Politics, culture, and governance in the development of prior informed consent in indigenous communities

Current Anthropology

Volumn 47, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 119-142

  Rosenthal, Joshua P ^a  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33646271832     PISSN: 00113204     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/497670     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. AAA (American Anthropological Association). 2004. American Anthropological Association Statement on Ethnography and Institutional Review Boards. http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/irb.htm (accessed July 2004).
2. Alexiades, M., and D. Pelusso. 2002. Annex 7.1 Prior Informed Consent: The anthropology and politics of crosscultural exchange. In Biodiversity and traditional knowledge: Equitable partnerships in practice, ed. S. A. Laird, 221-27. London: Earthscan. [KB]
3. Anderson, E. N. 2002. On Maya medicine and the biomedical gaze. Current Anthropology 43:789-93.
4. Barreda, Andrés. 2003. Biopiracy, bioprospecting, and resistance: Four cases in Mexico. In Confronting globalization: Economic integration and popular resistance in Mexico, ed. Timothy A. Wise, Hilda Salazar, and Lauren Carlsen, 101-28. Bloomfield, Conn.: Kumarian Press. [BB, EAB]
5. Barsh, R. L. 2001. The North American pharmaceutical industry and research involving indigenous knowledge. New York: First People Worldwide at NYU.
6. Beattie, A. J., C. T. Kheng, I. Prance, W. Barthlott, E. Elisabetsky, R. Farrel, D. Simpson, and J. Rosenthal. n.d. New products and industries from biodiversity. In Millennium ecosystem assessment, Condition Reports. New York: UNEP.
7. Benatar, S. R. 2004. Towards progress in resolving dilemmas in international research ethics. Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics, Winter, 574-82.
8. Berlin, B., and E. A. Berlin. 1996. Medical ethnobiology of the highland Maya of Chiapas, Mexico. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
9. Berlin, B., and E. A. Berlin. 2002a. Comment on: Maya medicine in the biological gaze. Bioprospecting research as herbal fetishism, by Ronald Nigh. Current Anthropology 43:466-67.
10. Berlin, B., and E. A. Berlin. 2002b. On Maya medicine in the biological gaze. Current Anthropology 43:790-91. [BB, EAB]
11. Berlin, B., and E. A. Berlin. 2003. NGOs and the process of prior informed consent in bioprospecting research: The Maya ICBG project in Chiapas, Mexico. In NGOs in the governance of biodiversity, ed. Marie Roué, 629-38. International Social Science Journal 179. [BB, EAB]
12. Berlin, B., and E. A. Berlin. 2005. Community autonomy and the Maya ICBG project in Chiapas, Mexico: How a bioprospecting project that should have succeeded failed. Human Organization 63: 32-99.
13. Berlin, Elois Ann, and Brent Berlin. 2004a. Prior informed consent and bioprospecting in Chiapas. In Indigenous intellectual property rights: Legal obstacles and innovative solutions, ed. Mary Riley, 341-72. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press. [BB, EAB]
14. Berlin, Elois Ann, and Brent Berlin. 2004b. Community autonomy and the Maya ICBG project in Chiapas, Mexico: How a bioprospecting project that should have succeeded failed. In The future lies ahead: Applied anthropology in century XXI, ed. Robert A. Hackenberg and Beverly Hackenberg, 472-86. Human Organization 63. [BB, EAB]
15. Bhutta, Z. A. 2004. Beyond informed consent. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 82:771-77.
16. Boyce, J., ed. 2003. The public domain. Law and Contemporary Problems 66:1-483. http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/lcp/indexpd.htm (accessed August 29, 2005). [SB]
17. Brant Castellano, M. 2003. Ethics of aboriginal research. Journal of Aboriginal Health 1:98-114. [KB]
18. Brown, M. F. 1993. Facing the state, facing the world: Amazonia's native leaders and the new politics of identity. L'Homme 126-128, 33:307-26.
19. Brown, M. F. 1998. Can culture be copyrighted? Current Anthropology 39:193-222. [KH]
20. Brown, M. F. 2003. Who owns native culture? Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
21. Brush, S. B. 1999. Bioprospecting the public domain. Cultural Anthropology 14:535-55. [SB]
22. Brush, S. B. 2005. Protecting traditional agricultural knowledge. Washington University Journal of Law and Policy 17:1-51. [SB]
23. Brush, S. B., and S. Carrizosa. 2004. Implementation pathways. In Accessing biodiversity and sharing the benefits: Lessons from implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity, ed. S. Carrizosa, S. B. Brush, B. Wright, and P. McGuire, 67-78. Bonn: IUCN Environmental Law Programme. [SB]
24. CIHR (Canadian Institutes for Health Research). 2005. Guidelines for Health Research involving aboriginal peoples prepared by the Ethics Office of the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR), Ottawa, September 2005 draft (Version 1.8). http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/ 29134.html. [KB]
25. CIOMS (Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences). 1993. International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. Geneva.
26. Cunningham, H. 1998. Colonial encounters in postcolonial contexts. Critique of Anthropology 18:205-33. [KH]
27. Emanuel, E. J., D. Wendler, J. Killen, and C. Grady. 2004. What makes clinical research in developing countries ethical? The benchmarks of ethical research. Journal of Infectious Disease 189:930-37.
28. etcgroup.org. n.d. US government's $2.5 million biopiracy project in Mexico cancelled: Victory for indigenous peoples in Chiapas. http://www.etcgroup.org/search2.asp?srch=ICBG. [JS]
29. Fowler, C. 2004. Accessing genetic resources: International law establishes multilateral system. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 51:609-20. [SB]
30. Freese, Duane. 2005. "Noble savages" saving noble men. Tech Central Station. http://www.techcentralstation.com/index.html, posted July 11.
31. Glowka, L., F. Burhenne-Guilmin, and H. Synge. 1994. A guide to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.
32. Greely, H. T. 2001. Informed consent and other ethical issues in human population genetics. Annual Review of Genetics 35:785-800.
33. Greene, S. 2004. Indigenous People Incorporated? Culture as politics, culture as property in pharmaceutical bioprospecting. Current Anthropology 45:211-37.
34. Greene, S. n.d. Customizing indigeneity: Paths to a cultural politics in neoliberal Peru. MS. [SG]
35. Gross, D., and S. Plattner. 2002. Anthropology as social work. Anthropology News 43 (8):22.
36. Hansen, S., and J. VanFleet. 2003. Traditional knowledge and intellectual property: A handbook on issues and options for traditional knowledge holders in protecting their intellectual property and maintaining biological diversity. AAAS 0-87168-690-2.
37. Hardison, P. 2000a. PIC/PIA Part II: ICBG-Maya: A case study in prior informed consent. ibin.net. http://www.cbin.ec.gc.ca/ips/ ibin15.cfm?lang=e (accessed February 28, 2005).
38. Hardison, P. 2000b. Prior informed consent (PIC), prior informed approval (PIA) Part 1. ibin.net no. 15. http://www.cbin.ec.gc.ca/ips/ ibin16.cfm?lang=e (accessed February 28, 2005).
39. Hayden, C. 2003. When nature goes public: The making and unmaking of bioprospecting in Mexico. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
40. International HapMap Consortium. 2003. The International HapMap Project. Nature 426:789-95. [PAM]
41. International HapMap Consortium. 2004. Integrating ethics and science in the International HapMap Project. Nature Reviews Genetics 5:467-75. [PAM]
42. Johns, T. K., O. John, and Ebi K. Kimanani. 1990. Herbal remedies of the Luo of Siaya District, Kenya: Establishing quantitative criteria for consensus. Economic Botany 44: 369-81.
43. Laird, S. A., ed. 2002. Biodiversity and traditional knowledge: Equitable partnerships in practice. London: Earthscan.
44. Larson-Guerra, J., C. Lopez-Silva, F. Chapela, J. C. Fernandez-Ugalde, and J. Soberon. n.d. Mexico: Between legality and legitimacy. In Accessing biodiversity and sharing the benefits: Lessons from implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity, ed. S. Carrizosa, S. B. Brush, B. D. Wright, and P. E. McGuire. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.
45. Lavery, J. V. 2002. A culture of ethical conduct in research: The proper goal of capacity building in international research ethics. WHO Commission on Macroeconomics and Health: International Public Goods for Health. WG2, Paper 5. http://www.cmhealth.org/ cmh_papers&reports.htm#Working%20Group%202 (accessed February 28, 2005).
46. Lewis, W., and V. Ramani. 2003. Ethics and practice in ethnobiology: Analysis of the International Cooperative Biodiversity Group project in Peru. Conference on Biodiversity and Biotechnology 2004: Washington University School of Law. http://law.wustl.edu/centeris/Confpapers/ lewisramani.html (accessed February 5, 2004).
47. Little Bear, L. 2002. Jagged worldviews colliding. In Reclaiming indigenous voice and vision, ed. Marie Battiste. Vancouver: UBC Press. [KB]
48. Marks, J. 2001. "We're going to tell these people who they really are": Science and relatedness. In Relative values. Reconfiguring kinship studies, ed. S. Franklin and S. McKinnon, 355-83. Durham and London: Duke University Press. [KH]
49. Moran, K., S. R. King, and T. J. Carlson. 2001. Biodiversity prospecting. Annual Review of Anthropology 30:505-26.
50. Moreno, J. D. 2001. Goodbye to all that: The end of moderate protectionism in human subjects research. Hastings Center Report 31:9-17.
51. NBAC (National Bioethics Advisory Commission). 2001. Voluntary informed consent. In Ethical and policy issues in international research: Clinical trials in developing countries. Washington, D.C.
52. Nigh, R. 2002. Maya medicine in the biological gaze: Bioprospecting research as herbal fetishism. Current Anthropology 43:451-77.
53. NIH, NSF, and USDA. 1998. Request for applications (RFA) International Cooperative Biodiversity Groups. NIH Guide TW-98-001.
54. Posey, D. A., and G. Dutfield. 1996. Beyond intellectual property: Toward traditional resource rights for indigenous peoples and local communities. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.
55. RAFI (Rural Advancement Foundation International). 2000. Stop biopiracy in Mexico: Indigenous peoples' organizations from Chiapas demand immediate moratorium. http://www.rafi.org (accessed February 21, 2005).
56. Reyes-García, V., R. Godoy, and V. Vadez. 2003. Ethnobotanical knowledge shared widely among Tsimane' Amerindians, Bolivia. Science 299:1707.
57. Rosenthal, J. P., D. Beck, A. Bhat, J. Biswas, L. Brady, K. Bridbord, S. Collins, G. Cragg, J. Edwards, A. Fairfield, M. Gottlieb, L. A. Gschwind, Y. Hallock, R. Hawks, R. Hegyeli, G. Johnson, G. T. Keusch, E. E. Lyons, R. Miller, J. Rodman, J. Roskoski, and D. Siegel-Causey. 1999. Combining high-risk science with ambitious social and economic goals. Pharmaceutical Biology 37:6-21.
58. Ruiz, M. 1997. Entre el acceso a los recursos genéticos, los derechos de propiedad intelectual y la protección de los conocimientos tradicionales de comunidades indígenas y locales. Sociedad Peruana de Derecho Ambiental Serie de Politica y Derecho Ambiental 2.
59. Selee, A., and L. Santin. n.d. Citizens and democracy: Participatory and deliberative experiences in Mexico. In Participation and deliberation: Strengthening the reciprocal relationship between citizens and representatives. Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center.
60. Sen, A. 1999. Development as freedom. New York: Random House.
61. Tri-council policy statement: Ethical conduct for research involving humans. 1998. http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/english/policystatement/ section2.cfm.
62. Tobin, B., J. Render, and K. Bannister. n.d. Lessons in bioprospecting agreement: Experiences from the ICBG-Peru project MS, First Nations Development Institute/First Peoples Worldwide.
63. UNEP (United Nations Environment Program). 1992. Convention on Biological Diversity. http://www.biodiv.org/convention/articles.asp.
64. UNEP (United Nations Environment Program). 2002. Bonn guidelines on access to genetic resources and benefit-sharing. Convention on Biological Diversity: Conference of Parties Decision VI/24. http://www.biodiv.org/decisions/default.asp?lg=0&dec=VI/24 (accessed April 2004).
65. Weijer, C. 1999. Protecting communities in research: Philosophical and pragmatic challenges. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 83:501-13. [LT]
66. Weijer, C., and E. Emanuel. 2000. Ethics: Protecting communities in biomedical research. Science 289:1142-44. [LT]
67. Weijer, C., G. Goldsand, and E. Emanuel. 1999. Protecting communities in research: Current guidelines and limits of extrapolation. Nature Genetics 23:275-80. [LT]
68. WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization). 2000. Report on fact-finding missions on intellectual property and traditional knowledge (1998-1999). http://www.wipo.int/globalissues/tk/ffm/report/final/ index.html (accessed May 20, 2004).