Origin is described by the Merriam-Webster On-line Dictionary as:-
a: rise, beginning, or derivation from a source b: the point at which something begins or rises or from which it derives. In layman’s language one might simply say that origin describes where an item, being, or thing that is tangible or intangible is traced to have initially come from
We often trace the origins of families, tribes, languages, traditions, customs, fruits, trees, minerals, flowers, ideas, and so on in an effort to establish the source and accredit the people, country or region associated with that product.
A few decades past the world was preoccupied with establishing the origins of peoples for the purpose of labeling them with a nationality, a race, a religion, and even a culture or caste. Soon afterwards, scientists uncovered DNA testing as a means to accurately tell us where various organisms originated from, and in our every day life, who was the undisputed father of which child.
Interestingly, origin testing is selectively applied, and selectively given either a cursory mention, or an in-depth analysis. This selective application is usually dependant on the institution concerned and what outcome it is looking to achieve. So the establishment of origin has a social, political and economic impact when applied in various selected ways.
What criteria does a licensing agency use to establish if a company is local or foreign? How does one describe who is a Zambian? What characteristics constitute the description of a resident of a particular society? How can one claim to hail from a particular village? These are simple but important issues that we use in our daily lives to describe ourselves, our businesses, and who we are.
Many of us will fill in forms and claim that we come from a particular village and are subjects of a listed Chief when in fact we have never seen that village nor have we met or interacted with the Chief that we claim to be our traditional leader.
This casual treatment of origin may be harmless and fashionable for the purposes of anchoring our identity when applied at the domestic level, but there are some serious implications when unleashed at a business or international level.
Origin is a big issue at the regional trade level, and an even bigger issue at the international trade level. The diversity among people at the regional level is far less than that at the international level where race, economic level, geography, social systems, and weather are significant parameters to contend with.
Currently both the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) are grappling with the intricacies of integrating regional economies under a Free Trade Area and possibly a Customs Union. A major hurdle in these deliberations is the one of Rules of Origin. Where do various goods and services come from? The World Trade Organization (WTO) is plagued with the same question as it endeavors to create global trading rules that all countries must adhere to.
At the regional level we see various permutations that are being used to create Rules of Origin which include the minimum percentage of local input of raw materials, labour, value addition, and so on. Some rules are being adopted within SADC and possibly different rules are being adopted by COMESA.
The strategy is that if the member states finally agree to a set of rules that are acceptable across the board then those rules will apply within that particular regional economic group. These sorts of negotiations are on-going behind the scenes and Governments are constantly challenging their private sector and other interested groupings to participate in fine tuning these Rules of Origin such that they support local development in addition to regional development.
At the global level however, the scenario is quite different.
The world is subdivided into a wider variety of interest groups with North America, Europe, China, India, South America, East Asia, and Africa being the prominent players. Much effort is focused on Africa, South America, East Asia, China, and India on Rules of Origin as these groupings are perceived to be ones that may try to circumvent the rules in order to trade with the rest of the world un-hampered. Many conferences and seminars are run to educate the countries in these regions on how to follow the rules and become good trading partners with the developed world.
In the background, the issue of ‘Intellectual Property’ (IP) rights is downplayed and relegated to later discussions much further down on the WTO agenda. The current emphasis is to get the Rules of Origin accepted across the globe and thereafter the IP issues can then be tabled for discussion.
One wonders how the global trading system will decipher the impact of IP on the Rules of Origin. It is interesting to note that while the developing world is busy trying to ensure that goods and services are produced on home soil, our colleagues in the West are outsourcing their production lines to China, India and most of East Asia. Today most European and American products that have home grown labels are actually produced in Greater Asia. Philips, LG, Siemens, Nokia, Motorola, Nike, Polo, Addidas, Cherokee, Rover, several computer brands, etc. are produced on the Asian continent. It will be interesting to see how the debate will go on this issue. Can a Philips TV be said to originate from Holland when it is actually manufactured in Asia? Can a Motorola Mobile Phone be said to originate from the USA when it is clearly marked ‘Made in China’?
There is a great likelihood that IP will suddenly account for a substantial part of the production of any goods or services to give the Western countries a special and solid foothold in claiming credit for the development of many products. The Rules of Origin are likely to tilt towards the Intellectual Content away from the physical input and give the developed nations the unfair advantage they have always enjoyed.
Published 29 January 2008
