Subject: Re: Terminator technology of Monsato - being Patented worldwide !
(fwd)
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 14:40:52 -0800
From: James Hess <jhess@ORION.OAC.UCI.EDU>
Reply-To: Ecol/Env Anthropology <EANTH-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
To: EANTH-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU
And a follow-up.
-Jim Hess-
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 17:01:49 -0500
From: "Busch, Lawrence" <Lawrence.Busch@ssc.msu.edu>
To: "'sts@kant.ch.umkc.edu'" <sts@kant.ch.umkc.edu>
Rachelle Hollander asked what the difference is between terminator
technology and hybrid seed. As I see it, there are two differences:
First, hybrids have only been successful with a few crops. There is some
debate as to why this is so, i.e., is it for genetic or economic reasons or
both. However, the point is that hybrids are limited to a few crops.
Second, hybrids are relatively easy to produce by conventional breeding, so
although the market is somewhat concentrated, there are many companies in
the market.
The first difference is far and away the most important one. In principle,
a wide range of crops could be developed with the Terminator gene. In fact,
if the gene works as expected, it will likely be licensed widely to seed
companies, making it difficult for farmers to buy seed that does not contain
the Terminator gene. Thus, farmers might well find that they have no choice
in the matter any more. Of course, such seeds will have to have other short
run benefits for farmers such as higher yields than other varieties on the
market.
Larry
Lawrence Busch
University Distinguished Professor
Department of Sociology
Michigan State University
East Lansing, MI 48824
USA
Tel: 1-517-355-3396
Fax: 1-517-432-2856
lawrence.busch@ssc.msu.edu
http://www.msu.edu/user/buschll/
> ----------
> From: Hollander, Rachelle [SMTP:rholland@nsf.gov]
> Reply To: sts@kant.ch.umkc.edu
> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 1999 4:35 PM
> To: 'sts@kant.ch.umkc.edu'
> Subject: RE: Terminator technology of Monsato - being Patented
> worldwide !
>
> What's the (big) difference between this and hybrid seed, which also makes
> farmers dependent?
> Rachelle
> Rachelle D. Hollander, Program Director
> Societal Dimensions of Engineering, Science, & Technology
> NSF 4201 Wilson Blvd. Rm.995
> Arlington VA 22230
> 703-306-1743 fax -0485 rholland@nsf.gov
> www.nsf.gov/sbe/sber/sdest
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Busch, Lawrence [SMTP:Lawrence.Busch@ssc.msu.edu]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 28, 1999 4:03 PM
> > To: 'sts@kant.ch.umkc.edu'
> > Subject: RE: Terminator technology of Monsato - being Patented
> > worldwide !
> >
> > I have to disagree strongly with those who see little problem with
> > Terminator technology. The big threat is that it assumes that
> > institutions
> > will remain forever stable. If used on a large scale, it will make
> > farmers
> > far more dependent on seed companies for seed. If the seed is
> unavailable
> > due to war, civil disturbance, natural disaster, etc. then farmers will
> > suddenly discover that they have no seed to plant. The results would be
> > catastrophic.
> >
> > Another question that might be asked is why USDA financed this
> technology
> > which does little or nothing to benefit farmers or consumers. It merely
> > puts more money into the hands of Monsanto.
> >
> > Lawrence Busch
> > University Distinguished Professor
> > Department of Sociology
> > Michigan State University
> > East Lansing, MI 48824
> > USA
> > Tel: 1-517-355-3396
> > Fax: 1-517-432-2856
> > lawrence.busch@ssc.msu.edu
> > http://www.msu.edu/user/buschll/
> >
> > > ----------
> > > From: James Hess[SMTP:jhess@orion.oac.uci.edu]
> > > Reply To: sts@kant.ch.umkc.edu
> > > Sent: Thursday, January 28, 1999 2:25 PM
> > > To: sts@kant.ch.umkc.edu
> > > Subject: Re: Terminator technology of Monsato - being Patented
> > > worldwide !
> > >
> > >
> > > Having forwarded the earlier message, based on a RAFI assessment, I
> here
> > > forward a more sanguine view of the potential on Terminator
> Technology:
> > >
> > > -Jim Hess-
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Rachel Sandals <rsandals@UFL.EDU>
> > > To: EANTH-L@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU
> > > Subject: Re: Terminator technology of Monsato - being Patented
> worldwide
> > > !!
> > >
> > > A few days ago, a message was forwarded about the 'terminator
> > technology"
> > > of
> > > Monsato. There is always a danger of spreading fear on topics with
> > which
> > > we
> > > may not be familiar as anthropologists, such as plant genetics. So, I
> > did
> > > a
> > > little inquiring. For those of you who want to know a molecular
> > > biologist's
> > > resonse to the message, read below:
> > >
> > > Fwd:
> > > I know something about this technology, and I don't think it is going
> to
> > > be
> > > a problem as regards the spread of killer toxin genes. There is a
> small
> > > but
> > > real risk that the gene could be transferred to a plant virus, but the
> > > gene
> > > is only activated by tetracycline, and the chances that tetracycline
> > will
> > > be
> > > used on plants is small, so any plant virus that may carry the gene is
> > > unlikely to ever be exposed to an environment which will activate the
> > > killer
> > > gene. And if it does activate the gene in the mutant virus, then the
> > > plant
> > > will rapidly die. Further, the gene will reside in the virus and not
> in
> > > the
> > > genes of the plant, and therefore, is unlikely to passed on to any
> plant
> > > progeny. However, most seeds which are sold today are hybrid seeds,
> and
> > > will not yield a commercially viable seed for crops in succeeding
> > > plantings.
> > > So, if the price of the seeds isn't too dear, I don't see any problem
> > with
> > > using them.
> > > As far as the patent is concerned, it will only be valid for a few
> short
> > > years, and then the technology will be out there for the public to use
> > as
> > > it
> > > likes. If I were a third world farmer, I would probably not buy the
> > seeds
> > > in the first place if I could not afford to buy them again. However,
> if
> > > the
> > > price is right, it would eliminate the problem of regrowth of
> > undesirable
> > > crops in succeeding plantings, and this is good.
> > >
> > >
>
Subject: RE: IK use in development
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1999 09:04:09 +0100
From: "Westrienen, Gerard van" <gerardw@nuffic.nl>
To: "'aw240@hermes.cam.ac.uk'" <aw240@hermes.cam.ac.uk>
CC: indknow@u.washington.edu
Dear Alexadra Winkels,
Information on indigenous knowledge which is scattered throughout
the Internet is searched, indexed and made available on the Indigenous
Knowledge Pages <http://www.nuffic.nl/ik-pages/index.html>. Resources that
offer an overview of a specific subject or that are specific for one region
or country can be browsed, but it is also possible to search resources that
we have selected and described. This resource has been made available by
Nuffic/CIRAN.
We aim to facilitate and improve the exchange of information within
the International Indigenous Knowledge (IK) Network
<http://www.nuffic.nl/ik-pages/info2.html>. CIRAN also provides the IK
network with a journal and newsletter, the Indigenous Knowledge and
Development Monitor. This publication promotes the exchange of information
on indigenous knowledge as it relates to sustainable development.
I hope this site will be a good starting point for further
information and references regarding indigenous knowledge. In respect to
agroforestry and forest management: pointers are available to this topic as
well.
Succes.
Gerard van Westrienen.
PS: we are interested in the results of your study.
----------------------------
Gerard van Westrienen
Nuffic/CIRAN, Centre for International Research and Advisory Networks
P.O.Box 29777, 2502 LT The Hague - The Netherlands
Tel: +31-70-4260325 Fax: +31-70-4260329
Email: gerardw@nuffic.nl Home page:
http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran/
Please note the change of our domain name: from nufficcs.nl to nuffic.nl
> -----Original Message-----
> From: aw240@hermes.cam.ac.uk [SMTP:aw240@hermes.cam.ac.uk]
> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 1999 7:39 PM
> To: indknow@u.washington.edu
> Subject: IK use in development
>
> I am currnetly looking into the institutional use of indigenous/local
> knowledge international development assistance - the implications and
> possibilties of IK transfer from projects of different cultural and
> geographical contexts. I'm trying to narrow my interest down to
> agroforestry and sustainable forest management practices.
>
> I would be very interested in your views about:
>
> a) priority research areas - what is currently regarded as important in
> the
> realm of IK promotion and transfer; is there any similar research out
> there?
>
> b) any information about internationally funded projects (UN, GTZ, IUCN,
> WWF, etc. ) that have successfully/ unsuccessfully incorporated IK;
>
> c) experiences with different donor organisations: how the agenda (in
> regards to IK) has changes over recent years and what about rhetoric vs
> action?
>
> d) any further information/ contacts/ references regarding indigenous
> knowledge in respect to agroforestry and forest management.
>
> Thank you very much for your time and input.
>
> Regards,
> Alexandra Winkels
>
> Research Student,
> University of Cambridge
>
Subject: RE: IK use in development
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 1999 14:20:32 EST
From: "Chuck Riley" <mbagnick@hotmail.com>
To: gerardw@nuffic.nl, aw240@hermes.cam.ac.uk
CC: indknow@u.washington.edu
I would like to know if anyone has information on the current status
of the CIKARD (Center for Indigenous Knowledge and Rural Development)
program, out of Iowa State. I've tried the URL
http://www.physics.iastate.edu/cikard/cikard.html recently, but haven't
found anything there. Is it still active?
----Original Message----
>
> Dear Alexadra Winkels,
> Information on indigenous knowledge which is scattered throughout
>the Internet is searched, indexed and made available on the Indigenous
>Knowledge Pages <http://www.nuffic.nl/ik-pages/index.html>. Resources
that
>offer an overview of a specific subject or that are specific for one
region
>or country can be browsed, but it is also possible to search resources
that
>we have selected and described. This resource has been made available
by
>Nuffic/CIRAN.
> We aim to facilitate and improve the exchange of information within
>the International Indigenous Knowledge (IK) Network
><http://www.nuffic.nl/ik-pages/info2.html>. CIRAN also provides the IK
>network with a journal and newsletter, the Indigenous Knowledge and
>Development Monitor. This publication promotes the exchange of
information
>on indigenous knowledge as it relates to sustainable development.
> I hope this site will be a good starting point for further
>information and references regarding indigenous knowledge. In respect
to
>agroforestry and forest management: pointers are available to this
topic as
>well.
>
> Succes.
> Gerard van Westrienen.
>
> PS: we are interested in the results of your study.
>
>
>----------------------------
>Gerard van Westrienen
>Nuffic/CIRAN, Centre for International Research and Advisory Networks
>P.O.Box 29777, 2502 LT The Hague - The Netherlands
>Tel: +31-70-4260325 Fax: +31-70-4260329
>Email: gerardw@nuffic.nl Home page:
>http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran/
>Please note the change of our domain name: from nufficcs.nl to
nuffic.nl
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Subject: RE: IK use in development
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 10:19:26 +0100
From: "Westrienen, Gerard van" <gerardw@nuffic.nl>
To: "'Chuck Riley'" <mbagnick@hotmail.com>
CC: "'indknow@u.washington.edu'" <indknow@u.washington.edu>
Dear Chuck,
we also noticed the problem and my collegue has contacted CIKARD. This was
their reply last Tuesday:
"We are currently re-organizing and relocating CIKARD'S website and
database. Just as soon as we get it up and running we will notify you.
Also as soon as I have confermation on the new web address I will send it
your way."
As soon as we have new information from CIKARD we will forward it to the
INDKNOW mailinglist.
Gerard van Westrienen.
----------------------------
Gerard van Westrienen
Nuffic/CIRAN, Centre for International Research and Advisory Networks
P.O.Box 29777, 2502 LT The Hague - The Netherlands
Tel: +31-70-4260325 Fax: +31-70-4260329
Email: gerardw@nuffic.nl Home page:
http://www.nuffic.nl/ciran/
Please note the change of our domain name: from nufficcs.nl to nuffic.nl
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Riley [SMTP:mbagnick@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, January 30, 1999 8:21 PM
> To: Westrienen, Gerard van; aw240@hermes.cam.ac.uk
> Cc: indknow@u.washington.edu
> Subject: RE: IK use in development
>
> I would like to know if anyone has information on the current status
> of the CIKARD (Center for Indigenous Knowledge and Rural Development)
> program, out of Iowa State. I've tried the URL
> http://www.physics.iastate.edu/cikard/cikard.html recently, but haven't
> found anything there. Is it still active?
>
>
Subject: Re: GE Organisms and Biodiversity: The Quito Declaration
Date: Sun, 07 Feb 1999 08:53:34 -0500
From: Janet Mrenica <jmrenica@web.net>
To: Ernest Rukangira <erukangira@iconnect.co.ke>
CC: Jean Arnold <fbcja@web.net>,
Korah Mathen <korah.mathen@arvind.sprintsmx.ems.vsnl.net.in>
Ernest: Have you seen this? How does the MPLC program stack up on the
points
raised in this declaration?
Janet
---------
Bob Phelps wrote:
> Over fifty organisations met in Ecuador in January and endorsed the
> following Declaration, in preparation for the Biosafety Protocol Meeting
in
> Colombia from February 14. Please pass it on to others.
>
> Your organisation is also welcome to become a signatory. Send your name
and
> the name of the organisation you represent to:
>
> Accion Ecologica
> Casilla 17-15-246-C
> Quito ECUADOR
>
> email: ebravo@hoy.net
>
> LATIN AMERICAN DECLARATION ON TRANSGENIC ORGANISMS
>
> Latin American peasant, indigenous, environmental and other civil society
> sector organisations, gathered in Quito, Ecuador, in January 1999, reject
> the invasion of transgenic organisms in Latin America - the greatest area
> of agricultural biodiversity on the planet and now the second region in
the
> world in terms of transgenic crop acreage - and we declare the following:
>
> 1. We reject genetic engineering because it is an ethically questionable
> technology which violates the integrity of human life, of species which
> have inhabited our planet for millions of years and of ecosystems.
>
> 2. This technology is in part a consequence but also exacerbates a global
> development process that is based on inequity between regions,
exploitation
> of people and nature, and the subordination of peasant and traditional
> economies of Third World countries to the profit drive of transnational
> companies (TNCs) in the food industry.
>
> 3. Genetic engineering is a technology driven by commercial interest. It
is
> not necessary. It forces us to become dependent on the TNCs which control
> it, putting our autonomy to take decisions about production systems and
> food security into real danger. Especially in the field of agriculture,
> there are traditional and alternative technologies which do not pose such
> risks and which are compatible with the conservation of biodiversity.
>
> 4. Even though genetic engineering shares the same reductionist logic as
> the Green Revolution, it is radically different from conventional genetic
> improvement.
>
> 5. Science is incapable of predicting the risks and impacts - affecting
> biodiversity, human and animal health, the environment as well as
> production systems -- which the deliberate release of transgenic organisms
> may produce.
>
> 6. The deliberate release of transgenic seeds is an extremely grave threat
> to the countries in our region which are countries of origin or diversity
> for cultivated plants and their wild relatives, as it could result in
> dangerous and irreversible forms of genetic pollution.
>
> 7. The commercial introduction of transgenic organisms into the market has
> been made possible by intellectual property laws which privatise life and
> undermine basic ethical values and principles such as respect for the
> integrity of life. We therefore reject every type of intellectual property
> over life forms.
>
> 8. The introduction of transgenic crops destroys productive traditional
> farming systems and local rural economies by violating, among others, the
> collective rights established under the Convention on Biological Diversity
> and other multilateral agreements such as Convention 169 of the
> International Labour Organisation and the UN Convention on Human Rights.
>
> 9. Equally, the introduction of transgenic organisms subverts the survival
> of cultural and technological practices by farmers, peasants, and
> indigenous, black and local communities, so that they may conserve, use,
> improve, innovate and exchange their seeds. This violates the millenary
> rights of these communities, which have been recognised by the
> International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources at the UN Food and
> Agriculture Organisation and Article 8(j) of the Convention on Biological
> Diversity.
>
> 10. Furthermore, the large scale spread of production systems based on the
> use of transgenic organisms represents a terrible threat to national
> economies of the countries in our region.
>
> 11. We are warning everybody about this danger and we condemn the imminent
> introduction of controls over genetic expression - such as the so-called
> "Terminator" technology but also others - which will produce sterile seeds
> and have no other objective than to consolidate monopolistic power of the
> global seed cartel.
>
> In light of the above, we demand that:
>
> · No transgenic organisms should be released where they have not yet been
> released
> · The right of local and national governments to reject the introduction
of
> transgenic organisms in their territories must be upheld
> · A moratorium on the release and commercial use of transgenic organisms
> and products derived from them should be established until complete
> evidence of their safety and absence of risk is secured and until our
> societies have had the full opportunity to understand and have informed
> debate about these technologies, including their risks and impacts, and
> exercise their own right to decide whether or not they should be used.
> · All decisions concerning the development, use and release of transgenic
> organisms should be subject to consultation and informed participation of
> all sectors of society which could be negatively affected, given that
> genetic engineering bears risks which can unleash unpredictable and
> irreversible impacts.
>
> Annex on the Biosafety Protocol of the CBD
>
> We entirely reject genetic engineering and the deliberate release of
> transgenic organisms into the environment.
>
> We are aware that this has been going on illegitimately - whether it had
> been lawful or not - with serious risks for the societies and ecosystems
> exposed to such activities.
>
> Given that releases have occurred and that a legal-binding protocol on
> biosafety is being developed under the Convention on Biological Diversity,
> we want the following demands to be accounted for under this protocol:
>
> A. The basic principle of any policy related to biosafety, including the
> Protocol, must be the "precautionary principle".
> B. The scope of the Protocol must include research, manipulation, use,
> transport, deliberate release into the environment, transboundary movement
> and labelling.
> C. All genetically modified organisms must be covered, be they living or
> dead, their parts (for example DNA segments, plasmids, modified virus) and
> their derived products.
> D. Risk evaluation and management must be handled in a manner that is
> integrated and interdependent on all aspects of biosafety, including
> environmental interactions, biodiversity, socioeconomic and cultural
> aspects, human health and food security.
> E. The Protocol must guarantee effective protection of local and
> traditional farming systems, food security and respect of human and
> collective rights.
> F. All agreements and considerations related to biosafety and all
> multilateral environmental treaties must have primacy over trade policies
> and agreements.
> G. Mechanisms must be provided to assure transparent information important
> for citizens, especially those related to risk evaluation and management,
> contingency plans, and damage control measures.
> H. The rights of countries to take sovereign decisions regarding research,
> manipulation, use, transport, deliberate release into the environment and
> transboundary movement of transgenic organisms, based on preliminary and
> informed participation of social sectors which may be negatively affected
> and which have no profit interest in these transactions, must be secured.
> I. The Protocol must provide efficient mechanisms to identify and assign
> responsibilities and sanctions, including economic liability of exporting
> countries and genetic engineering companies, as well as conflict
resolution
> mechanisms which will truly protect the rights of potentially affected
> parties. These mechanisms must cover liability for environmental,
> socioeconomic and cultural harm. organisms must be established.
> J. Efficient mechanisms to monitor, control and sanction the illegal
> movements of transgenic
> K. . This Protocol must apply to all countries and trading groups.
>
> Quito, 22 January 1999
> ----------------------
>
> mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
>
> NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
> distributed without profit to those who expressed a prior interest in
> receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
>
> Please don't send unsolicited attachments.
>
> mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
>
> Bob Phelps
> Director
> Australian GeneEthics Network
> c/- ACF 340 Gore Street, Fitzroy. 3065 Australia
> Tel: (03) 9416.2222 Fax: (03) 9416.0767 {Int Code (613)}
> email: acfgenet@peg.apc.org
> WWW: http://www.zero.com.au/agen
>
> "Non-cooperation with injustice is a sacred duty."
>
> Mahatma Gandhi
>
> "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for enough good
> people to do nothing"
>
> Edmund Burke
>
> "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint.
> When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist."
>
> Dom Helder Camera
>
> "Knowing is not enough, you must also act"
>
> mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Janet Mrenica <jmrenica@web.net>
Certified Management Accountant
Janet Mrenica
Certified Management Accountant <jmrenica@web.net>
192 Waverley St. Work: 613-231-6499
Ottawa, Ontario Fax: 613-231-4694
Ontario Conference Software Address
K2P 0V6 Default Directory Server
Additional Information:
Last Name Mrenica
First Name Janet
Version 2.1
Subject: Swiss university to use genetic resources from Yanomami lands
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 07:46:50 -0800 (PST)
From: Department of Zoology <pdh@u.washington.edu>
To: indknow@u.washington.edu
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 11:50:23 -0200 (EDT)
From: Biotech Activists <biotech_activists@iatp.org>
To: Multiple recipients of list <biodiv-l@bdt.org.br>
Subject: Swiss university to use genetic resources from Yanomami lands
================================
Date Posted: 02/02/1999
Posted by: mritchie@iatp.org
================================
BIO-IPR docserver * bilingual edition *
________________________________________________________
TITULO/TITLE: El Ministerio del Ambiente autorizÛ a universidad suiza a usar
recursos geneticos de las Tierras Yanomami / Ministry of Environment
authorises Swiss university to use genetic resources from Yanomami lands
AUTOR/AUTHOR: Mirey Tabuas
PUBLICACION/PUBLICATION: El Nacional, Caracas [Venezuela]
FECHA/DATE: 26 de enero de 1999 / 26 January 1999
NOTE: An unofficial English translation follows the original.
________________________________________________________
El Nacional, Caracas - Martes 26 de Enero de 1999
EL MINISTERIO DEL AMBIENTE AUTORIZO A UNIVERSIDAD SUIZA A USAR RECURSOS
GENETICOS DE LAS TIERRAS YANOMAMI
No solicitaron permiso a indÌgenas
Mireya Tabuas
El Ministerio del Ambiente celebrÛ este mes un contrato con la Universidad
de Zurich, Suiza, para permitirle el acceso a los recursos genÈticos en el
·rea yanomami. El coordinador de la OrganizaciÛn de Pueblos IndÌgenas del
Estado Amazonas (Orpia), Guillermo Guevara, denunciÛ que dicho compromiso
fue contraÌdo por este despacho sin la debida notificaciÛn a las poblaciones
yanomamis que habitan en la zona y que ser·n las principales afectadas por
la decisiÛn.
El documento tiene por objeto autorizar a la universidad europea para que
investigue sobre los recursos genÈticos vegetales y "componentes
intangibles", que son los conocimientos ancestrales de las comunidades
yanomamis. En dicho contrato se le da a los grupos indÌgenas que colaboren
con la investigaciÛn 30% del costo del contrato. El Ministerio del Ambiente
recibir· 20% por derechos de regalÌas, patente y comercializaciÛn de lo que
allÌ se encuentre.
Guevara recalcÛ que la OrganizaciÛn de Pueblos IndÌgenas de Amazonas no
autoriza este convenio porque considera que es un saqueo m·s de sus tierras,
esta vez aprovech·ndose de su biodiversidad y los conocimientos ancestrales
de las comunidades, que no pueden ser patentados, seg™n lo que se ha
acordado entre las poblaciones de la Cuenca AmazÛnica. Guevara manifestÛ que
el convenio se basa en la DecisiÛn 391 del Acuerdo de Cartagena, que no ha
sido reglamentada por nuestra legislaciÛn.
-øEn quÈ los afecta como comunidad?
-Nos afecta porque piensan patentar nuestros conocimientos y no est·n claros
los beneficios que nos otorgar·. Esa informaciÛn es propiedad colectiva de
nuestros pueblos, no de una empresa extranjera.
Lo que no le parece claro a Guevara es el hecho de que no se tome en cuenta
para ning™n trato a los yanomamis. Vale seÒalar que no existe legislaciÛn
sobre este tema, puesto que en nuestro paÌs la Ley de Diversidad BiolÛgica
fue aprobada por el Congreso el aÒo pasado, pero el presidente Rafael
Caldera la devolviÛ a la ProcuradurÌa (no al Congreso).
Como documentos de soporte del contrato de acceso a los recursos genÈticos,
la DirecciÛn de Asuntos IndÌgenas del Ministerio de EducaciÛn concediÛ un
permiso, firmado por Horacio Biord, en su condiciÛn de director encargado.
Avalan tambiÈn el convenio el Herbario de la Universidad Central de
Venezuela y la Escuela de AntropologÌa de la misma instituciÛn. Una
autorizaciÛn tambiÈn fue rubricada por la directora de VegetaciÛn del Marnr,
Delfina RodrÌguez. Mediante dicha autorizaciÛn se permite colectar las
plantas medicinales en un ·rea muy especÌfica de Amazonas, bajo condiciones
muy claras que obligan a depositar muestras en los herbarios del paÌs.
En ninguno de estos documentos anexos al contrato se habla de autorizar la
posibilidad de registrar patentes de comercio e industrializaciÛn de los
descubrimientos basados en la farmacopea yanomami, sin embargo en el
contrato final sÌ se especifica este punto como v·lido.
La directora de VegetaciÛn del Marnr, Delfina RodrÌguez, refiriÛ que la
instituciÛn suiza ha cumplido con todos los requisitos para que le sea
aprobado el convenio. Le extraÒa que la comunidad indÌgena reclame cuando
"el contrato recoge una cantidad de beneficios, incluso econÛmicos, para los
yanomamis".
__________________
El Nacional, Caracas [Venezuela]
26 January 1999
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT AUTHORISES SWISS UNIVERSITY
TO USE GENETIC RESOURCES FROM YANOMAMI LANDS
No permission sought from the indigenous peoples
by Mireya Tabuas
The Ministry of Environment has signed a contract this month with the
University of Zurich, Switzerland, granting access to the genetic resources
in Yanomami territory. The Coordinator of the Organisation of Indigenous
Peoples of the Amazonas State (ORPIA), Guillermo Guevara, denounced the
contract because it was signed without notifying the Yanomami people who
live in the area and will be affected by the decision.
The document authorises the university to conduct research on plant genetic
resources in the area, including their "intangible components" such as
traditional knowledge of the Yanomami about them. In the contract, it is
stipulated that the indigenous groups which collaborate in the research
process will receive 30% of the cost of the contract. The Ministry of
Environment will get 20% though rights to royalties, patents and commercial
benefits derived from the outcome of the research.
Guevara stressed that the Organisation of Indigenous Peoples of Amazonas
does not approve the contract because it is yet another form of plunder of
their lands, this time exploiting biodiversity and the traditional knowledge
of the communities. Neither of these can be patented, according to an
agreement among the peoples of the Amazon Basin. Guevara said that the
contract is based on Decision 391 of the Cartagena Agreement, which has not
been regulated through national legislation.
How does this affect the Yanomami as a community?
"It affects us because they're planning to patent our knowledge, and the
benefits that we are supposed to get from this are not clear. This
knowledge, this information, is the collective property of our peoples, not
the property of a foreign company."
What is clear to Guevara is that the contract does not take account of the
Yanomami peoples. It is important to bear in mind that there is no national
legislation on this issue, given that the Law on Biological Diversity was
approved by Congress last year but President Rafael Caldera sent it back to
the Solicitor General's office, not to Congress.
As a supporting document for the access contract, the Directorate for
Indigenous Affairs of the Ministry of Education had issued a permit signed
by Horacio Biord as Acting Director. The contract also leans on an agreement
between the Central University of Venezuela and its own School of
Anthropology. Another permit that forms part of the contract involves the
Director of Plants of Marnr, Delfina Rodriguez. This permit allows
collecting of medicinal plants in a very specific area of Amazonas under
very clear conditions which require samples to be deposited in a national
herbarium.
None of these documents annexed to the contract mention any possibility of
filing patents or commercialising the results of the discoveries based on
Yanomami pharmacopoeia. However, the final contract does stipulate that both
commercialisation and patenting should be anticipated and will be valid.
The Director of Plants of Marnr, Delfina Rodriguez, insists that the Swiss
institution has complied with all the requirements necessary for the
approval of the contract. She is surprised that the communities are
complaining, since "The contract identifies a certain amount of benefits,
even economic ones, that will go to the Yanomami."
Subject: [BIO-IPR] UNESCO's Upcoming Summit To Pursue Social Equity Goal
Resent-Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 18:48:18 -0800
Resent-From: bio-ipr@cuenet.com
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 1999 10:40:06 +0800
From: GRAIN Los Banos <grain@baylink.mozcom.com>
To: bio-ipr@cuenet.com
--
BIO-IPR docserver
________________________________________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment