Consent and Benefit-Sharing

Building Ethical Partnerships Around Hodopathy Knowledge

Hodopathy draws upon knowledge preserved by Adivasi communities, traditional practitioners, elders and forest-dependent families. When this knowledge or the biological resources associated with it contribute to documentation, research, education or responsible product development, two principles become essential: informed consent and fair benefit-sharing.

Consent protects the right of knowledge holders to decide whether and how their knowledge may be accessed. Benefit-sharing helps ensure that those who preserve knowledge and biological resources participate fairly in the value created from their use.

These principles must work together. Consent without fair benefits can become extraction, while benefit-sharing without genuine consent can become a payment for something that was never freely authorised.

What Does Consent Mean?

Consent is the voluntary and informed agreement of an individual, community or authorised institution to a clearly explained activity.

It should be obtained before:

Interviewing a knowledge holder
Photographing or recording a practice
Collecting a biological sample
Documenting a plant or preparation method
Conducting laboratory or field research
Transferring information or samples to another institution
Publishing knowledge in print or online
Developing a formulation or commercial product
Seeking intellectual-property protection
Using recordings or data in advertising
Depositing material in a database or repository
Using community data to train artificial-intelligence systems

Consent for one activity does not automatically authorise every future use.

Permission to record an interview, for example, may not include permission to publish the interview, disclose a sacred practice or use the information for commercial development.

Free, Prior and Informed Consent

Hodopathy supports the principle of free, prior and informed consent—or prior informed approval and effective involvement, according to the applicable legal and community context.

Free

Consent should be voluntary and free from:

Coercion or threats
Misleading information
False promises
Pressure from officials or powerful individuals
Unfair financial influence
Fear of losing services, employment or benefits
Manipulation arising from differences in literacy or bargaining power

A person or community must be able to refuse without punishment or loss of legitimate entitlements.

Prior

Consent should be obtained before access, collection, recording, research or use begins.

Seeking approval after information has already been recorded, samples have been removed or results have been published does not provide meaningful prior consent.

Communities need reasonable time to:

Discuss the proposal internally
Consult elders and practitioners
Seek independent advice
Understand possible consequences
Decide who has the authority to respond
Negotiate conditions
Refuse or propose alternatives

Informed

Information must be presented honestly, clearly and in an appropriate language.

Knowledge holders should understand:

Who is requesting access
The purpose of the proposed activity
What knowledge or resources are requested
How information will be recorded and stored
Who will have access
Where samples may be sent
Whether commercial development is possible
Whether intellectual property may be sought
Expected risks and uncertainties
Proposed monetary and non-monetary benefits
Confidentiality arrangements
Duration of the agreement
Procedures for withdrawal and complaints
What may happen after the project ends

Technical, legal and scientific terms should be explained in plain language. Written documents should be accompanied by oral explanation wherever required.

Consent Is a Continuing Process

Consent should not end when a form is signed. It should continue throughout the relationship.

New consent or renewed agreement may be needed when:

The research purpose changes
A new institution joins the project
Samples are transferred to a third party
Confidential information is proposed for publication
A non-commercial study develops commercial potential
A patent or other intellectual-property application is considered
New data technologies are introduced
Material is proposed for export
The project continues beyond the agreed period
A new product category is developed

A staged consent process can help communities make separate decisions as a project evolves.

Project stage	Consent question
Initial discussion	May the proposed activity be explained and considered?
Documentation	May specified knowledge be recorded?
Sample collection	May identified biological material be collected?
Research	May the knowledge or material be scientifically studied?
Data or sample transfer	May it be shared with named third parties?
Publication	What may be published and what must remain confidential?
Product development	May the results be used for commercial development?
Intellectual property	May an application be pursued and under what ownership terms?
Future use	What additional permission is required for later applications?

This approach prevents broad consent language from being used to authorise activities that were never properly discussed.

Who Should Give Consent?

Traditional knowledge may be held at different levels:

By an individual practitioner
By a particular family or lineage
By a group of practitioners
By a village or community
By more than one community
By a customary institution
By a recognised statutory body

The appropriate consent authority should be identified before documentation begins.

Consent may need to involve:

The specific knowledge holder
Family or lineage representatives
Community elders
The Gram Sabha
A customary council
A Biodiversity Management Committee
Forest-rights institutions
Competent government authorities

Consent from a local institution should not automatically replace the permission of an identifiable practitioner whose specialised knowledge is being requested. Similarly, one individual should not authorise the disclosure of knowledge held collectively by a community.

Some projects may therefore require layered consent from both the community and the particular knowledge holder.

The Right to Refuse or Restrict Access

Knowledge holders may decide:

Not to participate
Not to answer particular questions
Not to provide biological samples
To remain anonymous
To prohibit photography or recording
To restrict public access
To allow academic research but not commercial use
To require renewed permission before publication
To protect exact plant locations
To exclude sacred or secret knowledge
To permit use for a limited period
To require destruction or return of certain records

A refusal should be respected without attempting to obtain the same knowledge indirectly from another person who lacks authority to share it.

Recording Consent Properly

Consent may be recorded through:

Written agreements
Signed or thumb-impressed forms
Audio or video records
Gram Sabha or community resolutions
Witnessed oral consent
Memoranda of understanding
Access and Benefit-Sharing agreements
Records in an appropriate local language

The method should reflect the nature of the activity and community preferences. A signature alone does not prove that the person understood the proposal.

Consent records should identify:

The parties
The knowledge or resource covered
Permitted and prohibited uses
Confidentiality requirements
Benefit-sharing commitments
Duration
Review dates
Third-party transfer restrictions
Withdrawal procedures
Grievance and dispute-resolution mechanisms
Signatures, witnesses or community approvals

Both sides should receive accessible copies of the final agreement.

What Is Benefit-Sharing?

Benefit-sharing means distributing the benefits arising from the use of biological resources or associated traditional knowledge in a fair and equitable manner.

Benefits may arise from:

Research grants
Publications and educational programmes
Biological-resource access
Development of processes or formulations
Intellectual property
Licensing
Commercial products
Technology transfer
Data or sample repositories
Training programmes
Conservation activities

Benefit-sharing should recognise both the knowledge contribution and the community’s role in conserving biological resources.

The Convention on Biological Diversity identifies fair and equitable benefit-sharing as one of its three central objectives. The Nagoya Protocol further connects access to genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge with prior informed consent and mutually agreed terms. Convention on Biological Diversity—Nagoya Protocol.

Monetary Benefits

Depending on the project and applicable law, monetary benefits may include:

Upfront access payments
Fees for the time of knowledge holders
Research-participation payments
Milestone payments
Royalties
Licence fees
A percentage of sales or profits
Community conservation funds
Payments for cultivation or sustainable collection
Joint-venture income
Equity participation
Research or education funds

The amount and method should reflect the value, duration, risks and intended use of the contribution.

Payment for attending an interview should not automatically be treated as full compensation for every later use of the knowledge.

Non-Monetary Benefits

Communities may value long-term opportunities as much as, or more than, a one-time payment.

Non-monetary benefits may include:

Training and skill development
Scholarships and fellowships
Employment
Community nurseries and medicinal-plant gardens
Support for forest and water conservation
Research equipment
Local laboratories or processing facilities
Technology transfer
Access to research results
Educational materials in local languages
Joint authorship or acknowledgement
Participation in scientific meetings
Improved storage and value-addition facilities
Support for intergenerational knowledge transmission
Community-controlled archives
Healthcare, education or livelihood infrastructure

Benefit packages should be developed through consultation rather than imposed by the researcher or company.

Mutually Agreed Terms

Benefit-sharing should be documented through mutually agreed terms. These are the negotiated conditions governing access, use, benefits and responsibilities.

Mutually agreed terms may cover:

The exact knowledge or biological resource
Permitted purposes
Prohibited uses
Collection location and quantity
Research methods
Data and sample ownership
Storage and transfer
Confidentiality
Publication review
Intellectual-property ownership
Monetary benefit calculations
Non-monetary benefits
Payment timing
Community development commitments
Conservation responsibilities
Reporting and audit rights
Duration and renewal
Withdrawal and termination
Grievance procedures
Dispute resolution
Consequences of non-compliance

Agreements should not use vague language such as “all future uses” without explaining the practical consequences.

India’s Access and Benefit-Sharing Framework

India’s Biological Diversity Act, as amended, the Biological Diversity Rules 2024 and the applicable Access and Benefit-Sharing regulations provide the national framework for access to biological resources and associated traditional knowledge.

The legal requirements depend on factors including:

Who is seeking access
Whether the activity involves research or commercial use
Whether traditional knowledge is involved
The origin of the biological resource
Whether material or research results will be transferred
Whether intellectual property is proposed
Whether an exemption applies
Which authority has jurisdiction

The National Biodiversity Authority explains that relevant applications may be reviewed in consultation with State Biodiversity Boards and Biodiversity Management Committees. The BMC may facilitate prior informed consent from concerned local communities or individual benefit claimants. National Biodiversity Authority—ABS FAQs.

The Authority also explains that benefit claimers may include individuals or groups who conserve biological resources or hold associated traditional knowledge. Monetary benefits may be distributed through the biodiversity framework according to applicable agreements and procedures. National Biodiversity Authority—Benefit-Sharing.

Compliance with regulatory procedures does not remove the need for respectful, transparent relationships with the actual knowledge holders.

Fairness Requires Negotiating Capacity

An agreement may be legally documented but still be unfair if one side does not understand its implications or has no meaningful opportunity to negotiate.

Communities should have access to:

Independent legal or technical advice
Translation into appropriate languages
Sufficient decision-making time
Clear financial information
Explanation of commercial uncertainty
Information about alternative arrangements
Copies of all documents
Representatives chosen by the community
Protection against conflicts of interest

Hodopathy supports capacity-building so that consent and benefit-sharing become informed negotiations rather than formalities.

Intellectual Property and Commercial Development

When traditional knowledge contributes to an invention, process, formulation or other development, intellectual-property questions should be addressed before an application is filed.

The agreement should clarify:

Who contributed what
Whether an application may be filed
Who will be named as inventor where legally appropriate
Who will own the resulting rights
Whether the community will be a co-owner or beneficiary
How licensing income will be shared
Whether the source of knowledge will be disclosed
What happens if the application is rejected
Whether the community may continue customary use
How confidential knowledge will be protected

A patent or other right should never be used to prevent a community from continuing its legitimate customary practices.

Withdrawal and Future Use

Knowledge holders should understand how withdrawal will operate.

Before publication or irreversible processing, withdrawal may allow records or samples to be returned, destroyed or excluded from further use. After information has entered a public publication or completed analysis, complete removal may not always be possible.

Agreements should therefore explain:

The last date for withdrawal without limitation
What happens to existing samples
Whether anonymised data may be retained
Whether completed publications can remain available
Whether future commercial use will stop
How ongoing benefit obligations will be handled

These issues should be discussed before consent is obtained—not after a dispute arises.

Transparency and Accountability

Consent and benefit-sharing arrangements should be monitored throughout the project.

Responsible organisations should maintain:

Consent records
Knowledge-source records
Biological-resource traceability
Copies of agreements
Payment and benefit records
Third-party transfer records
Research and publication updates
Conservation reports
Grievance records
Periodic community-review meetings

Communities should be informed about important developments, including research findings, patent applications, commercial partnerships and product launches.

Responding to Misuse

A clear grievance process should allow knowledge holders to report:

Use beyond the agreed purpose
Unauthorised publication
Breach of confidentiality
Failure to provide benefits
Misrepresentation of community knowledge
Unauthorised sample transfer
Harmful harvesting
Incorrect attribution
Exclusion from decision-making

Possible remedies may include correction, removal of content, suspension of access, renewed negotiation, payment of outstanding benefits, compensation or referral to a competent authority.

Hodopathy’s Commitment

Hodopathy seeks to build long-term relationships based on dignity, trust and shared responsibility.

We are committed to:

Seeking consent before accessing community knowledge
Explaining proposed activities in accessible language
Respecting refusals and restrictions
Obtaining renewed permission when purposes change
Recognising individual and collective knowledge holders
Protecting sacred, secret and sensitive information
Negotiating fair monetary and non-monetary benefits
Documenting mutually agreed terms
Maintaining traceability of knowledge and biological resources
Sharing research progress and results
Protecting communities from misleading claims
Supporting conservation and local livelihoods
Following applicable biodiversity requirements
Providing accessible grievance mechanisms
Reviewing agreements as projects evolve

From Permission to Partnership

Consent is not a document collected at the beginning of a project. Benefit-sharing is not a donation offered after value has been created.

Together, they form the foundation of an ethical partnership.

When knowledge holders participate in decisions, understand the proposed use and share fairly in the resulting benefits, documentation and research can support both cultural preservation and responsible innovation.

Through transparent consent, mutually agreed terms and equitable benefit-sharing, Hodopathy aims to ensure that the communities preserving traditional knowledge remain respected participants in its future.

Hodopathy—Knowledge Shared with Consent, Benefits Shared with Fairness.

This webpage provides general educational information and is not legal advice. Access, consent, intellectual-property and benefit-sharing obligations depend on the parties, activity, resource, location and applicable law. Project-specific regulatory and legal guidance should be obtained before accessing or using biological resources or traditional knowledge.