UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Community Rights and Benefit-Sharing Mechanisms for Traditional Knowledge Protection: A Comparative Legal Analysis and Development of the Community Benefit-Sharing Governance Framework

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.47191/ijsshr/v9-i7-36

Auteurs

Kraiwit Settathum · Egkapong Sarnnoi · Piyapun Santaveesuk

Année déclarée

2026

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:04:47.741045+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-09T19:04:47.741045+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

Mahasarakham University · Sripatum University

Pays d’affiliation déclarés

TH

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

Traditional knowledge and intangible cultural heritage constitute invaluable cultural resources that contribute to identity preservation, social cohesion, cultural continuity, and sustainable development. However, conventional intellectual property systems have demonstrated significant limitations in protecting traditional knowledge because such knowledge is collectively held, intergenerationally transmitted, and deeply embedded within cultural and social practices. As a result, concerns regarding cultural appropriation, biopiracy, unauthorized commercialization, and inequitable use of community knowledge have intensified worldwide. This article aims to examine community rights and benefit-sharing mechanisms for traditional knowledge protection through a comparative legal analysis and to develop an integrated governance framework applicable to contemporary cultural heritage protection. This study employs a comparative legal analysis of six countries: Thailand, India, China, New Zealand, Australia, and Canada. Relevant legislation, policy documents, international instruments, and scholarly literature concerning traditional knowledge, indigenous knowledge, traditional cultural expressions, and intangible cultural heritage were systematically analyzed. The comparison focuses on seven analytical dimensions, including community rights recognition, ownership structures, traditional knowledge registries, prior informed consent, access and licensing mechanisms, benefit-sharing arrangements, and sustainable community development. The findings reveal substantial differences in legal and governance approaches. India demonstrates a robust traditional knowledge registration system through the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library and biodiversity-related access-and-benefit-sharing mechanisms. China emphasizes state-led protection through specialized intangible cultural heritage legislation and national registration systems. New Zealand advances indigenous cultural stewardship through the principles of kaitiakitanga and the Wai 262 framework. Australia promotes Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP) principles that emphasize ethical cultural governance and community consultation. Canada highlights collaborative governance and the integration of Indigenous Knowledge into public decision-making processes. In contrast, Thailand continues to face challenges arising from fragmented legal protections, limited recognition of community ownership, and the absence of a comprehensive benefit-sharing system. The comparative analysis suggests that effective traditional knowledge protection requires a transition from fragmented intellectual property approaches toward integrated governance systems that recognize community rights, strengthen cultural participation, ensure prior informed consent, and establish equitable benefit-sharing mechanisms. The findings provide policy recommendations for legal reform, cultural governance, and sustainable development strategies, particularly for countries seeking to strengthen community-based cultural heritage protection. This article develops the Community Benefit-Sharing Governance Framework (CBSG Framework), a novel conceptual model that integrates six interrelated components: community rights recognition, traditional knowledge registration, prior informed consent, licensing and access governance, equitable benefit-sharing, and sustainable community development. The framework contributes to the growing discourse on traditional knowledge governance by bridging intellectual property law, indigenous rights, cultural heritage protection, and sustainable development. It offers a comprehensive governance approach that can support cultural justice, community empowerment, and long-term preservation of traditional knowledge in the twenty-first century.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W7170166895

DOI

10.47191/ijsshr/v9-i7-36

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

article

Juridictions étudiées — sources explicites

AU · CA · CN · IN · NZ · TH

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v9-i7-36
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W7170166895

Relations bibliographiques documentées

Références et liens déclarés par les sources ; ils ne constituent pas une preuve juridique ni une qualification UGLC. Affichage limité à 20 références sortantes.

• openalex:w1523493462 · CITES
• openalex:w4206610535 · CITES

0 références entrantes au sein du corpus détecté

Statut documentaire

Publication académique détectée

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.