63
3
ing, either by themselves, or jointly with smaller companies specializing in bioprospecting, or together with research institutes.
Bioprospecting is an economic activity with a clear North-South dimension.
Companies that use bioprospecting to develop new products are mainly found in
wealthy countries in the Global North. At the same time, many tropical countries
in the Global South possess a large biological diversity, with many different species
of plants and animals, and much genetic variation also within species. This has
made tropical countries particularly attractive for bioprospectors.
The activity involves various actors, including agents who travel from the
Global North to the South to collect samples of biodiversity, and people in the
South who help the agents collect plant samples and sometimes teach them how
the plants are used in traditional medicine. These actors meet face-to-face. At the
same time, places far from each other become linked together, such as collection
areas in Africa and South America, and research institutes and pharmaceutical
companies in Europe and North America.
From the early 1990s on, bioprospecting also came into focus in international
negotiations and conferences on biodiversity. These were first of all negotiations
and follow-up of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Many leaders in
developing countries were optimistic, because they saw that their abundance of
biodiversity had become an asset in demand as a raw material for companies in
developed countries. This gave rise to thoughts of biodiversity as a new green gold
that could provide income for developing countries. At the same time, the notion
of neo-colonial exploitation linked to this activity arose.
At the summit for environment and development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, as
well as during previous negotiations and at the Conferences of the Parties to the
CBD every other year afterwards, there have been numerous discussions about
possible consequences and possibilities to regulate bioprospecting. In 2007, most
countries still lacked laws and procedures necessary for profiting from bioprospecting, although some 58 countries were on the verge of or had implemented relevant
legislation (CBD 2007; Wynberg and Laird 2009).
In 2014, the Nagoya Protocol came into force. This protocol specifies conditions for bioprospecting and rights of source countries of biodiversity to take part
in benefits from the access and use of genetic resources.
After three decades, in 2020 bioprospecting can be concluded to have been a
wave that did not lead to the growth of activities and income that some hoped for.
An important reason for the decline was that critique and protests against the
activity made companies prefer other alternatives. At the same time, new technology has again made chemical methods attractive for pharmaceutical companies.
Nevertheless, in this chemical approach, companies often still apply knowledge
that they have already collected through bioprospecting, when they elaborate new
products based on imitations of nature (Neimark 2017).
We see the bioprospecting wave as an example of the rise, fall and change of an
industrial activity with expectations of income and development not only for
companies in the Global North, but also for the Global South. Recently, newer
3.1 · The Political Economy of Bioprospecting
3
ing, either by themselves, or jointly with smaller companies specializing in bioprospecting, or together with research institutes.
Bioprospecting is an economic activity with a clear North-South dimension.
Companies that use bioprospecting to develop new products are mainly found in
wealthy countries in the Global North. At the same time, many tropical countries
in the Global South possess a large biological diversity, with many different species
of plants and animals, and much genetic variation also within species. This has
made tropical countries particularly attractive for bioprospectors.
The activity involves various actors, including agents who travel from the
Global North to the South to collect samples of biodiversity, and people in the
South who help the agents collect plant samples and sometimes teach them how
the plants are used in traditional medicine. These actors meet face-to-face. At the
same time, places far from each other become linked together, such as collection
areas in Africa and South America, and research institutes and pharmaceutical
companies in Europe and North America.
From the early 1990s on, bioprospecting also came into focus in international
negotiations and conferences on biodiversity. These were first of all negotiations
and follow-up of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Many leaders in
developing countries were optimistic, because they saw that their abundance of
biodiversity had become an asset in demand as a raw material for companies in
developed countries. This gave rise to thoughts of biodiversity as a new green gold
that could provide income for developing countries. At the same time, the notion
of neo-colonial exploitation linked to this activity arose.
At the summit for environment and development in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, as
well as during previous negotiations and at the Conferences of the Parties to the
CBD every other year afterwards, there have been numerous discussions about
possible consequences and possibilities to regulate bioprospecting. In 2007, most
countries still lacked laws and procedures necessary for profiting from bioprospecting, although some 58 countries were on the verge of or had implemented relevant
legislation (CBD 2007; Wynberg and Laird 2009).
In 2014, the Nagoya Protocol came into force. This protocol specifies conditions for bioprospecting and rights of source countries of biodiversity to take part
in benefits from the access and use of genetic resources.
After three decades, in 2020 bioprospecting can be concluded to have been a
wave that did not lead to the growth of activities and income that some hoped for.
An important reason for the decline was that critique and protests against the
activity made companies prefer other alternatives. At the same time, new technology has again made chemical methods attractive for pharmaceutical companies.
Nevertheless, in this chemical approach, companies often still apply knowledge
that they have already collected through bioprospecting, when they elaborate new
products based on imitations of nature (Neimark 2017).
We see the bioprospecting wave as an example of the rise, fall and change of an
industrial activity with expectations of income and development not only for
companies in the Global North, but also for the Global South. Recently, newer
3.1 · The Political Economy of Bioprospecting