Legal frameworks for benefit sharing: From biodiversity to human genomics

Benefit Sharing: From Biodiversity to Human Genetics

Volumn 9789400762053, Issue , 2013, Pages 33-64

  Andanda, Pamela ^a   Schroeder, Doris ^b   Chaturvedi, Sachin ^c   Mengesha, Emezat ^d   Hodges, Tim ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE WITWATERSRAND   (South Africa)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL LANCASHIRE   (United Kingdom)

^c India Habitat Centre   (India)

^d C/O Muluemebet Zenebe ^*  (Ethiopia)

^e Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada   (Canada)

Author keywords

Benefit sharing; Convention on Biological Diversity; Declaration of Helsinki; Post study access

Indexed keywords

EID: 84932609117     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-6205-3_3     Document Type: Chapter

References (65)

1. Albert B (2005) Biomedical research, ethnic labels, and anthropological responsibility: further comments. In: Borofsky R (ed) Yanomami: the fierce controversy and what we can learn from it. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, pp 157-168
2. Andanda P (2006) The law and regulation of clinical research: interplay with public policy and bioethics. Focus Publishers Ltd., Nairobi
3. Andanda P (2008) Human-tissue related inventions: ownership and intellectual property rights in international collaborative research in developing countries. J Med Ethics 34(3):171-179
4. Andanda P, Lucas JC (2007) Majengo HIV/AIDS research case. A report for GenBenefit. http://www.uclan. ac.uk/schools/school-of-health/research-projects/files/health-genbenefit-nairobi-case.pdf
5. Brownlie I (2003) Principles of public international law. Oxford University Press, New York
6. CBD (1992) Convention on Biological Diversity. http://www.cbd.int/convention/text
7. CBD (2010) Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity. http://www.cbd.int/abs/doc/protocol/nagoya-protocol-en.pdf
8. Chadwick R, Berg K (2001) Solidarity and equity: new ethical frameworks for genetic databases. Sci Soc 2:318-321
9. CIOMS (2002) International ethical guidelines for biomedical research involving human subjects. Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences. http://www.cioms.ch/publications/layout-guide2002.pdf
10. Dutfield G (2011) Summing up the Nagoya Protocol: fairness and bio-knowledge: the Nagoya Protocol. Workshop at the School of Law, University of Warwick, 17 June
11. Egziabher T B G (1994) The Convention on Biological Diversity, intellectual property rights and the interests of the South. In: Shiva V (ed) Biodiversity conservation: Whose resources? Whose knowledge? Indian National Trust for Art and Cultural Heritage, New Delhi, pp 198-215
12. Emanuel EJ, Wendler D, Killen J, Grady C (2004) What makes clinical research in developing countries ethical? The benchmarks of ethical research. J Infect Dis 189:930-937
13. European Commission (2010) Can we stop biodiversity loss by 2020? 19 January. http://ec. europa.eu/news/environment/100119-en.htm
14. Faunce TA (2005) Will international human rights subsume medical ethics? Intersections in the UNESCO Universal Bioethics Declaration. J Med Ethics 31:173-178
15. Fidler DP (2001) 'Geographical morality' revisited: international relations, international law and the controversy over placebo controlled HIV clinical trials in developing countries. Harvard Int Law J 42:288-354
16. Haira A (2006) Prior and informed consent: an introduction. Presentation, New Zealand Ministry of Economic Development. http://www.med.govt.nz/upload/34619/haira.pdf
17. HUGO Ethics Committee (2000a) Statement on benefit-sharing, 9 April. http://www.hugo-international.org/img/benefit-sharing-2000.pdf
18. HUGO Ethics Committee (2000b) Editorial: Genetic benefit sharing. Science 290(5489):49
19. Human D, Fluss SS (2001) The World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki: historical and contemporary perspectives. World Medical Association. http://www.wma.net/en/20activit ies/10ethics/10helsinki/draft-historical-contemporary-perspectives.pdf
20. ICJ (n. d.) Statute of the international Court of Justice. http://www.icj-cij.org/documents/index.ph p?p1=4&p2=2&p3=0&PHPSESSID=8755b5295491e0553df37fa930e1edcc
21. IISD and Stratos Inc. (2007) Volume 1: The ABS best practice standard. ABS-management tool best practice standard and handbook for implementing genetic resource access and benefitsharing activities. State Secretariat for Economic Affairs, Swiss Confederation, Bern. http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2007/abs-mt.pdf
22. King KM (1998) A proposal for effective international regulation of biomedical research involving human subjects. Stanf J Int Law 34:163-206
23. Kleba J (2011) Access and benefit sharing in the light of justice as fairness. 17 June. Fairness and bio-knowledge: the Nagoya Protocol. Workshop at the School of Law, University of Warwick
24. Knoppers BM, Chadwick R, Takebe H, Berg K, Cantu JM, Daar AS, Engels EM, Kirby M, Macer D, Murray TH, Qiu R-Z, Verma IC, Wertz DC (2000) HUGO urges genetic benefit sharing. Community Genet 3(2):88-92
25. Macpherson CC (2007) Global bioethics: did the universal declaration on bioethics and human rights miss the boat? J Med Ethics 33:588-590
26. Merali Z, Singer PA, Boulyjenkov V, Daar AS (2004) The ELSI genetics regulatory resource kit: a tool for policymakers in developing countries. J Law Med Ethics 32(4):692-700
27. Mooney PR (1969) Seeds of the earth: a private or public resource? International Coalition for Development Action, London
28. National Health Council (Brazil) (1996) Resolution No. 196/96 on research involving human subjects. http://ww2.prefeitura.sp. gov. br//arquivos/secretarias/saude/organizacao/cepsms/0009/Reso196-English.pdf
29. National Health Council (Brazil) (1997) Resolution No. 251, dated 7 Aug. http://www.ensp. fiocr uz.br/etica/docs/cns/Res251i.pdf
30. National Health Council (Brazil) (1999) Resolution No. 292, dated 8 July. http://www.conselho. saude.gov. br/resolucoes/1999/Res292-en.pdf
31. National Health Council (Brazil) (2000) Resolution No. 304, 9 Aug. http://www.conselho.saude. gov. br/resolucoes/2000/Res304-en.pdf
32. National Health Council (Brazil) (2008) Resolution No. 404, 1 Aug. http://conselho.saude. gov. br/resolucoes/2008/Reso-404.doc
33. Nijar GS (1996) In defence of local community knowledge and biodiversity: a conceptual framework and the essential elements of a rights regime. Third World Network, Penang, Malaysia
34. Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2005) The ethics of research related to healthcare in developing countries: a follow-up discussion paper. http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/sites/default/files/HRRDC-Follow-up-Discussion-Paper.pdf
35. Pogge T (2008) World poverty and human rights, 2nd edn. Polity Press, Cambridge
36. Pottage A (1998) The inscription of life in law: genes, patents and bio-politics. Mod Law Rev 61:740-765
37. Research and Information System for Developing Countries (2007) World trade and development report 2007: building a development-friendly world trading system. Oxford University Press, Oxford
38. Schroeder D (2008) Post-trial obligations. RECIIS - Electron J Commun Inf Innov Health 2(Supl 1):Sup63-73
39. Schroeder D (2009) Informed consent: from medical research to traditional knowledge. In: Wynberg R, Schroeder D, Chennells R (eds) Indigenous peoples, consent and benefit sharing. Springer, Berlin, pp 27-51
40. Schroeder D, Pogge T (2009) Justice and the Convention on Biological Diversity. Ethics Int Aff 23(3):267-280
41. Schuklenk U (2004) The standard of care debate: against the myth of an 'international consensus opinion'. J Med Ethics 30(2):194-197
42. Shanahan M, Masood E (2004) Biodiversity facts and figures. Science and Development Network, 1 Dec. http://www.scidev. net/en/agriculture-and-environment/features/biodiversity-facts-and-figures.html
43. Sheridan C (2005) EPO neem patent revocation revives biopiracy debate. Nat Biotechnol 23(5):511-512
44. Shiva V (1991) The violence of the green revolution: third world agriculture, ecology and politics. Zed Books, London
45. Simm K (2006) An argument for benefit-sharing through solidarity. Soc Justice Context 2:47-64
46. Simm K (2007a) Benefit sharing frameworks: justifications for and against benefit sharing in human genetic research. Report for GenBenefit. http://www.uclan. ac.uk/schools/school-of-health/research-projects/files/health-genbenefit-simm.pdf
47. Simm K (2007b) Benefit-sharing: a look at the history of an ethics concern. Nature Rev Genet 8:496. http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v8/n7/pdf/nrg2145.pdf
48. Tomossy GF, Ford J (2006) Globalisation and clinical trials. In: Bennett B, Tomossy GF (eds) Globalization and health: challenges for health law and bioethics. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 27-45
49. UN (1979) Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. United Nations. http://www.unoosa.org/oosa/SpaceLaw/moon.html
50. UN (1982) Convention on the Law of the Sea. United Nations. http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention-agreements/texts/unclos/closindx.htm
51. UNESCO (1945) Constitution of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Adopted in London on 16 November 1945 and amended by the General Conference at its 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 12th, 15th, 17th, 19th, 20th, 21st, 24th, 25th, 26th, 27th, 28th, 29th and 31st sessions. http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev. php-URL-ID=15244&URL-DO=DO-TOPIC&URL-SECTION=201.html
52. UNESCO (1997) Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. http://www.un-documents. net/udhghr.htm
53. UNESCO (2005) Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights. Adopted by the General Conference of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 33rd Session, 19 Oct. http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev. php-URL-ID=31058&URL-DO=DO-TOPIC&URL-SECTION=201.html
54. UNESCO (2007) Standard-setting in UNESCO. Information on a publication. http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev. php-URL-ID=41269&URL-DO=DO-TOPIC&URL-SECTION=201.html
55. UNESCO (n. d.) Building peace in the minds of men and women - Introducing UNESCO: what we are. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/about-us/who-we-are/introducing-unesco
56. Weijer C (2000) Benefit sharing and other protections for communities in genetic research. Clin Genet 58:367-368
57. Weisman J (1993) Organs as assets. Israel Law Rev 27:610-623
58. WHO 5 (2007) International Health Regulations (2005): Areas of work for implementation. http://www.who.int/ihr/finalversion9Nov07.pdf
59. WMA (2004a) Clarification on Declaration of Helsinki. World Medical Association. http://www.wma.net/en/40news/20archives/2004/2004-24
60. WMA (2004b) Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. World Medical Association. http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/helsinki.html
61. WMA (2008) Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. Adopted by the 18th World Medical Association General Assembly, Helsinki, Finland, June 1964, latest revision by the 59th WMA General Assembly, Seoul, Korea, October. http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/index.html
62. Wolinsky H (2006) The battle of Helsinki: two troublesome paragraphs in the Declaration of Helsinki are causing a furore over medical research ethics. EMBO Rep 7(7):670-672
63. WTO (2006) The relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity: summary of issues raised and points made. Note by the secretariat, Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. IP/C/W/368/Rev. 1, 8 Feb. http://www.wto.org/english/tratop-e/trips-e/ipcw368-e.pdf
64. WTO (n. d.) The Doha Declaration explained. World Trade Organization. http://www.wto.org/eng lish/tratop-e/dda-e/dohaexplained-e.htm
65. Zong Z (2008) Should post-trial provision of beneficial experimental interventions be mandatory in developing countries? J Med Ethics 34:188-192