ADVERTISEMENTS:
Biopiracy suggests to use of biological resources by corporations. Particular activities usually covered by the term are:
i. Unauthorised use of biological resources such as plants, animals, micro-organisms and genes,
ii. Unauthorised use of traditional communities knowledge on biological resources,
ADVERTISEMENTS:
iii. Unequal share of benefits between a patent holder and the indigenous community whose resource or knowledge has been used,
iv. Patenting biological resource with no respect to patentable criteria.
More than 90 per cent of the earth’s biological diversity is located in Africa, Asia and South America; indigenous communities which have developed and nurtured such diversity are not acknowledged — much less compensated – for the material and local knowledge that is taken from them. This inequity is exacerbated by the growing use of patents, which grant exclusive protection to Northern corporations and researchers for material or knowledge, which originated in the South.
And what is more, a majority of the populations of the South rely on indigenous knowledge for their survival. A report, which was prepared by the Rural Advancement Foundation International (RAFI) estimates that “80 per cent of the world’s people continue to rely upon indigenous knowledge for their medical needs and possibly two-thirds of the world’s people could not survive without the foods provided through indigenous knowledge of plants, animals, microbes and farming systems”.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
As Vandana Shiva points out “biopiracy and patenting of indigenous knowledge is a double theft because first it allows theft of creativity and innovation, and secondly, the exclusive rights established by patents on stolen knowledge steal economic options of everyday survival on the basis of our indigenous biodiversity and indigenous knowledge. Over time, the patents can be used to create monopolies and make everyday products highly priced”.
The justification given by big corporations for patent has been that they lose a lot of money which they spend in research development to developing world piracy. The estimates provided for royalties lost in agricultural chemicals are US$202 million and US$2,545 million for pharmaceuticals.
However, as the Rural Advancement Foundation International (RAFI), in Canada has shown, if the contribution of developing world peasants and tribals is taken into account, the roles are dramatically reversed: the US owes US$302 million in royalties for agriculture and $5,097 million for pharmaceuticals to developing countries.
Besides the money involved the unequal trade, patenting of life- forms and knowledge is big threat to the very food security of poorer rural communities and the indigenous people. Many biotech companies claim that genetically engineered foods will help alleviate hunger and increase food security, their acts of patenting the knowledge and food that has been developed over centuries it may be a threat to food security.
Genetic diversity in agriculture has been the main stay of many indigenous communities and rural communities of the South. In fact the reason why there has been so much of bio-diversity in the South has been partly attributed to the sustainable agricultural practices of small farmers and communities. These communities have over the centuries acquired knowledge about plants, seeds and breeds which are best adapted to agro-climates, pests and so on.
And this has contributed to the general availability of food even through climatic aberrations and changes. Farmers in Semi-arid regions of India at one time knew the particular variety of crops to be grown which are drought resistant. The same regions now see an increasing disaster of failed crop production and suicides by farmers.