Biodiversity, biopiracy and benefits: What allegations of biopiracy tell us about intellectual property
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Developing World Bioethics 6 (3):158–173 (2006)
ABSTRACTThis paper examines the concept of biopiracy, which initially emerged to challenge various aspects of the regime for intellectual property rights in living organisms, as well as related aspects pertaining to the ownership and apportioning of benefits from ‘genetic resources’ derived from the world’s biodiversity.This paper proposes that we take the allegation of biopiracy seriously due to the impact it has as an intervention which indexes a number of different, yet interrelated, problematizations of biodiversity, biotechnology and IPR. Using the neem tree case as an example, it describes activists’ use of the term as one that involves a deliberate simplification of science and IPR. Additionally, it argues that in so doing, biopiracy is positioned as a touchstone that mobilizes actors and problems, and ultimately generates ‘solutions’ to the very challenges it creates.The paper will also encourage a view of biopiracy claims that does not always treat them simply as claims of theft, or as a misallocation of benefits, but rather as claims that are designed to raise broader questions about the IPR system itself. It concludes by advocating that, in order to properly understand how to address biopiracy, we must be prepared to move beyond the current narrow readings to develop a more complete picture of the term’s influence in challenging how, and by whom, the decisions about what is natural and what is invented come to be made
|Keywords||bioprospecting intellectual property rights biodiversity TRIPS biopiracy CBD|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Bram De Jonge (2011). What is Fair and Equitable Benefit-Sharing? Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 24 (2):127-146.
Similar books and articles
Markku Oksanen & Juhani Pietarinen (eds.) (2004). Philosophy and Biodiversity. Cambridge University Press.
John Snapper (1991). The Uses and Justifications for the Regulation of Intellectual Property. Social Epistemology 5 (1):78 – 87.
Baruch A. Brody (2010). Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 20 (3):231-249.
D. B. Resnik (2003). A Pluralistic Account of Intellectual Property. Journal of Business Ethics 46 (4):319 - 335.
Paul Oldham & Anthony Mark Cutter, Global Status and Trends in Intellectual Property Claims: Patent Dataset for Biodiversity.
Nandini K. Kumar (2009). India's Preparedness in Tackling Biopiracy and Biobanking : Still Miles to Go. In Margaret Sleeboom-Faulkner (ed.), Human Genetic Biobanks in Asia: Politics of Trust and Scientific Advancement. Routledge
Pete Bsumek (1999). Biopiracy: The Plunder of Nature and Knowledge. Social Epistemology 13 (2):239 – 240.
Asterios Tsioumanis, Konstadinos Mattas & Elsa Tsioumani (2003). Is Policy Towards Intellectual Property Rights Addressing the Real Problems? The Case of Unauthorized Appropriation of Genetic Resources. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 16 (6):605-616.
Monica Ribadeneira Sarmiento (2009). Biopiracy or Fallacy : Identifying Real Biopiracy Cases in Ecuador. In Evanson C. Kamau & Gerd Winter (eds.), Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge, and the Law Solutions for Access and Benefit Sharing. Earthscan
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads54 ( #67,836 of 1,781,482 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #96,728 of 1,781,482 )
How can I increase my downloads?