CAN WE CLAIM UBE AS OUR OWN?
CAN WE CLAIM UBE AS OUR OWN?
Whenever Filipinos see ube-flavored products being sold abroad—from ice cream and cakes to lattes and doughnuts—we feel a sense of pride. After all, ube has become one of the most recognizable symbols of Filipino cuisine. But can we honestly claim ube as exclusively our own?
The answer is both yes and no.
Yes, because the word “ube” is Filipino. It is part of our language, culture, and culinary identity. No, because the plant itself, scientifically known as Dioscorea alata, is not found only in the Philippines. It originated in a broader area of Island Southeast Asia and has been cultivated for centuries in neighboring regions as well.
However, this should not stop us from pursuing something even more valuable: international recognition for uniquely Filipino varieties and products derived from ube.
Consider how Mexico protects tequila, how France protects champagne, and how India protects Darjeeling tea. These products are not protected merely because of what they are, but because of where they come from and the traditions behind them. This is known as a Geographical Indication (GI).
Fortunately, the Philippines is already moving in that direction. The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) has been working toward GI protection for Ube Kinampay of Bohol, a heritage variety celebrated for its distinctive aroma, texture, and flavor. Unlike ordinary purple yam, Kinampay is deeply connected to Bohol’s soil, climate, and farming traditions.
In my opinion, this effort deserves full government support.
Instead of trying to claim ownership over all ube, we should focus on protecting the varieties and products that are undeniably Filipino. Why not pursue GI recognition not only for Ube Kinampay but also for certain regional versions of ube-based delicacies? Could a properly defined and standardized Ube Halaya someday qualify for a similar form of protection? These are questions worth exploring.
The economic benefits could be substantial. GI-certified products often command premium prices, create jobs, encourage tourism, and preserve agricultural traditions. More importantly, they prevent foreign manufacturers from using Philippine names to market inferior imitations.
This issue is bigger than dessert. It is about agricultural heritage, intellectual property, and national identity.
For decades, Filipino farmers have cultivated local ube varieties adapted to specific environments. Researchers have also identified traditional cultivars such as Kinampay and Kabusah as valuable genetic resources. These are treasures that deserve protection, documentation, and promotion.
I therefore suggest that the Departments of Agriculture, Trade and Industry, Tourism, and Science and Technology work together with IPOPHL, local governments, and farmers’ cooperatives to develop a national strategy for the Philippine ube varieties. Such a program could include certification systems, export promotion, research funding, and international branding campaigns similar to those used by Thailand for its restaurants and food products abroad.
The world already associates ube with the Philippines. The question now is whether we are prepared to transform that cultural advantage into a long-term economic and intellectual property asset.
We may not own the species. But if we act wisely, we can certainly strengthen our claim as the world's leading steward, innovator, and promoter of ube.
And perhaps that is an even greater achievement.
RAMON IKE V. SENERES
www.facebook.com/ike.seneres iseneres@yahoo.com senseneres.blogspot.com 09088877282/07-04-2027
Comments
Post a Comment