IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/glenvp/v2y2002i1p65-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Patenting Biodiversity? Rejecting WTO/TRIPS in Southern Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew T. Mushita
  • Carol B. Thompson

Abstract

The year 2000 was the deadline for developing countries to bring their national laws into compliance with the trade-related intellectual property rights (TRIPS) agreement under the World Trade Organization (WTO). However, the transition to one universal intellectual property law is not proceeding as scripted. After briefly summarizing a long tradition of debate about intellectual property, this article first analyzes what is new and different about TRIPS. It then argues that extending intellectual private property rights to plants, in particular in the form of patents, challenges scientific logic and threatens biodiversity. Southern Africa has also taken this view, and is proposing political and legal alternatives to the patenting of biodiversity. Combining principles from the Convention on Bio logical Diversity and the FAO International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources, draft legislation affirms farmers' and community rights, while not denying the important role of international protocols. The proposal, calling for local and national control, is not only a model for Africa, but for other developing countries to resolve the incongruities between TRIPS and the CBD over the patenting of living organisms. Copyright (c) 2002 Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew T. Mushita & Carol B. Thompson, 2002. "Patenting Biodiversity? Rejecting WTO/TRIPS in Southern Africa," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 2(1), pages 65-82, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:2:y:2002:i:1:p:65-82
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1162/152638002317261472
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:2:y:2002:i:1:p:65-82. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kelly McDougall (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.