Bi-polar disorder? Is bioprospecting an emerging issue for the arctic as well as for Antarctica?

Review of European Community and International Environmental Law

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 41-55

  Leary, David ^a  

^a UNITED NATIONS UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARCTIC ENVIRONMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; EXPLOITATION; REGIONAL POLICY;

ANTARCTICA; EURASIA; EUROPE; NORTHERN EUROPE; SCANDINAVIA;

EID: 42349097134     PISSN: 09628797     EISSN: 14679388     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9388.2008.00584.x     Document Type: Article

References (144)

1. USA National Research Council, Frontiers in Polar Biology in the Genomic Era (National Academies Press, 2001), at 1.
2. European Commission, Background Documents for the Green Paper Towards a Future Maritime Policy for the Union: A European Vision for the Oceans and Seas. Background Paper No 10 on Marine Biotechnology (European Commission, 2006), available at .
3. See, for example, D. Lohan and S. Johnston, Bioprospecting in Antarctica (United Nations University - Institute of Advanced Studies, 2005); and S. Johnson and D. Lohan, 'Existing Activities, Policies and Emerging Issues for the Antarctic Treaty System', in A. Hemmings and M. Rogan-Finnemore (eds), Antarctic Bioprospecting (University of Canterbury, 2005).
4. See D. Lohan, and S. Johnston, ibid., at 7.
5. Ibid.
6. R. Farrell and S. Duncan, 'Uniqueness of Antarctica and Potential for Commercial Success', in A. Hemmings and M. Rogan-Finnemore (eds), n. 3 above, at 26.
7. For further detailed information, the reader is referred to a number of publications including R. Cavicchioli et al., 'Low-temperature extremophiles and their applications', 13:3 Current Opinion in Biotechnology (2002), 253; M. Clark, et al., 'Antarctic genomics', 5:3 Comparative and Functional Genomics (2004), 230; and other publications such as D. Lohan and S. Johnston, n. 3 above.
8. The Nordic countries are Denmark (including the autonomous territories of Greenland and the Faeroe Islands), Finland (including the autonomous territory of Åland), Iceland, Norway and Sweden.
9. Some countries such as Malaysia have periodically criticized the ATS as a club of former colonial powers and have called for greater involvement of the United Nations in the management of Antarctica. But these criticisms have become muted in recent years, with Malaysia now indicating that it is prepared to take an active part in the ATS. See P. Beck, 'The United Nations and Antarctica, 2005: The end of the "Question of Antarctica"?', 42:222 Polar Record (2006), 217.
10. Antarctic Treaty (Washington, 1 December, 1959).
11. Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals (London, 1 June 1971).
12. Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (Canberra, 20 May 1980).
13. Convention on the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities (Wellington, 2 June 1988) (Antarctic Minerals Convention).
14. Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (Madrid, 4 October 1991) (Madrid Protocol).
15. A. Bergin and M. Haward, Frozen Assets: Securing Australia's Antarctic Future (Australian Strategic Policy Institute, 2007).
16. R. Davis, 'Enforcing Australian Law in Antarctica: The HIS Litigation', 8:1 Melbourne Journal of International Law (2007), 142.
17. M. Rogan-Finnemore, 'What Bioprospecting Means for Antarctica and the Southern Ocean', in G. Leane and B. Von Tigerstrom (eds), International Law Issues in the South Pacific (Ashgate, 2005), 199.
18. A. Hemmings and M. Rogan-Finnemore, 'The issues posed by bioprospecting in Antarctica', in A. Hemmings and M. Rogan-Finnemore (eds), n. 3 above, at 235.
19. Ibid., at 239.
20. See, for example, D. Lohan and S. Johnston, n. 3 above; and S. Johnson and D. Lohan, n. 3 above.
21. United Nations University - Institute of Advanced Studies, Biological Prospecting in Antarctica: Review, Update, and a Proposed Tool to Support a Way Forward (ATCM XXX - IP 67, 2007), available at .
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid.
24. These included: Antarctic krill Euphausia superba; Antarctic eel pout; Pseudoalteromonas antartica (a bacteria isolated from the Antarctic Ocean); Pseudoalteromonas haloplanktis (a bacteria in seawater); Antarctic microalgae of the Fragilariopsis genus (isolated from sea ice); Cryoen-protease culture extracted from Antarctic abyssal ooze; and Thraustochytrium and Antarctic marine organisms in general. See United Nations University - Institute of Advanced Studies, n. 21 above.
25. Ibid.
26. Ibid.
27. Ibid.
28. See Argentina, 'Argentine Activities of Bioprospecting and Bioremediation in Antarctica' (ATCM XXIX - IP 112, 2007), available at .
29. For an overview of Malaysia's Antarctic Research Programme (MARP) and its bioprospecting activities, see Malaysian Antarctic Research Program, About MARP (MARP, undated), available at ; and I. Tan, 'Biological and Functional Diversity of Microbial Communities in Ecologically Distinct Polar Environments', in Science Council of Japan and National Institute of Polar Research, Proceedings of the International Symposium-Asian Collaboration in IPY 2007-2008 (Science Council of Japan and Japan National Institute of Polar Research, 2007), 38; and A. Samah, 'Sustaining Malaysia's Interest in Antarctica: From Diplomacy to Science' in Science Council of Japan and National Institute of Polar Research, Proceedings of the International Symposium-Asian Collaboration in IPY 2007-2008, above, at 14.
30. See the Korean Polar Research Institute (KOPRI), About US (KOPRI, undated), available at .
31. J. Jabour-Green, and D. Nicol, 'Bioprospecting in areas outside national jurisdiction: Antarctica and the Southern Ocean', 76:4 Melbourne Journal of International Law (2003), 76.
32. A. Hemmings and M. Rogan-Finnemore, 'Environment, Ethics and Equity Issues', in A. Hemmings and M. Rogan-Finnemore (eds), n. 3 above, 255.
33. P. Vigni, 'Antarctic Bioprospecting: Is it Compatible with the Value of Antarctica as a Natural Reserve?', in F. Francioni, and T. Scovazzi, Biotechnology and International Law (Hart Publishing, 2006), 111.
34. United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (Rio de Janeiro, 5 June 1992) (CBD).
35. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (Montego Bay, 10 December 1982) (UNCLOS).
36. See R. Davis, n. 16 above, at 151.
37. The CBD has three main objectives: The conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources. It is a framework treaty that sets out several obligations aimed at implementing these objectives. These include obligations to create plans, strategies or programmes for conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity under Article 6. Similarly under Article 7, States must identify and monitor components of biodiversity important for their conservation and sustainable use, and identify processes and categories of activities that have, or are likely to have, significant adverse impacts on the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity. The CBD also provides that States have an obligation to take steps to regulate activities that threaten biodiversity, including through measures such as establishing a system of protected areas to conserve biodiversity under Articles 8, 9, 10 and 11. See CBD, n. 34 above.
38. Ad Hoc Open-Ended Working Group, 'Overview of recent developments at the international level relating to access and benefit sharing' (UNEP/CBD/ WG-ABS/5/4/Add.1, 25 July 2007), at para 50.
39. For the purposes of Australian domestic law, the Australian Antarctic Territory is regarded as an external Territory and by virtue of section 5(1) of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth), the access and benefit-sharing regime would prima facie, as a matter of Australian domestic law, extend to the Australian Antarctic Territory.
40. Of particular relevance here is the standing of civil society to enforce the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) in the Australian Federal Court, as highlighted by the current litigation pending on Japanese Whaling in Antarctica. On this point see R. Davis, n. 16 above; and T. Stephens and D. Rothwell, 'Case Note: Japanese Whaling in Antarctica: Humane Society International Inc. v. Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha Ltd', 16:2 RECIEL (2007), 243.
41. See A. Hemmings and M. Rogan-Finnemore (eds), n. 3 above, at 241.
42. See D. Lohan and S. Johnston, n. 3 above. For a detailed examination of the emergence of the debate see A. Hemmings, 'A Question of Politics: Bioprospecting and the Antarctic Treaty System', in A. Hemmings and M. Rogan-Finnemore (eds), n. 3 above, at 98; and Netherlands, Belgium and France, 'Biological Prospecting in the Antarctic Treaty Area - Scoping for a Regulatory Framework' (ATCM XXX -WP 36, 30 April 2007), available at .
43. Antarctic Treaty Secretariat, XXX ATCM Final Report (undated), para 262, found at .
44. Ibid.
45. Some examination of possible options for regulation has taken place in the academic literature. See B. Herber, 'Bioprospecting in Antarctica: The search for a policy regime', 42:221 Polar Record (2006), 139; A. Hemmings and M. Rogan-Finnemore (eds), n. 3 above; and M. Weber, 'Accreditation as a regulatory option for Antarctic bioprospecting', 42:223 Polar Record (2006), 349.
46. H. Svarstad, H. Bugge and S. Dhillion, 'From Norway to Novartis: Cyclosporine from Tolypocladium inflatum in an open access bioprospecting regime', 9:11 Biodiversity and Conservation (2000), 1521.
47. Ibid.
48. Ibid.
49. Ibid.
50. Interview with Minna Mannisto, Metla, Rovaniemi Finland (19 April 2007).
51. See the Press Release issued by the Finnish Forest Research Institute, 'A unique collection of bacterial strains from the Arctic: Material for anti-cancer drug screening' (10 February 2006), available at .
52. Ibid.
53. KAIRA stands for Kaivosveden biologinen ravinteidenpoisto (biological removal of nutrient from mine water).
54. Funding organizations, research partners, mine sites and industry sectors involved in the KAIRA project include: The European Union Regional Development Fund; Tekes Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovations; Outokumpu Chrome Oy, Kemi Mine (chromium); ScanMining Oy, Pahtavaara Mine (gold); Kemphos Oy, Siilinjrvi Mine (phosphorus); Agnico-Eagle Finland, Kittil Mine (Suurikuusikko, gold); Anglo American Exploration BV plc. (prospecting); Scandinavian Gold Prospecting Ab (Kevitsa, PGM and nickel); Oy Forcit Ab (explosives); Sarlin Hydor Oy (process automation); Tekno-Forest Oy (process water treatment); and the Geological Survey of Finland (mineral processing). See KAIRA Project, 'Biological removal of nutrient from mine water' (KAIRA, undated), available at .
55. Ibid.
56. Ibid.
57. Ibid.
58. For an examination of research and development in relation to Greenland's genetic resources see D. Leary, 'Greenland's new legislation on commercial and research-related use of biological resources: Implications for the International Polar Year and later', 44:229 Polar Record (2008), 97.
59. Ibid.
60. For more information, see the Bioneer corporate website, available at .
61. See European Commission, n. 2 above.
62. Ibid.
63. Marine Industries Global Market Analysis (Douglas-Westwood Limited, March 2005), cited in European Commission, n. 2 above, 9.
64. H. Svarstad, H. Bugge and S. Dhillion, 'From Norway to Novartis: Cyclosporine from Tolypocladium inflatum in an open access bioprospecting regime', 9:11 Biodiversity and Conservation (2000), 1521.
65. Ibid.
66. For further detailed analysis of this market, see publications such as Foresight Marine Panel (Marine Biotechnology Group), A Study into the Prospects for Marine Biotechnology in the United Kingdom, Vol. 2 (The Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology, 2005), available at ; and M. Vierros, et al., n. 64 above; and CIRCA Group Europe Ltd, Opportunities for Marine Biotechnology Application in Ireland (CIRCA Group Europe Limited, January 2005), available at .
67. D. Leary, International Law and the Genetic Resources of the Deep Sea (Martinus Nijhoff, 2007).
68. For more information, see the Primex corporate website, available at .
69. See CIRCA Group Europe Ltd, n. 66 above, at 17.
70. Royal Norwegian Society of Sciences and Letters and the Norwegian Academy of Technological Sciences, Exploitation of Marine Living Resources - Global Opportunities for Norwegian Expertise (Royal Norwegian Society of Sciences and Letters and the Norwegian Academy of Technological Sciences, 2006), 16, available at .
71. D. Newman, 'Viewpoint' Oslo Bio Update (January 2007), 2, available on the official website of the City of Oslo and Akershus County Council inward investment authority (Oslo Teknopol), at .
72. H. Aslesen, 'Commercialization of Knowledge: The Case of Norwegian Marine Biotechnology', draft paper for the 5th Triple Helix Conference - The capitalization of knowledge: Cognitive, economic, social & cultural aspects (undated), found at .
73. Research Council of Norway, FUGE - Functional Genomics in Norway - A National Plan (2001), found at http://www.forskningsradet.no/nfrsearch/ search.jsp?UIlang=no_NO&breadcrumb=cssitename~fuge %7C&query=genomics.
74. Ibid., at 12.
75. T. Ø. Jørgensen, quoted in R. Hayhurst and O. Marvik, Naturally Inspired: Life Sciences in Norway (Innovation Norway and Research Council of Norway, 2007), found at .
76. See CIRCA Group Europe Ltd, above n. 66, at 16.
77. Ibid.
78. See R. Hayhurst and O. Marvik, n. 75 above.
79. Ibid.
80. Ibid., at 6.
81. Ibid.
82. Ibid.
83. Ibid., at 7.
84. Ibid.
85. See the Korean Polar Research Institute (KOPRI), Arctic Research at Dasan Station (KOPRI, undated), available at .
86. Polish Ministry of Science and Education, Polish Scientists at the Svalbard (undated), copy on file with the author.
87. These are the Aleut International Association, the Arctic Athabaskan Council, the Gwich'in Council International, the Inuit Circumpolar Council, the Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples the North and the Saami Council. See .
88. Ibid.
89. For detailed information on CAFF's work see CAFF, Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF, undated), available at .
90. Nordisk Ministerråd, Srategi for genetiske resourcer for fiskeri, jordbrug, skovbrug og levnedsmidler i Norden 2005-2008 (Nordisk Ministerråd, 2005), at 83.
91. Treaty of Cooperation between Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden (Helsinki, 23 March 1962).
92. Ibid.
93. These are the Nordic Council of Ministers for Labour Market and Working Environment Policy; Nordic Council of Ministers for Business, Energy and Regional Affairs; Nordic Council for Fishery, Agriculture, Forestry and Food Affairs; Nordic Council of Ministers on Gender Equality; Nordic Council of Ministers for Economic Questions; Nordic Council of Ministers for Nordic Cultural Cooperation; Nordic Council of Ministers for Legislative Issues; Nordic Council of Ministers for Environmental Affairs; Nordic Council of Ministers for Health and Social Affairs; Nordic Council of Ministers for Educational and Research Issues; and the Ministers for Cooperation.
94. Ibid.
95. For more information, see the Nordic Gene Resources Council, Nordic Gene Resources Council (undated), available at .
96. Ibid.
97. Ibid.
98. Ibid.
99. The Nordic Joint Committee for Agricultural Research promotes and supports cooperation on agricultural research between the national research councils, or corresponding organizations, in Nordic countries, as well as providing advice to the Nordic Council of Ministers on agricultural issues.
100. The Forest Research Cooperation Committee provides advice to the Nordic Council of Ministers on questions concerning forests and forestry research, in addition to its primary role of promoting research into sustainable forestry. See .
101. The store is in a coal mine owned by the Norske Spitsbergen Kulkompani. The Norwegian Government announced in May 2006 that a 'Global Seed Vault' to house seeds from the entire world would be established on Svalbard. The Nordic gene bank is also currently engaged in a plant breeding programme examining the potential for exploitation of marginal farming areas in the western parts of the Nordic countries, the Arctic area of the Scandinavian countries and the Kola Peninsula.
102. Nordic Council of Ministers, Safeguarding genetic diversity in the Nordic region (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2004), available at .
103. Norden, Strategi for gentiske ressourcer for fiskeri, jordbrug, skovbrug of levnedsmidler i Norden 2005-2008 (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2005).
104. Nordic Council of Ministers, Access and Rights to Genetic Resources - A Nordic Approach (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2003), 141.
105. See D. Leary, n. 58 above.
106. Ibid.
107. Iceland, Law No. 57/1998 on Research and Exploitation of Natural Resources in the Ground, Article 34, unofficial English translation available at .
108. For further detail see Finland, Ministry of Environment, Geenivarojen saatavuutta ja hyötyjen jakoa koskevien Bonnin ohjeiden kansallinen toimeenpano (Finland Ministry of Environment, 2006), available at .
109. CBD, Ad Hoc Open-ended working group on access and benefit sharing, Report on International expert workshop on access to genetic resources and benefit sharing 20 to 23 September 2005 (UNEP/CBD/WG-ABS/4/INF/11, 22 December 2005), at 7, available at .
110. Ibid.
111. Unless otherwise indicated, the following discussion of draft Norwegian legislation is drawn from a presentation by B. Valen, Norwegian Department of Nature Management, Ministry of the Environment, entitled, 'Implementation of CBD in Norway. New Legislation on Genetic Resources' presented at a meeting of the Nordic Gene Resources Council, Copenhagen (26 April 2007), copy on file with author.
112. Ibid.
113. Ibid.
114. Ibid.
115. Ibid.
116. Ibid.
117. See CBD, Ad Hoc Open-ended working group on access and benefit sharing, n. 109 above, at 7.
118. See B. Valen, n. 111 above.
119. Ibid.
120. Ibid.
121. Ibid.
122. Ibid.
123. Ibid.
124. Ibid.
125. Ibid.
126. Ibid.
127. Ibid.
128. For a detailed examination of this issue see D. Leary, n. 67 above, at 37-40.
129. For a detailed discussion of the history of Svalbard's territorial status, see G. Ulfstein, The Svalbard Treaty. From Terra Nullius to Norwegian Sovereignty (Scandinavian University Press, 1995).
130. Treaty Concerning the Archipelago of Spitzbergen (Paris, 9 February 1920).
131. Article 1 of the Spitzbergen Treaty, ibid., defines the archipelago of Spiztbergen as 'comprising, with Bear Island or Beeren-Eiland, all the islands situated between 10 deg. and 35 deg. longitude East of Greenwich and between 74 deg. and 81 deg. latitude North, especially West Spitsbergen, North-East Land, Barents Island, Edge Island, Wiche Islands, Hope Island or Hopen-Eiland, and Prince Charles Foreland, together with all islands great or small and rocks appertaining thereto'.
132. T. Pedersen, 'The Svalbard Continental Shelf Controversy: Legal Disputes and Political Rivalries', 37:3/4 Ocean Development & International Law (2006), 339.
133. Ibid.
134. Ibid.
135. Ibid.
136. See, for example, G. Ulfstein, n. 129 above, and other references cited by T. Pedersen, n. 132 above.
137. Jan Mayen is Norwegian territory that is a volcanic island located in the Arctic Ocean approximately 600 kilometres north of Iceland and 500 kilometres east of Greenland.
138. Research Council of Norway, FUGE - Functional Genomics in Norway - A National Plan (2001), found at http://www.forskningsradet.no/nfrsearch/ search.jsp?UIlang=no_NO&breadcrumb=cssitename~fuge %7C&query=genomics.
139. See T. Pedersen, n. 132 above, at 345.
140. Ibid.
141. Ibid.
142. See Government of Norway, Continental Shelf Submission of Norway in Respect of Areas in the Arctic Ocean, the Barents Sea and the Norwegian Sea: Executive Summary (2006), available at .
143. Note Verbale, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation, Spain, to the Royal Embassy of Norway (2 March 2007), available at .
144. See Note Verbale, to the Secretary General of the United Nations from the Permanent Mission of the Russian Federation to the United Nations (21 February 2007), unofficial English translation available at .