dollars per tonne) of peppermint oil
Exporter
s 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
'World
1646
8 15953 16437 17928 19720 22784 20917 21302 24445
'United
States of
America
2820
4 29058 29162 30559 29076 30025 30072 28625 38806 40122
'United
Kingdom
2013
3 19492 18683 16247 17844 26314 22089 28122 29879 29492
'Singapore
1914
3 6446 15842 15872 15909 23038 26956 28620 26235 15750
'France
1766
8 15993 21688 28675 16769 20594 24099 23633 30493 34322
'Chile
2323
5 23935 23231 23750 27364 33471 43103 33667
'Switzerla
nd
2686
7 49000 56263 43679 53333 45111 44222 53750 53278 64833
'Brazil
6600
0 16000 30000 30684 29167 30233 29750 34800 29250 35882
'Chinese
Taipei 6624 10767 10694 13500 12929 9500 12000 15286 20000
'Paraguay 6584 7200 7656 20944 21680 22150 24111 27200 26563
'Japan
2700
0 28750 32000 19667 34000 12000 21000 65500 63500 71000
67
Export unit value of peppermint oil of major exporting countries
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Exp
ort
un
it v
alu
e (U
S $
per
to
nn
e)
World
USA
UK
India
It is evident from graph that USA makes the maximum valued exports followed by UK.
Table: Import values (in thousand US Dollars) of peppermint oil in 2001-2010
Importers 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
'World
16420
8
17684
0
17534
6
13696
9
13378
0
15346
0
17091
5
19351
3
16601
6
'Singapore 2130 1923 2486 2612 4312 8871 15545 27311 29447 16597
'United Kingdom 23834 24643 23083 19966 19530 22992 25731 21341 20654 23369
'Germany 5366 6639 6510 6124 5535 8333 10053 14451 14743
'Japan 6503 6951 8458 10644 10149 8616 9910 10002 11379 11471
'United States of
America 5289 8736 10952 8593 13691 18161 19325 24907 9181 11065
'Belgium 8770 8933 8328 8357 7291 7747 8609 8384 6882
'China 1770 2630 3572 5354 3560 2951 3875 5387 6699 9777
'Mexico 11543 12776 13458 9256 8246 9459 10276 8576 5817
'France 6686 7943 6874 6317 5776 5286 7224 8599 5537 6484
'Switzerland 1484 2262 2486 2532 3134 4093 3509 3877 5430 5446
'Hong Kong, China 38175 38990 30365 9878 3676 6125 4249 5223 4977
It is evident from the table and the corresponding graph that of the USD 166 billion of imports in
2009, Singapore has made the maximum exports followed by UK, Germany and Japan.
68
Share of different countries in the global import valuesof peppermint oil in 2009
17.7
12.4
8.9
6.9
5.5
4.1
4
3.53.3 3.3 3
2.62
1.91.6
1.51.4
1.41.31.1
1
1
0.9
0.8
0.8
0.70.7
0.7
0.6
0.57.7
'Singapore'United Kingdom'Germany'Japan'United States of America'Belgium'China'Mexico'France'Switzerland'Hong Kong, China'Italy'Netherlands'Indonesia'Brazil'Thailand'Argentina'Philippines'Canada'Denmark'Republic of Korea'Russian Federation'Turkey'South Africa'Colombia'Israel'Chinese Taipei'Australia'Spain'Poland
The graph below indicates the global import values of peppermint oil from 2001-2009.
Althogh, the total imports have seen fluctuations but overall, there has been a minor change in
the average of the decade.
Global import value of peppermint oil from 2001-2009
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Imp
ort
val
ue
(in
th
ou
san
d U
SD
)
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the analysis of the foreign-trade statistics of the commodity peppermint oil (HS
330124) for the period 2001-2010 the following conclusions may be drawn:
69
• The trade in peppermint oil is dominated by India, USA, UK and Singapore. India dominates
the global export of peppermint oil in quantity where USA does so with respect to values. The
countries Singapore and UK are involved in export of one species and in import of other.
• The main acting countries in the peppermint trade are India and USA in 2006-2009.
• The global import values of peppermint oils although have fluctuated a lot, by 2009, they have
returned to their same value as in 2001.
6. Major Issues arising in Trade of MAPs
6.1 Conservation Issues: There have been concerns in the past few concerns regarding the
over-collection of wild varieties of medicinal plants. This is leading to loss of biodiversity and
leading to them being endangered. This has been attributed to a number of factors: narrow
margin of profits for collectors and tradesmen, lack of regulations at collector’s echelons. To
maintain the stability of supplies of medicinal plants on a long term basis and conserve the
species as a form of folklore medicine for the tribal people who can’t afford expensive
treatments, it is necessary to raise the conservation issues against their over-collection.
70
Fig: Illegal harvesting of bark in Ngome Forest
6.2 Biopiracy : ‘Biopiracy’ is used to describe the manipulation of intellectual property rights by
those intent on gaining exclusive control over genetic resources without giving adequate
recognition or remuneration to the original possessors of these resources. In Asia, biopiracy
is practised by multinationals and governments, under various pretexts, on biological and
genetic resources found mostly in indigenous peoples’ communities. It is not only genetic or
biological materials that are taken, but also the priceless and age-old collective indigenous
knowledge of how to use them, embodied in healing and farming practices indigenous
peoples have used for generations, and which have been proved to be scientifically sound and
effective. After genetic and biological materials, and the knowledge of how to use them, have
been collected, genetically manipulated ‘life forms’ are patented, and thus privatized and
commercialized.
Perhaps the most serious appropriation, however, and one that is taking place in almost all
communities of indigenous and tribal peoples in Asia, is the appropriation of indigenous
knowledge of biodiversity through ‘biopiracy’: indigenous peoples’ knowledge of plants,
animals and the environment is being used by scientists, medical researchers, nutritionists
and pharmaceutical companies for commercial gain, often without their informed consent
and without any benefits flowing back to them. Indigenous people have long been aware of
71
the medicinal properties of plants in their own areas. Traditional knowledge is regarded as
common heritage and not as a commodity to be patented for commercial exploitation,
perhaps to the exclusion of traditional owners. As with many other aspects of indigenous
culture, knowledge of different plants and their healing properties is restricted to a particular
class of people. Knowledge of the therapeutic properties of plants is passed on orally, from
generation to generation. Indigenous people gain access to such knowledge when they have
attained the appropriate level of initiation. Indigenous medicinal knowledge is sought after
by medical researchers and pharmaceutical companies to save research time and money.
When plants are identified as having commercial potential, their active properties are isolated
and the pharmaceutical company takes out a patent on inventions relating to those plants,
even though their benefits have been known to indigenous people for years.
Indigenous peoples are alarmed that knowledge concerning the nutritional use of indigenous
resources is being extensively documented. They are concerned that such information is
often given to researchers and others without indigenous people realizing how this
information might be exploited. The food industry increasingly recognizes the value of
indigenous knowledge concerning the nutritional benefits of particular plants and animals.
Traditional knowledge has always been an easily accessible treasure and thus has been
susceptible to misappropriation. The traditional knowledge, particularly, related to the
treatment of various diseases has provided leads for development of biologically active
molecules by the technology rich countries. In other words, traditional knowledge is being
exploited for bio-prospecting. Also Traditional knowledge is often misappropriated, because
it is conveniently assumed that since it is in public domain, communities have given up all
claims over it. Traditional Knowledge includes both the codified (documented) as well as
non-codified information (not documented but may be orally transmitted).
Bio-piracy of codified Indian traditional knowledge continues, since, this information exists
in regional languages, and there exists a language barrier due to which the patent offices are
unable to search this information as prior art, before granting patents. Formulations used for
the treatment of human ailments from traditional knowledge are time-tested since they have
been in practice for centuries. The reliability of the traditional medicine systems coupled with
the absence of such information with patent offices, provides an easy opportunity for
72
interlopers for getting patents on these therapeutic formulations derived from traditional
medicine systems.
Some examples of bio-piracy of traditional knowledge
Turmeric (Curcuma longa Linn.)- The rhizomes of turmeric are used as a spice for
flavouring Indian cooking. It also has properties that make it an effective ingredient in
medicines, cosmetics and dyes. As a medicine, it has been traditionally used for centuries
to heal wounds and rashes. In 1995, two expatriate Indians at the University of
Mississippi Medical Centre (Suman K. Das and Hari Har P. Cohly) were granted a US
patent (no.5, 401,504) on use of turmeric in wound healing. The Council of Scientific &
Industrial Research (CSIR), India, New Delhi filed a re-examination case with the US
PTO challenging the patent on the grounds of existing of prior art. CSIR argued that
turmeric has been used for thousands of years for healing wounds and rashes and
therefore its medicinal use was not a novel invention. Their claim was supported by
documentary evidence of traditional knowledge, including ancient Sanskrit text and a
paper published in 1953 in the Journal of the Indian Medical Association. Despite an
appeal by the patent holders, the US PTO upheld the CSIR objections and cancelled the
patent. The turmeric case was a landmark judgment case as it was for the first time that a
patent based on the traditional knowledge of a developing country was successfully
challenged. The US Patent Office revoked this patent in 1997, after ascertaining that
there was no novelty; the findings by innovators having been known in India for
centuries.
Neem (Azadirachta indica A. Juss.)- Neem extracts can be used against hundreds of
pests and fungal diseases that attack food crops; the oil extracted from its seeds can be
used to cure cold and flu; and mixed in soap, it provides relief from malaria, skin diseases
and even meningitis. In 1994, European Patent Office (EPO) granted a patent (EPO
patent No.436257) to the US Corporation W.R. Grace Company and US Department of
Agriculture for a method for controlling fungi on plants by the aid of hydrophobic
extracted Neem oil. In 1995, a group of international NGOs and representatives of Indian
farmers filed legal opposition against the patent. They submitted evidence that the
fungicidal effect of extracts of Neem seeds had been known and used for centuries in
Indian agriculture to protect crops, and therefore, was unpatentable. In 1999, the EPO
73
determined that according to the evidence all features of the present claim were disclosed
to the public prior to the patent application and the patent was not considered to involve
an inventive step. The patent granted on was Neem was revoked by the EPO in May
2000. EPO, in March 2006, rejected the challenge made in 2001 by the USDA and the
chemicals multinational, W. R. Grace to the EPO’s previous decision to cancel their
patent on the fungicidal properties of the seeds extracted from the neem tree.
Kava (Piper methysticum Forster)- Kava is an important cash crop in the Pacific, where
it is highly valued as the source of the ceremonial beverage of the same name. Over 100
varieties of Kava are grown in the Pacific, especially in Fiji and Vanuatu, where it was
first domesticated thousands of years ago. In North America and Europe, Kava is now
promoted for a variety of uses. French company L'Oreal - a global giant with US $10
billion a year in sales - has patented the use of Kava to reduce hair loss and stimulate hair
growth.
Ayahuasca(Banisteriopsis caapi Mort.)- For generations, Shamans of indigenous tribes
throughout the Amazon basin have processed the bark of B. caapi Mort. to produce a
ceremonial drink known as “Ayahuasca”. The Shamans use Ayahuasca (which means
“wine of the soul”) in religious and healing ceremonies to diagnose and treat illness, meet
with spirits, and divine the future.
American, Loren Miller obtained US Plant Patent (no.5, 751 issued in 1986), granting
him rights over an alleged variety of B. caapi Mort. which he had collected from a
domestic garden in Amazon and had called “Da Vine”, and was analyzing for potential
medicinal properties. The patent claimed that Da Vine represented a new and distinct
variety of B. caapi Mort., primarily because of the flower colour.
The Coordinating Body of Indigenous Organisations of the Amazon Basin (COICA),
which represents more than 400 indigenous tribes in the Amazon region, along with
others, protested about a wrong patent that was given on a plant species. They protested
that Ayahuasca had been known to natives of the Amazon rainforest and it is used in
traditional medicine and cultivated for that purpose for generations, so Miller could not
have discovered it , and should not have been granted such rights, which in effect,
appropriated indigenous traditional knowledge. On reexamination, USPTO revoked this
patent on 3rd November 1999. However, the inventor was able to convince the USPTO
74
on 17th April 2001, the original claims were reconfirmed and the patent rights restored to
the innovator.
Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.)- Quinoa is a staple food crop for millions in the
Andes, especially Quechua and Aymara people who have bred a multitude of quinoa
varieties. One traditional quinoa variety, Apelawa, is the subject of US patent 5,304,718
held by two professors from Colorado State University who claim the variety's male
sterile cytoplasm is key to developing hybrid quinoa. The patent claims any quinoa
crossed with male sterile Apelawa plants.
Hoodia (Hoodia gordonii(Masson) Sweet ex Decne)- For thousands of years, African
tribesmen have eaten the Hoodia cactus to stave off hunger and thirst on long hunting
trips. The Kung bushmen, San who live around the Kalahari desert in southern Africa
used to cut off a stem of the cactus about the size of a cucumber and munch it.
Hoodia is now at the centre of a bio-piracy row. In 1995, South African Council of
Scientific & Industrial Research (CSIR) patented Hoodia’s appetite-suppressing element
(P57) and hence, its potential cure for obesity. In 1997 they licensed P57 to British
Biotech Company, Phytopharm. In 1998, Pfizer acquired the rights to develop and market
P57 as a potential slimming drug and cure for obesity (a market worth more than £ 6
billion), from Phytopharm for $ 32 million. The San people eventually learned of this
exploitation of their traditional knowledge, and in June 2001, launched legal action
against South African CSIR and the pharmaceutical industry on grounds of bio-piracy.
They claimed that their traditional knowledge has been stolen, and the South African
CSIR had failed to comply with the rules of the Convention on Biodiversity, which
requires the prior informed consent of all stakeholders, including the original discoverers
and users. Phytopharm conducted extensive enquiries but were unable to find any of the
knowledge holders. The remaining San were apparently at the time living in a tented
camp 1500 miles away from their tribal lands. The South African CSIR claimed that they
have planned to inform the San of the research and share the benefits, but wanted to make
sure that the drug proved successful. The two sides entered into negotiations for a
benefit-sharing agreement, despite complications regarding who should be compensated:
the person who originally shared the information, their descendants, the tribe, or the
entire country. The San are nomads spread across four countries.
75
However, in March 2002, a landmark was reached in which the San will receive a share
of any future royalties. The settlement will not directly affect Phytopharm or Pfizer since
the San would be paid out of the CSIR’s royalties, as South African CSIR is the patent
holder. South African CSIR will probably receive a royalty of around 10% from
Phytopharm, which itself will receive royalties from sales from Pfizer. Thus San are
likely to end up with only a very small percentage of eventual sales.
Conus majus- A US multinational pharmaceutical company, Neurex Inc., with the help
of scientists from the University of the Philippines Marine Sciences Institute and the
University of Utah, now owns a Philippine snail that produces the world’s most powerful
painkiller. The scientists isolated from the Philippine sea snail (Conus magus) a toxin
called SNX 111, a painkiller that is claimed to be 100–1,000 times more effective than
morphine. SNX 111 will be highly profitable when marketed outside the USA. As a
painkiller, it will be most important in battlefields, hospitals and drugstores. The
Philippine snail is now covered by US patent numbers 5189020, 5559095 and 5587454.
The US government is expected to approve, the use of Neurex Inc.’s painkiller, as
Warner Lambert, one of the world’s major international pharmaceutical companies, has
entered into a marketing deal with Neurex. The removal of Philippine genetic resources is
in part being made possible by the government, which has embraced globalization
agreements. The Philippines became a member of the WTO in 1995 and since then, its
trade policies have hurt its ecology badly.
Other examples- To cite some more examples of biopiracy, the plant Phyllanthus
amarus Schum.et Thonn. is used for Ayurvedic treatment for jaundice, a US patent has
been taken for use against Hepatitis B. The plant Piper nigrum Linn. is used for
Ayurvedic treatment for vitiligo (a skin pigmentation disorder). A patent has been taken
in UK for the application of a molecule from Piper nigrum Linn. for use in treatment of
vitiligo.
The appropriation of elements of this collective knowledge of societies into proprietary
knowledge for the commercial profit of a few is one of the concerns of the developing
world. An urgent action is needed to protect these fragile knowledge systems through
national policies and international understanding linked to IPR, while providing its
development and proper use for the benefit of its holders. What is needed is a particular
76
focus on community knowledge and community innovation, enterprise and investment is
particularly important. The local communities or individuals do not have the knowledge
or the means to safeguard their property in a system, which has its origin in very different
cultural values and attitudes. The communities have a storehouse of knowledge about
their flora and fauna, their habits, their habitats, their seasonal behaviour and the like-and
it is only logical and in consonance with natural justice that they are given a greater say
as a matter of right in all matters regarding the study, extraction and commercialization of
the biodiversity. A policy that does not obstruct the advancement of knowledge, and
provides for valid and sustainable use and adequate intellectual property protection with
just benefit sharing is what is needed.
6.3 Illicit trade(Smuggling)- There have been reported cases of illicit trade of MAPs across the
political boundaries. The reasons attributable to the cases have been:
Lack of training of Custom Officials at the countries endowed with slipper orchids
“Porous” nature of the borders of these countries
Difficulties in distinguishing in vitro cultured materials or plants from legitimate sources
and those obtained illegally
Lenient penalties.
This factor has further led to concern on the conservation issues of the medicinal plants since
smuggled plants are usually beyond the natural regeneration capacity thereby making these plants
endangered.
Some of the reported smuggling cases are:
1. Cases of smuggling from India-
According to a news report, every year medicinal plants worth Rs.15-20 crores is sent
across Myanmar, Bangladesh to China, Germany, Britain, and America.13
A sikkimese blog reported the arrest of four residents of Sikkim for smuggling a hill
fungus, known as ‘Yarsagumba’ in local terminology.14 This fungus is known to have
immense medicinal value particularly in respect of treatment of impotence in men.
The fungus Cordyceps sinensis is used as an aphrodisiac and has immense medicinal
value in traditional Chinese medicines. In pharmaceuticals, it is used to manufacture
potent antibiotics, immune system stimulants, anti tumor agents etc.
77
Western Ghats is bestowed with the abundance of Saptarangi (Salacia reticulata) and
Guvada in Uttara Kannada and Belguam districts. As they fetch substantial value in
the National-International markets, the same are being smuggled.15 These medicinal
plants, useful in curing cancer, uterus and intestinal related diseases, are smuggled to
Hyderabad, Chennai and from there to international market and Multinational
companies relating to Plant Based Medicines.
Across the border in Nepal, medicinal plants like jatamashi (Nardostachys
grandiflora) have spawned a thriving black market. Despite export restrictions,
there's a big market in India for jatamashi's bitter essential oil, which is used in
Ayurvedic medicine as a sedative, and to keep hair thick and glossy. Chris Robbins, a
program officer with TRAFFIC USA, reports finding jatamashi advertised in U.S.
catalogs at prices 300 times what the collector receives for the raw plants.16
2. Cases of smuggling from World- Every year, many cases are recorded of ginseng illicit trade
from Russia. Several plants of the family orchidaceae being smuggled have been recorded. In a
review article of Orchid Smugglers by Chow Yong Neng, seven cases of orchid smuggling have
been reported in 2001-2007.
7. International Policies Regulating MAP Trade
7.1 Sustainable Development or WildCrafting:
In sustainable trade of medicinal plants, new methods are devised to protect key natural
resources from the wild while improving the livelihoods and benefits for local people through
application of guidelines on sustainable wild collection. With around 15,000 of the estimated
50,000–70,000 plant species used for medicine, cosmetics or dietary supplements threatened, the
need for developing practical guidelines to ensure supplies are sustainable has never been more
urgent. It is important to ensure that all local stakeholders—from collectors to local
organizations, resource management authorities, and businesses—are involved in partnership
from the outset, and that clear and realistic market openings should be identified for harvested
products and with ways devised to give “added value” to products and a fair share of benefits to
the owners of traditional knowledge. Adequate resources should be allocated for training of local
78
project workers in wild plants’ resource assessment, harvest monitoring, collection and
processing techniques and most importantly for protection of their traditional knowledge and
benefit-sharing.
A series of challenges and successful approaches exist in the goal towards sustainable collection
and trade of medicinal plants. TRAFFIC has made the following recommendations for
improving the management of wild plants in a report entitled “Wild For The Cure”19:
• Regulatory context. Agencies engaged in sustainable wild plant collection should acquire a
thorough understanding of the legal context within which they will be operating, in order to work
in concert with it. In settings where laws governing collection and management of wild plants are
found to be in need of updating or otherwise improving, legislators should consider using
principles of International Standard for Sustainable Collection of Wild Medicinal and Aromatic
Plants(ISSC-MAP) as a guide to revision of such laws. In this way, they would simultaneously
achieve synergy with goals of international environmental agreements such as the Convention on
Biological Diversity (CBD). In contexts where legislation specific to wild plants is absent,
legislators should consider mainstreaming ISSC-MAP into national and/or local law.
• Partnership. Projects for sustainable wild plant collection should engage local stakeholders,
for example businesses, local collectors, and local organizations with experience in the field, in
partnership, including by identifying clear and realistic market openings for harvested products.
• Project documentation. In many locations with a strong tradition of organized collection of
wild plants there can be a wealth of knowledge on wild plants that is not necessarily written
down. Project staff engaged in management of harvest of wild plants should take care to ensure
that documentation available to support schemes is appropriate to local needs.
• Training. Projects on sustainable wild plant collection should factor in ample time and funds
for capacity-building and training of local project workers in resource assessment, harvest
monitoring, collection and processing techniques, protection of their traditional knowledge, and
benefit-sharing.
• Project time span. Project managers aiming for sustainable wild plant collection should adopt
a long-term perspective in order to allow time to support projects through to stability.
79
• Certification. Project managers, governments, NGOs and others involved in sustainable
collection of wild plants should evaluate on a case-by-case basis whether certification is the best
option for reinforcing sustainability.
• International co-ordination. The current project benefited from centralized and fully funded
coordination and standardization of efforts on the ground, including to support compliance and
promote relevance to inter-governmental conservation and development frameworks, such as the
CBD. Similar projects should take care to install oversight at this higher level.
• Research. Scientists and other individuals with appropriate local knowledge should consider
prioritizing research on plant species for which sustainability of wild harvest is a major concern,
to safeguard species important for health and livelihoods.
• Initiation of a value-adding strategy and market development. Development agencies
involved in projects adding value to raw plant material should also support capacity-building and
tools for resource management.
Initiatives taken towards WildCrafting18: People world across understand the problems faced
by the biodiversity and the urgent need of sustainable collection of medicinal plants. Hence,
steps are being taken towards the same. Some of the recent initiatives taken are:
1. Berlin, Germany, 15th September 2010—Worldwide application of a new standard for
sustainable harvesting of wild medicinal, aromatic, dye and food plants and trees is
charting new ways to protect the species and their habitats and benefit the communities
that depend on them, according to a new report from world wildlife trade monitoring
network, TRAFFIC.
2. Karnataka, India- It is now possible to collect the resin of the White Palle tree used in
traditional Indian medicine and incense without removing the bark and killing the trees
that provide it.
3. Cambodia- A new co-operative has boosted returns to medicinal plant harvesting
communities through better harvesting, drying and marketing.
80
4. Brazil- A women’s co-operative in Amazonia State and a major natural cosmetics
company are aiming to co-operate on the marketing of sustainably harvested products.
5. Lesotho and South Africa- A harvesting and management strategy for Kalwerbossie,
whose tubers are used to treat digestive disorders, will ensure sustainable harvest of the
plant, thus providing long term benefits to communities.
6. The BMZ-funded ‘Saving Plants that Save Lives and Livelihoods’ project has taken an
important step in bridging the gap between words and action to manage wild plants for
the future of humankind.
FairWild Standard- The newly developed FairWild guidelines are an invaluable tool to support
sustainable harvesting and management regimes, a worldwide challenge facing the conservation
community. The contribution of the FairWild Standard to improving local livelihoods and
conservation of wild plant diversity were feature during a series of events at the 10th Conference
of the Parties (CoP) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in Nagoya, Japan, from
18–29 October 2010. Events included a public one at Nagoya Gakuin University on 19th
October and a CBD CoP 10 side event on 22nd October. The project examined implementation
of the International Standard for Sustainable Collection of Wild Medicinal and Aromatic Plants
(ISSC-MAP), which has subsequently been fully incorporated within the expanded FairWild
Standard. The revised FairWild Standard FairWild Standard version 2.0 was launched on 8th
September 2010 and is aimed to make sure of fair trade of medicinal plants.
7.2 CITES: Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora
It is an international agreement between governments whose aim is to ensure that international
trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival.
Annually, international wildlife trade is estimated to be worth billions of dollars and to include
hundreds of millions of plant and animal specimens. The trade is diverse, ranging from live
animals and plants to a vast array of wildlife products derived from them, including food
products, exotic leather goods, wooden musical instruments, timber, tourist curios and
81
medicines. Levels of exploitation of some animal and plant species are high and the trade in
them, together with other factors, such as habitat loss, is capable of heavily depleting their
populations and even bringing some species close to extinction. Many wildlife species in trade
are not endangered, but the existence of an agreement to ensure the sustainability of the trade is
important in order to safeguard these resources for the future.
Because the trade in wild animals and plants crosses borders between countries, the effort to
regulate it requires international cooperation to safeguard certain species from over-exploitation.
CITES was conceived in the spirit of such cooperation. Today, it accords varying degrees of
protection to more than 30,000 species of animals and plants, whether they are traded as live
specimens, fur coats or dried herbs20.
CITES is an international agreement to which States (countries) adhere voluntarily. States that
have agreed to be bound by the Convention ('joined' CITES) are known as Parties. Although
CITES is legally binding on the Parties – in other words they have to implement the Convention
– it does not take the place of national laws. Rather it provides a framework to be respected by
each Party, which has to adopt its own domestic legislation to ensure that CITES is implemented
at the national level. For many years CITES has been among the conservation agreements with
the largest membership, with now 175 Parties1.
Working: Roughly 28,000 species of plants are protected by CITES against over-exploitation
through international trade. They are listed in the three CITES Appendices.5
Appendices I, II and III to the Convention are lists of species afforded different levels or types of
protection from over-exploitation22.
Appendix I lists species that are the most endangered among CITES-listed animals and plants
(see Article II, paragraph 1 of the Convention). They are threatened with extinction and CITES
prohibits international trade in specimens of these species except when the purpose of the import
is not commercial, for instance for scientific research. In these exceptional cases, trade may take
place provided it is authorized by the granting of both an import permit and an export permit (or
re-export certificate).
82
Appendix II lists species that are not necessarily now threatened with extinction but that may
become so unless trade is closely controlled. It also includes so-called "look-alike species", i.e.
species of which the specimens in trade look like those of species listed for conservation reasons.
International trade in specimens of Appendix-II species may be authorized by the granting of an
export permit or re-export certificate. No import permit is necessary for these species under
CITES (although a permit is needed in some countries that have taken stricter measures than
CITES requires). Permits or certificates should only be granted if the relevant authorities are
satisfied that certain conditions are met, above all that trade will not be detrimental to the
survival of the species in the wild.
Appendix III is a list of species included at the request of a Party that already regulates trade in
the species and that needs the cooperation of other countries to prevent unsustainable or illegal
exploitation (see Article II, paragraph 3, of the Convention). International trade in specimens of
species listed in this Appendix is allowed only on presentation of the appropriate permits or
certificates.
However, there are a few exceptions. Appendix I plants that have been artificially propagated
must be accompanied by a certificate of artificial propagation or an export permit, but an import
permit is not required. These plants can be traded for commercial purposes. Both orchid
seedlings and tissue cultures, if grown on sterile media in sterile containers, are exempt from
CITES permit requirements. Many Appendix II plants, excluding cacti, are also exempt from
CITES permit requirements.
International Enforcement
CITES representatives convene at least once every 2 or 3 years to evaluate the state of the
world’s wild fauna and flora. During these conventions, national representatives vote on whether
to transfer species from one appendix to another and whether to add or remove a species from
the list.
Participating countries enforce the treaty’s provisions and impose penalties upon individuals
caught smuggling plants and wildlife listed in the appendices. Both importing and exporting
countries are held accountable for adhering to CITES provisions and regulations in the trading of
83
plants and animals. Countries must ensure that species are not illegally exported or imported
from one country to another. Persons caught smuggling plants or wildlife from one country to
another may face criminal prosecution.
U.S. Enforcement
As the U.S. management authority, the U.S. Department of the Interior’s U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (FWS) is responsible for overseeing all aspects of CITES within the United States. In
particular, FWS enforces all CITES regulations with regard to endangered animals or products
from these animals being transported into or out of the United States. FWS ensures that
importers and exporters have the proper permits for transporting and trading these animals or
products. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service (APHIS)21 enforces the provisions of CITES related to plants and works closely with
FWS. Officials from APHIS’ Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) program inspect all plant
shipments imported into the United States through the 16 plant-inspection stations located
nationwide. Depending upon inspection results, APHIS employees may refuse entry, seize, or
release plants that are imported or presented for export. APHIS is responsible for enforcing plant
quarantine laws and the CITES permit requirements during these plant inspections. In addition,
employees of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection unit
now handle inspection of nonliving CITES imports such as lumber, medicinal products, and
other related items at U.S. ports-of-entry.
APHIS’ Role
In fiscal year 2005, nearly 1.5 billion plants were inspected for quarantine purposes at APHIS’
16 plant inspection stations. More than 50 million of those plants were regulated because of their
status as endangered species. APHIS also facilitated the export of 3 million CITES plants and
more than 2 million kilograms of CITES-regulated products such as ginseng. If plants protected
by CITES arrive at an APHIS plant-inspection station without the appropriate documents or the
plants do not match the documentation accompanying them, inspectors seize the plants
immediately. APHIS then obtains legal ownership through forfeiture procedures. APHIS notifies
FWS of all seized plants protected by CITES. FWS distributes these plants to designated “rescue
84
centers” throughout the United States. One such rescue center is the Smithsonian Institution in
Washington, DC, where many endangered orchids are displayed for the public’s enjoyment and
education. CITES officials of the countries from which the seized plants originated are notified
of the plants’ placement in the rescue center, and the exporting country may arrange to bring the
plants back at its own expense. FWS also consults with APHIS to ensure that exotic animal
species entering the country under CITES meet animal-quarantine requirements so that these
animals will not introduce pests and diseases that could endanger animal health or the livestock
industries of the United States. When U.S. zoological facilities apply to FWS for CITES permits
to import protected animals, FWS verifies with APHIS that these facilities are in compliance
with the Animal Welfare Act. APHIS also manages two quarantine facilities for smuggled birds.
After the birds undergo quarantine, APHIS works with FWS to place these smuggled,
endangered, and threatened birds in aviaries or zoological parks.
Securing Necessary Permits
Importing CITES-protected plants into the United States requires several documents from
various government agencies. All permit arrangements should be made as far in advance as
possible. APHIS inspectors cannot make last-minute arrangements to allow endangered plants
into or out of the United States without the proper documentation from FWS and the CITES-
management authorities of other countries. Permits that may be required include the following:
• Export permits from the wildlife permit office of the country of origin.
• Import permits for Appendix I material from the FWS Federal Wildlife Permit Office.
• Import permits from APHIS. All plants imported for growing or propagation must meet plant
health permit and quarantine requirements.
• A Protected Plant Permit (or general permit) from APHIS for commercial shipments of
CITES-regulated plants.
7.3 Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property Rights (ICIPR):
85
ICIPR24 is a reference to indigenous peoples' rights to their heritage. Indigenous peoples'
heritage is a living heritage and it includes objects, knowledge, performing works, and literary
works - all of those things created in the past, now and in the future.
The nature and use of indigenous peoples' heritage is passed down from generation to
generation. Usually the particular objects, sites and knowledge pertain to a particular indigenous
group or territory.
Essentially, ICIPR are a bundle of rights of indigenous peoples which protect the right to:
own and control ICIPR
commercialise ICIPR in accordance with traditional laws and customary obligations
benefit commercially from the authorised use of ICIPR
enjoy full and proper attribution
protect significant and sacred materials
The intellectual and cultural property rights (ICPR) of indigenous peoples are also under threat.
These include their beliefs, knowledge (agricultural, technical, medicinal, ecological), movable
and immovable cultural properties (human remains; sacred burial and prayer grounds),
customary laws, traditions, rights to flora, fauna and biodiversity in their midst, arts and artistic
works and other forms of cultural expression, handed down through the generations. These
intellectual and cultural properties are living traditions that are vital to the identity and cultural
survival of the indigenous peoples. They are holistic and cannot be divided. Given that
indigenous knowledge is collectively owned, only the group as a whole may consent to sharing
indigenous cultural and intellectual property. In many instances, use of indigenous arts and
cultural expression takes place without the knowledge or permission of the indigenous artists, or
the artists’ communities. Sometimes such use is inappropriate, derogatory or culturally offensive.
Indigenous peoples are also concerned about the unauthorized use and reproduction of secret or
sacred material and spiritual rituals for commercial purposes. This type of appropriation results
in the disclosure of secret/sacred material to those not authorized to know or view such material.
As biopiracy has spread, indigenous peoples saw that the quest for plant and animal species
necessitates access to their lands. This has led governments to exercise rights over the land, and
86
to the denial of the rights of indigenous people to their traditional lands. The process places
indigenous people in positions where they cannot manage and develop their inherited medicinal
and agricultural knowledge. Government conservation authorities and multinational companies
are collecting specimens from indigenous lands as part of their programmes to create inventories.
The collected species are made available for research without reference to the owners from
whom the specimens were collected. Under the existing framework of intellectual property
rights, indigenous peoples cannot control the use of the genetic material taken from them.
UN efforts to protect indigeneous peoples’ ICIPR24:
As indigenous peoples in Asia strengthen their effort to win recognition of their rights, a number
of international instruments have been initiated by the UN to support the rights of indigenous
peoples to protect and enjoy their cultural heritage. One was the Draft Principles and Guidelines
for the Protection of the Heritage of Indigenous People, which recommends standards for
governments to ensure that the heritage of indigenous peoples survives for future generations and
continues to enrich the common heritage of humanity. The UN Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization (UNESCO) also co-established the Model Treaty on the Protection of
Expressions of Folklore against Illicit Exploitation. The Treaty recognizes indigenous peoples as
the traditional owners of artistic heritage, including folklore, music and dance, created within
indigenous territories and passed down through the generations.
Yet these international enactments have failed to provide a working system and applicable
standards that could ensure the implementation and enforcement of the instruments. In particular,
the nature of indigenous peoples’ intellectual property, which is often inseparable from spiritual,
cultural, social and economic aspects of indigenous life, and the notion of collective ownership
of such property, are not adequately addressed in existing international intellectual property law.
This is not to say that there have been no international efforts to address the problem of
indigenous peoples’ resources. The most widespread and fundamental threat to indigenous
peoples’ resources is the failure (often by states) to respect and protect the right of indigenous
peoples to control their own territories under their customary forms of ownership. Recognizing
this, the UN has sponsored several initiatives to resolve the problem.
ILO Convention 169- The International Labour Organization is the only international
body which has produced an international legally binding instrument on indigenous
87
peoples – ILO Convention 169. ILO Convention 169 ratified an earlier international
instrument adopted by the ILO in 1957 – the Indigenous and Tribal Populations
Convention 107, which was the first attempt to codify indigenous peoples’ rights in
international law. Adopted in Geneva in June 1989, ILO Convention 169 hails the
‘distinctive contributions of indigenous and tribal peoples to the cultural diversity and
social and ecological harmony of humankind and to international cooperation and
understanding’. It also addresses land and resource rights concerns. One problem is that,
as of August 2002, only 17 countries had ratified ILO Convention 169. The only Asia-
Pacific country that has ratified the Convention is Fiji. The other countries that have
ratified the Convention are Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Denmark,
Dominica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, The Netherlands, Norway, Paraguay,
Peru and Venezuela. It is unfortunate that, over a decade after ILO Convention 169 came
into force, controversy continues. The Convention has been criticized for not fully
embodying the indigenous point of view. Indeed, some imply that the wording of the
document is a direct affront to the rights of indigenous peoples. Directly after the
adoption of Convention 169 by the ILO, the Indigenous Peoples Preparatory Meeting in
Geneva produced a resolution rejecting it and asking governments not to ratify it. Yet,
despite its shortcomings, most indigenous leaders and organizations see the Convention
as an important step towards an improvement of their human rights situation and are
eager for governments to ratify it.
UNDP Sponsored Study- The study, entitled Conserving Indigenous Knowledge:
Integrating Two Systems of Innovation, was carried out by the Rural Advancement
Foundation International (RAFI). The results of the study were disseminated in regional
meetings of indigenous organizations to raise awareness of traditional knowledge and to
address ways in which indigenous peoples can preserve and protect their cultural heritage
and intellectual property.
Legislative Measures Enforced By Countries in protection of peoples’ ICIPR: Creating,
modifying and implementing national laws on traditional knowledge and genetic resources is the
most visible action taken by governments. This law-making is spurred on by pressure to meet
international agreements. The general trend in Asia is towards the commercialization of genetic
88
resources and the expansion of IPRs over traditional knowledge. This trend is most visible in the
adoption of Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV)-style legislation that
does little to recognize and reward farmers’ innovation in plant-breeding. UPOV is an
intergovernmental organization with headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. It was established by
the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants to oversee the
protection of new varieties of plants under an intellectual property right. Attempts have been
made to slow down this trend until impact assessments of the proposed changes are fully
explored, but with little success. Nevertheless, many developing countries are also attempting to
promote legal changes to protect biodiversity and related traditional knowledge.
In some countries, governments have seemingly made efforts to empower local communities,
such as in the Philippines with the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA); in Thailand, where
the indigenous peoples were granted a Peoples’ Assembly and the introduction of the Thai
Traditional Medicine Law that seeks to protect traditional knowledge related to medicinal plants;
in Bangladesh, where a Department of Indigenous Peoples Development was created along with
the drafting of a Biodiversity and Community Knowledge Act; and in India and Indonesia where
an amendment to the Indian Constitution and the decentralization law allow village bodies
(panchayats) and adat villages to take decisions on local biological resources.
But new laws can also bring in more administrative structures and accompanying bureaucracy,
and often depend on political will. At the local level, multiple bodies and groups, often with
overlapping jurisdictions, may increase the problem of local resource management and create
unnecessary conflicts with informal systems of control and management.
89
90
7.4 Overview of Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act (PPV and FRA):
The law enacted in India as an implication of ICIPR26:
After several years of deliberations and several amendments in the original draft, the latest draft
of "Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmer Rights Act" (PPV and FRA), 2001 was passed by
the Parliament (Lok Sabha) in August 2001.
The President also gave his assent to the Bill on November 5, 2001, so that the Bill was notified
as Act No. 53 of 2001, in the Gazette of India. It was to be enforced from a date that was to be
notified by the Union Minister of Agriculture. As a signatory to the Trade Related Intellectual
Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement under the World Trade Oragnization (WTO) regime, it was
mandatory for the Government of India to enact law to provide for protection of plant varieties
either by patents or by a ‘sui generissystem’ (a unique set of laws) or by a combination of both.
In the PPV and FRA, the provisions relating to breeders' rights are more or less the same as
recognised by the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties (UPOV).
One of the most important feature of this bill is that it grants Fanners' Rights by recognizing
fanners as breeders, cultivators and conservators of the seeds in their possession. It allows the
fanners to use for resowing or sell their harvested seed, although they will not be allowed to sell
the seed under a brand name. In other words the farmers will not be able to sell their harvested
seed to another farmer for the purpose of raising a crop for commercial seed production.
A farmer will also be able to register a variety developed by him, provided it conforms to the
criteria of novelty, distinctiveness, uniformity and stability. India is the first country in the world
which has provided for Farmers' rights in their Protection of Plant Variety Act. The PV and FRA
have been described by plant breeders and NGOs with both positive and negative aspects.
Positive and negative aspects of PPV and FRA:
Positive aspects (gains) Negative aspects (losses)
1. Farmers get a legal right to sell seed of
varieties.
1. Uncertainly about whether farmers can trade in
seeds
2. Farmers are recognized as breeders 2. A bureaucratic authority to monitor
implementation of the Act
3. Researches will have right to conduct 3. The procedure for registration of varieties is
91
experiments with patented varieties lengthy, expensive and stringent for farmers (as
also for breeders)
4. No varieties with terminator genes will
be registered
4. Filing of law suits against farmers possible
5. Any government agency or NGO can file
a claim on a 5. variety developed by local
community
5. Researcher's use of protected varieties may
allow entry of GM crops by the' back door
6. Farmers rights proposed for the first time
any where in the world
The bill also grants breeders the rights to conduct research with a branded variety in order to
create a new variety, but distinguishes between a new variety and an essentially derived variety
(EDV). The bill provides for the establishment of a National Gene Fund, which would facilitate
'benefit sharing' between the farmers and any body interested in their knowledge. The bill also
calls for setting up of the 'Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights (PPV and FR)
Authority' which' will consider applications for granting breeder's rights to a new variety and
will also give permission to use an EDV.
References:
92
1. Rachelle D. “Development of Civilizations” in Past to Present; Brown Paper Publishers,
London. 2nd ed; 1982. pp 367-8
2. Lange D. “International Trade In Medicinal And Aromatic Plants” pp 1-2. Available online
at http://library.wur.nl/frontis/medicinal _aromatic_plants/11_lange.pdf. Retrieved on March
8th, 2011 at 7:04pm
3. http://nccam.nih.gov/health/whatiscam/D347.pdf D347 . Retrieved on March 8th, 2011 at
7:10 pm
4. Nutraceuticals in ‘Issue Brief’ prepared by North Carolina Association for Biomedical
Research, Pp 3. Available online at http://www.aboutbioscience.org/pdfs/Nutraceuticals.pdf.
Retrieved on March 8th, 2011 at 7:15pm
5. Evans W.C., Commerce in Crude Drugs in Trease and Evans’ Pharmacognosy, 9th ed,
Published by Elsevier’s Publishers, UK; 1999. pp 57-60
6. http://www.ecocert.com/en/our-approach on March 13th, 2011 at 1:30 pm
7. http://www.ota.com/ Retrieved on March 8th, 2011 at 7:20 pm
8. http://files.dcp2.org/pdf/DCP/DCP69.pdf Retrieved on March 8th, 2011 at 7:12 pm
9. Rath B. in Globalisation, Global Trend in Herbal Market, and The Impact Thereof on
Medicinal Plants in Orissa pp 4-8. http://www.vasundharaorissa.org/Research
%20Reports/GlobalisationAndMedicinalplantsOfOrissa.pdf. Retrieved on February 2nd,
2011 at 6:36pm
10. http://etd.uasd.edu/ft/th9571.pdf. retrieved on March 10th, 2011 at 2:30pm
11. http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/pdf/s4928e/s4928e.pdf Retrieved on March 8th, 2011 at
7:35pm
12. Subedi B.P., ‘Marketing of Medicinal and Aromatic Plant Products of Nepal in Domestic and
International Markets’ Asia Network for Sustainable Agriculture and Bioresources
(ANSAB) pp2-3. Available online at
http://www.ansab.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/marketing-_MAPs_DOF_training.pdf
Retrieved on March 27th, 2011 at 10:35pm
13. Data collected using the databases from http://www.trademap.org/
14. The Smuggling of Medicinal Plants. Retrieved from
http://www.eng.chauthiduniya.com/2011/01/the-smuggling-of-medicinal-plants on February
27th, 2011 at 10:22pm
15. http://sikhim.blogspot.com/2008/07/arrests-in-sikkim-for-smuggling.html
93
16. Measures to prevent medicinal plants smuggling. Retrieved from
http://udayavani.com/news/5168L14-Measures-to-prevent-medicinal-plants-smuggling.html
on February 27th, 2011 at 10:35pm
17. Smuggling in North-East India. Retrived from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1594/is_n1_v9/ai_20417687/ on February 27th, 2010 at
10:45pm
18. http://www.traffic.org/home/2010/9/15/sustainable-wild-plant-harvesting-proves-a-global-
success.html. Retrieved on March 10th, 2011 8:58am
19. ‘Wild for a Cure’. Available online at
http://www.traffic.org/species-reports/traffic_species_plants14.pdf. Retrieved on March 10th,
2011 at 9:05 am
20. http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/what.shtml Retrieved on February 10th, 2011 5:35pm
21. http://www.cites.org/eng/app/index.shtml . Retrieved on February 10th, 2011 5:17pm
22. http://www.cites.org/eng/app/Appendices-E.pdf Retrieved on February 10th, 2011 5:16pm
23. http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/species.shtml . Retrieved on February 10th, 2011 5:27pm
24. Bengwayan M.A. ‘Intellectual and Cultural Property Rights of Indigenous and Tribal
Peoples in Asia’ pp-14 Available online at
http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/pdfid/469cbf970.pdf. Retrieved on March 8th, 2011
25. http://www.smartcopying.edu.au/scw/Jahia/lang/en/scw/go/pid/820
26. PPV bill. Available online at
http://www.molecular-plant-biotechnology.info/biotechnology-intellectual-property-rights-
IPR-Intellectual-property-protection-IPP/intellectual-property-rights-iprs-for-plant-
breeding/protection-of-plant-varieties-and-farmers-rights-act-ppv-fra.html. Retrieved on
March 8th, 2011
94