North-south benefit sharing arrangements in bioprospecting and genetic research: A critical ethical and legal analysis

Developing World Bioethics

Volumn 6, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 122-134

  Schüklenk, Udo ^a   Kleinsmidt, Anita ^b  

^a GLASGOW CALEDONIAN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF THE WITWATERSRAND   (South Africa)

Author keywords

Benefit sharing; Research; Traditional knowledge

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMMUNITY; CONSULTATION; COST; DEVELOPING COUNTRY; ETHICS; FINANCE; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; HUMAN GENETICS; INFORMED CONSENT; LEADERSHIP; LEGAL ASPECT; LIFESTYLE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PATENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; GENETICS AND REPRODUCTION; UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY;

BIODIVERSITY; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DEVELOPED COUNTRIES; DEVELOPING COUNTRIES; DRUG INDUSTRY; GENETIC RESEARCH; HUMANS; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; ORGANIZATIONS; PATENTS; PATENTS AS TOPIC; PLANTS, MEDICINAL; POPULATION GROUPS; POVERTY; PUBLIC POLICY; SOCIAL JUSTICE; TISSUE DONORS; UNITED NATIONS;

EID: 33750083311     PISSN: 14718731     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-8847.2006.00149.x     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. C. Weijer & E.J. Emanuel. Protecting Communities in Biomedical Research. Science 2000; 289: 1142.
2. United Nations (UN). 1999. Declaration of Human Rights. First adopted and proclaimed in 1948. New York, NY: UN: Article 27. Available at: http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html [Accessed 9 May 2006].
3. Global Forum for Health Research (GFHR). 2002. The 10/90 Report on Health Research 2001-2002. Geneva: GFHR: xv. Available at: http://www. globalforumhealth.org/filesupld/1090_report_01-02/01_02_front_matt.pdf [Accessed 9 May 2006].
4. Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) Campaign for Access to Essential Medicines & Drugs for Neglected Diseases (DND) Working Group. 2001. Fatal Imbalance: The Crisis in Research and Development for Drugs in Neglected Diseases. Geneva: MSF & DND. Available at: http://www.accessmed- msf.org/documents/fatal_imbalance_2001.pdf [Accessed 8 May 2006].
5. E. Cameron. 2000. The XII International AIDS Conference. Durban, South Africa. Press Conference, 10 July.
6. U. Schuklenk & R.E. Ashcroft. Affordable Access to Essential Medication in Developing Countries: Conflicts between Ethical and Economic Imperatives. J Med Philos 2002; 27: 179-195.
7. P. Trouiller et al. Drug Development for Neglected Diseases: A Deficient Market and a Public-health Policy Failure. Lancet 2002; 360: 1102.
8. T. Hubbard & J.A. Love. A New Trade Framework for Global Healthcare R&D. PloS Biol 2004; 2: 147-150.
9. J. Love. 2003. A New Trade Framework for Global Healthcare R&D. Columbia University, New York, NY. Seminar Paper, 4 December. Available at: http://www.earthinstitute.columbia.edu/cgsd/documents/love_000.pdf [Accessed 8 May 2006].
10. R. Lie, E. Emanuel & C. Grady. The Standard of Care Debate: The Declaration of Helsinki versus the International Consensus Opinion. J Med Ethics 2004; 30: 190-193.
11. Convention on Biological Diversity. 2000. Sustaining Life on Earth: How the Convention on Biological Diversity Promotes Nature and Human Well-being. Montreal: UNEP/CBD. Available at: https://www.biodiv.org/doc/publications/guide. asp?id=action-int [Accessed 9 May 2006].
12. World Trade Organization (WTO). 2005. TRIPS: Part II - Standards Concerning the Availability, Scope and Use of Intellectual Property Rights. Geneva: WTO: Article 27: Patentable Subject Matter. Available at: http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/27-trips_04c_e.htm [Accessed 8 May 2006].
13. Weijer & Emanuel, TRIPS: Part II - Standards Concerning the Availability, Scope and Use of Intellectual Property Rights. op. cit. note 1.
14. Human Genome Organisation (HUGO). 2000. Statement on Benefit Sharing. London: HUGO. Available at: http://www.hugo-international. org/ Statement_on_Benefit_Sharing.htm [Accessed 8 May 2006]. Presumably this refers to a benefit to be administered by the government concerned.
15. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). 1992. Convention on Biological Diversity, 5 June 1992. Montreal: UNEP/CBD. Available at: www.biodiv.org/doc/ legal/cbd-en.pdf [Accessed 8 May 2006].
16. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 1992. Convention on Biological Diversity, 5 June 1992. www.biodiv.org/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf Ibid.
17. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 1992. Convention on Biological Diversity, 5 June 1992. www.biodiv.org/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf Ibid.
18. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 1992. Convention on Biological Diversity, 5 June 1992. www.biodiv.org/doc/legal/cbd-en.pdf Ibid.
19. nd ed. D. Hunter, J. Salzman & D. Zaelke, eds. New York, NY: Foundation Press: 945.
20. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). 2002. Bonn Guidelines on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of the Benefits Arising out of their Utilization. Montreal: UNEP/CBD. Available at: www.biodiv.org/doc/publications/cbd-bonn-gdls-en.pdf [Accessed 9 May 2006].
21. R. Chennells. 2003. Ethics and Practice in Ethnobilogy, and Prior Informed Consent with Indigenous Peoples, Regarding Genetic Resources. St Louis, MO. Conference Paper, 6 April 2003. Available at: http://law.wustl.edu/ centeris/Confpapers/ChennelFinalApril2003.htm [Accessed 8 May 2006].
22. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Article 8. In-situ Conservation. Montreal: UNEP/CBD. Available at: http://www.biodiv.org/ convention/articles.asp?lg=0&a=cbd-08 [Accessed 8 May 2006].
23. For further details about this case, see the Global Forum on Bioethics in Research (Forum 5) (GBFR5). 2004. Conference, Paris, 22-23 April. Geneva: GBFR. Available at: http://www.inserm.fr/fr/presse/dossiers_presse/att00000407/ 19avril2004.pdf [Accessed 15 May 2006];
24. and Chennells, Global Forum on Bioethics in Research (Forum 5) (GBFR5). op. cit. note 20. Our summary of the salient features of this case is based in its entirety on these two sources.
25. Global Forum on Bioethics in Research (Forum 5), Chennells, op. cit. note 23.
26. Ibid. Our summary of the salient features of this case is based in its entirety on this source.
27. Ibid.
28. Ibid.
29. This case study is derived from R.V. Anuradha. 1998. Sharing with the Kanis: A Case Study from Kerala, India. New Delhi: Kalpvriksha Mimeo. Available at: http://biodiv.org/doc/case-studies/abs/cs-abskanis.pdf [Accessed 10 May 2006].
30. P. Pushpangadan. 'Arogyappacha' (Trichopus zeylanicus): The 'Ginseng' of Kani tribes of Agasthyar Hills (Kerala) for Evergreen Health and Vitality. Ancient Sciences of Life 1988: 8: 13-16.
31. Anuradha, Ancient Sciences of Life op. cit. note 28, p. 129.
32. M.J. Selgelid & U. Schuklenk. Poverty and Patents. JAMA 2002; 287: 842-823.
33. nd ed. D. Hunter, J. Salzman & D. Zaelke, eds. New York, NY: Foundation Press: 942-945.
34. nd ed. 942-945.Ibid.
35. nd ed. op. cit. note 12, Article 27: Patentable Subject Matter.
36. J. VanFleet. Protecting Knowledge. Human Rights Dialogue 2003; 2: 9. Available at: http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/viewMedia.php/prmTemplateID/8/ prmID/942 [Accessed 8 May 2006].
37. World Health Organization (WHO) & World Trade Organization (WTO). 2002. WTO Agreements and Public Health: A Joint Study by the WHO and WTO Secretariat. Geneva: WHO & WTO. Available at: http://www.wto.org/English/ res_e/booksp_e/who_wto_e.pdf [Accessed 8 May 2006].
38. Joint Communication from the African Group. 2003. Taking Forward the Review of Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreement. Geneva: WTO. Available at: http://www.wto.org/English/tratop_e/trips_e/art27_3b_e. htm [Accessed 8 May 2006].
39. 2003. Taking Forward the Review of Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreement. WTO http://www.wto.org/English/tratop_e/trips_e/art27_3b_e.htm Ibid.
40. 2003. Taking Forward the Review of Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreement. WTO http://www.wto.org/English/tratop_e/trips_e/art27_3b_e.htm Ibid.
41. World Trade Organization (WTO). 2005. TRIPS: Reviews, Article 27.3(b) and Related Issues: Background and the Current Situation. Geneva: WTO. Available at: http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/art27_3b_background_e.htm [Accessed 8 May 2006].
42. World Trade Organization (WTO) 2005. TRIPS: Reviews, Article 27.3(b) and Related Issues: Background and the Current Situation. http://www.wto.org/ english/tratop_e/trips_e/art27_3b_background_e.htm Ibid.
43. VanFleet, TRIPS: Reviews, Article 27.3(b) and Related Issues: Background and the Current Situation. op. cit. note 34, p. 18.
44. VanFleet, TRIPS: Reviews, Article 27.3(b) and Related Issues: Background and the Current Situation. 18.Ibid.
45. S. Hansen & J. VanFleet. 2003. Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).
46. See Global Forum on Bioethics in Research (Forum 5), S. Hansen & J. VanFleet. op. cit. note 23. Our summary of the salient features of this case is based in its entirety on this source.
47. Weijer & Emanuel, Global Forum on Bioethics in Research (Forum 5), op. cit. note 1.