Lessons from the Interaction of Biotechnology, Intellectual Property and World Needs (original) (raw)
Related papers
Intellectual Property Rights in Biotechnology and the Fate of Poor Farmers' Agriculture
The journal of world intellectual property, 2006
The recent revolution in the field of biotechnology has triggered off another round of controversy between the developed countries of the North and the developing countries of the South concerning access to genetic resources and equitable sharing of its benefits. Developed countries assert ownership claims on associated technologies, while developing countries claim ownership of genetic resources. The heart of the matter, however, lies in the application of conflicting conventions and protocols in respect of genetic resources and biotechnology: genetic resources are treated as public goods, while biotechnology is treated as a private good. Developing countries that claim ownership to a large reserve of the earth's pool of genetic resource feel that this exposes them to the exploitative tendencies of multinational corporations (MNCs) that are mainly owned by developed countries of the North. MNCs exploit the advantages as well as the weaknesses in the various conventions increasingly to monopolize the seed and germplasm industry, without due consideration for farmers and developing countries. This paper analyses these developments and proposes that a better regime of benefit sharing that recognizes farmers' or indigenous rights alongside patents and plant breeders' rights will go a long way to introducing a more even playing field that is mutually favourable to both parties.
1993
Policymakers in developing countries responsible for national agricultural research are considering the implications of adopting intellectual property rights for biotechnology. The impetus for these deliberations comes from many factors, including the desire of developing countries to acquire and use new technologies in agricultural research, and the pressure exerted on developing countries in international negotiations to strengthen their intellectual property legislation. In this report, the introductory chapters summarize the increasing significance of intellectual property rights for agricultural biotechnology and current international trade- and development-related debates on IPR and developing-country responses to these issues. An analysis is then provided of the complexities, options and implications regarding intellectual property rights in relation to three national technology objectives: acquiring either public or proprietary biotechnologies, developing and protecting national innovations, and choices for technology transfer and licensing.
Challenges of agro-biotechnologies, intellectual property rights and globalization
2005
The present paper is an attempt to analyse the role of academic institutions in meeting the challenges posed by agro-biotechnologies, IPRs, globalisation and its implications for achieving the millennium development goals. The problems of implementing the MDGs are certainly intertwined and the entire nexus requires attention. However, serious doubts are being raised by many that these daunting goals would be achieved in the present international system, with an uneven 'globalisation' and conflicts generated by the TRIPS. Moreover, given the nature of agro-biotechnologies and the fact that commercial interests are found to be predominant, it is doubtful whether it will have any impact on food security, bio-safety or poverty reduction. The preceding context demands that the academic institutions pay greater attention to socio-economic & environmental objectives, IPR training & documenting traditional knowledge. This necessitates adoption of an active role in the development process rather than merely developing a node in a knowledge network.
The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 2006
The recent revolution in the field of biotechnology has triggered off another round of controversy between the developed countries of the North and the developing countries of the South concerning access to genetic resources and equitable sharing of its benefits. Developed countries assert ownership claims on associated technologies, while developing countries claim ownership of genetic resources. The heart of the matter, however, lies in the application of conflicting conventions and protocols in respect of genetic resources and biotechnology: genetic resources are treated as public goods, while biotechnology is treated as a private good. Developing countries that claim ownership to a large reserve of the earth's pool of genetic resource feel that this exposes them to the exploitative tendencies of multinational corporations (MNCs) that are mainly owned by developed countries of the North. MNCs exploit the advantages as well as the weaknesses in the various conventions increasingly to monopolize the seed and germplasm industry, without due consideration for farmers and developing countries. This paper analyses these developments and proposes that a better regime of benefit sharing that recognizes farmers' or indigenous rights alongside patents and plant breeders' rights will go a long way to introducing a more even playing field that is mutually favourable to both parties.
Jama The Journal Of The American Medical …, 2007
The biotechnology industry has in recent years come under attack from an ethical point of view concerning its intellectual property rights and the non accessibility of life-saving products for many of the poor in less developed countries and developing countries. The industry has replied with economic and legal justifications for its actions. The result has been a communication gap between the industry on the one hand and low income nations critics on the other. This paper attempts to present and evaluate the arguments on many sides and suggests a possible way out of the current impasse. It attempts to determine the ethical responsibility of the biotechnology industry in making products available to the needy, while at the same time developing the parallel responsibilities of individuals, governments, and NGOs. It concludes with the suggestion that the industry develop an international code for its self-regulation.
World Review of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, 2005
The present paper is an attempt to analyse the role of academic institutions in meeting the challenges posed by agro-biotechnologies, IPRs, globalisation and its implications for achieving the millennium development goals. The problems of implementing the MDGs are certainly intertwined and the entire nexus requires attention. However, serious doubts are being raised by many that these daunting goals would be achieved in the present international system, with an uneven 'globalisation' and conflicts generated by the TRIPS. Moreover, given the nature of agro-biotechnologies and the fact that commercial interests are found to be predominant, it is doubtful whether it will have any impact on food security, bio-safety or poverty reduction. The preceding context demands that the academic institutions pay greater attention to socio-economic & environmental objectives, IPR training & documenting traditional knowledge. This necessitates adoption of an active role in the development process rather than merely developing a node in a knowledge network.
2009
Since the formation in 1976 of the first modern biotechnology company, Genentech, the biotechnology industry has grown to become one of the major engines of innovation in virtually all developed economies. Indeed, biotechnology’s growth in areas ranging from health, agriculture, environment and industrial processes has been phenomenal. This expansion has been paralleled by mounting public concerns because of potential ethical issues and impact on our health, food and the environment. The importance of innovation in biotechnology and its widespread applications in health, agriculture and commerce has helped bring issues related to intellectual property (IP) rights and technology transfer into sharp focus. The ongoing global debate on IP rights, especially related to health and agriculture, has hinged on proprietorship of knowledge and its ethical and political implications for innovation, knowledge sharing and technology transfer. The means by which knowledge and technologies are mov...