ChapterPDF Available

Bioprospecting and biopiracy in The international encyclopedia of geography: People, the earth, environment, and technology, eds. D. Richardson, N. Castree, M. F. Goodchild, A. L. Kobayashi, W. Liu, and R. Marston. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Richardson wbieg0587.tex V1 - 03/23/2016 9:05 P.M. Page 1
k k
Bioprospecting and
Benjamin D. Neimark
Lancaster University, UK
History of natural products drug
Bioprospecting is dened as the collection,
research, and commercialization of biodiversity
for new medicines and other useful natural prod-
ucts (perfumes, cosmetics, agro-chemicals, and
functional foods). Although generally thought
of as a modern practice, the discovery of natural
products is part of a millennia-long quest for
medicines. Evidence of this can be observed in
ancient texts, including the Chinese Materia Med-
ica, the Vedas, or the Brahamanic of Hinduism,
and many inuential Arabic medical works
(Sneader 2005).
In Europe, imperial and colonial projects of
economic botany helped to establish global
botanical gardens where collections of valu-
able herbaria and details of their medical uses
were housed and used for new discoveries.
The reported use by Indians in Quito, Peru,
of cinchona bark (Cinchona ocinalis L.) as a
medicinal decoction for shivering and cold
spells led European scientists in the early 1700s
to adopt the use of quinine as a treatment for
malaria. Another important discovery from this
period included the ipecacuanha root (Cephaelis
ipecacuanha), which was used to treat amoebic
The International Encyclopedia of Geography.
Edited by Douglas Richardson, Noel Castree, Mike M. Goodchild, Audrey Kobayashi, Weidong Liu, and Richard A. Marston.
© 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Published 2017 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118786352.w9780470659632wbieg0587
Centuries later, drug discovery was a major
focus of the US government when seeking
treatment for wounded soldiers during World
War II. Government research immediately
began to collaborate with a number of large
pharmaceutical companies, such as Abbott,
Pzer, Merck, and Squibb, for the commer-
cial production of penicillin. The large-scale
research cooperation opened a gateway for the
US National Institutes of Health (NIH) to pro-
mote joint public/private funding for enhanced
treatment from natural products.
Bioprospecting and regulation
Contemporary bioprospecting was introduced
to the conservation and development com-
munity at the 1992 Earth Summit at Rio as a
model of sustainable development intervention.
Proponents held that the discovery of natural
drug products could provide the incentive, and
more importantly the nance, for the conser-
vation of biodiversity hotspots or ecosystems
most at risk of extinction. Two of the largest
multi-collaborative bioprospecting projects that
evolved out of this period and debuted in 1991
were the bilateral contract between Costa Rica’s
National Institute of Biodiversity (INBio) and
the large pharmaceutical rm Merck and Co.,
and the US federally funded International Coop-
erative Biodiversity Groups (ICBG) program
(Neimark and Tilghman 2014).
Posed as “win–win,” these large projects
were structured in a way to enable ecient
high-quality research while allowing for the
return of commercial benets to both source-
country laboratories and local communities. On
Richardson wbieg0587.tex V1 - 03/23/2016 9:05 P.M. Page 2
k k
the research side, bioprospecting projects were
meant to facilitate scientic and technology
transfer between global pharmaceutical rms
and source-country public and private laborato-
ries. On the conservation and development end,
international environmental organizations built
relationships with rural resource users and tra-
ditional healers in attempts to deliver sustainable
development in areas where the natural resources
and traditional knowledge were sourced.
Yet, in contrast to previous research on natural
products, which generally used targeted searches
for specic plants believed to have medicinal
qualities, these new projects boasted a much
broader geographic scope of plant collection.
In fact, bioprospectors were now spanning the
globe to ensure the delivery of bioprospecting
samples (plants, insects, and micro- and marine
organisms) in bulk quantities.
One reason for the increased scale of collect-
ing was the advanced technology now accessible
to the industry. The adoption of user-friendly
robotics and high-throughput screeners provided
researchers with opportunities to run hundreds
of thousands of samples per day against a par-
ticular disease target (i.e., cancer or HIV). Fol-
lowing this, computerized databases allowed for
immediate analysis of the laborious and multistep
process of elucidation and isolation. To take full
advantage of these technologies, however, it was
essential to collect in quantities unforeseen in the
past. Major pharmaceutical rms were lured in
with the reassurance that for meager investment
and relatively little risk they could amass desired
libraries of samples to test without leaving their
home institution.
Nevertheless, the emergence of bioprospect-
ing brought about a host of ethical concerns sur-
rounding the exploitation of source-country par-
ticipants’ knowledge and worries regarding the
ecological impacts of collection. In an attempt to
placate concerns, a regulatory framework was set
up to provide a structure for return benets back
to the countries where the material and knowl-
edge was collected.
Open for signature at the rst Rio Earth
Summit in 1992 and ratied a year later, the
Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) was
for many a signicant step forward, calling for an
equitable exchange of benets in return for the
facilitation of access to the country’s biodiversity.
Articles 1, 8(j), and 15 of the CBD were espe-
cially important in this regard. The CBD stated
that signatory countries now owned all biodi-
versity within its territorial boundaries, with the
understanding that it had to make all attempts to
facilitate access for research and/or commercial
interests. This reversed the earlier Stockholm
agreement in 1972, which stated that biodiversity
was the natural patrimony of all humankind, and
thus, a global resource (Svarstad 2005). There
was some trepidation by scientists that coun-
tries might become too overprotective of their
resources, but most agree that the CBD was a
major step forward in providing signatory coun-
tries the incentive to conserve resources through
the commercialization of their biodiversity.
In order for the CBD to work in practice,
bioprospectors and source-country governments
had to agree on Access and Benet-Sharing
agreements (ABS) a requirement that was
nally ratied in 2010 by the Conference of
Parties at the Nagoya Protocol. Although ABSs
usually diered in structure, many shared the
same mutually agreed upon terms, including (i)
outlining how benets were to be distributed,
(ii) conrmation that details of informed consent
were g ranted prior to collection, and (iii) goals
for biodiversity conservation. Monetary and
nonmonetary benets from bioprospecting were
usually delivered in the form of milestone or
royalty payments, access or licensing fees, and
technology transfer of equipment, materials,
and/or trainings (Ten Kate and Laird 1999).
Richardson wbieg0587.tex V1 - 03/23/2016 9:05 P.M. Page 3
k k
Due to the lengthy time necessary for discovery,
small-scale sustainable development projects
were constructed at the local level.
Biopiracy and resistance
Right from the beginning, however, the opti-
mism surrounding bioprospecting was quickly
met with well-organized resistance. Many held
that the practice was essentially biopiracy, or the
systematic theft of traditional knowledge and
nature. First coined by the Canadian activist
group Rural Advancement Foundation Interna-
tional (RAFI), biopiracy was used by the Indian
scholar-activist Vandana Shiva (1997) in her book
of the same name. The thrust of the critique coa-
lesced around whether rural inhabitants received
fair compensation for the natural resources
and associated traditional knowledge used in
the drug discovery research. The resources
and knowledge used by locals for medicinal
purposes had been discovered, it was argued,
through countless years of “trial and error.”
Many of the more vocal critiques claimed that
given the history of exploitation of the global
south leading back to precolonial times, any
form of research and/or commercialization of
biodiversity under the banner of bioprospecting
was biopiracy (ETC Group 2004). Resistance
grew to the point that the Maya- ICBG project
operating in Chiapas, Mexico, was eventually
discontinued (Rosenthal 2006), followed by
other projects operating in Peru, Nigeria, and
Indonesia, that were encountering problems due
to disagreements from participating indigenous
groups. These events sent shockwaves across the
bioprospecting community, ultimately leading
some scientists to question the ethics of the
practice and their participation within it.
Although opposition to bioprospecting
manifested from larger anti-globalization and
indigenous rights movements, many of the cri-
tiques can also be traced back to the 1970s–1980s
surrounding the collecting and commercializing
of agricultural crops for the newly emerging
biotechnology industry (Neimark and Tilgh-
man 2014). The galvanizing issue was the World
Trade Organizations’ agreements on trade related
aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPS)
and the contentious debate over intellectual
property rights (IPRs). The TRIPS agreement
was meant to provide a way of facilitating patents
on discoveries of nature for life science and
agribusiness multinationals and universal IPR
standards that are enforceable through trade
protocols. The logic was that patents would
incentivize research and discovery within a glob-
alized marketplace, thereby opening the door for
ownership of novel discoveries. TRIPS essen-
tially codied the application of western IPR law
in developing countries. Yet, many argued that
this trade agreement weighed heavily in favor of
multinationals who had the nancial resources
and the political power to guarantee patents
without any recognition of the original knowl-
edge leading to the discovery, running counter
to the spirit of the CBD and, in particular, the
protection of indigenous people’s intellectual
A second major critique of bioprospecting
concerned the fairness of the ABS agreements
themselves. Many began to question whether
these agreements could even be equitable, given
that they were negotiated between high-powered
lawyers representing large pharmaceutical com-
panies and rural resource users with very little
experience in negotiating such deals. One
landmark case included the ABS agreements
surrounding the Hoodia gordonii – a small cactus
that grows in desert regions of southern Africa
used by the San people to stave of hunger. The
rst license agreement was made through a sci-
entic agreement with the South African-based
Richardson wbieg0587.tex V1 - 03/23/2016 9:05 P.M. Page 4
k k
Council for Scientic and Industrial Research
(CSIR) and a joint-venture between Pzer and
a UK-based Phytopharm. Once in place, the
agreement was challenged because it was signed
without the consent of the San. A subsequent
ABS, which included the San, was also contested
on the basis that the group did not have proper
legal representation at the signing (Wynberg
2010). The rights to commercialize the plant
were subsequently sold to the giant multinational
Unilever for the development of a functional
food using the plant, but the company eventu-
ally dropped eorts due to health and sourcing
Another noteworthy case of drug discovery
surrounds the commercialization of the rosy
periwinkle (Catharanthus roseus). Commonly
perceived as the quintessential case study of
global biopiracy, the story of the periwinkle is
quite a bit more complicated. The periwinkle
is a pantropical plant that is generally agreed
upon by botanists to be indigenous to Mada-
gascar. Research on the periwinkle by Eli Lilly
conducted in the late 1950s focused on the use
of the plant as oral insulin for the treatment
of diabetes. This work followed published and
anecdotal accounts of its use as a bush tea to
regulate sugar levels in Caribbean and Filipino
communities. After extensive research, the
periwinkle was serendipitously found to have a
number of tiny vinca alkaloids, which were use-
ful as an anti-cancer treatment of non-Hodgkin
lymphomas and childhood leukemia. The orig-
inal source material for the research, however,
was collected from multiple sources, including
from India and Jamaica, not Madagascar (Irving
Johnson, personal communication). Lilly did,
eventually, source periwinkle from plantations in
southern Madagascar, but the country did not
receive any royalties from the sale of the drugs,
which some estimates put close to 400 million
before the expiry of the patent. The periwinkle
case leads one to question what claims Mada-
gascar can make to benets when the original
source material or medicinal knowledge leading
to the discovery was not collected on the island.
Many issues surrounding the landmark case of
hoodia and the rosy periwinkle can be attributed
to the complex political, biophysical, and geo-
graphical challenges of bioprospecting. First,
much of the biodiversity desired for drug dis-
covery are collected in tropical and subtropical
ecosystems that are very far removed from the
large-scale advanced research facilities in the
global north. The biological/technical resource
imbalance raises a number of proprietary issues
concerning the collected material and knowl-
edge. For example, one major issue surrounding
the practice is that it is extremely dicult to
trace collected material housed in botanical
repositories and laboratories years after it was
collected. As Bronwyn Parry (2004) notes, the
increasing ability to “re-mine” this material
through subcontracted rental agreements to
third parties raises questions about the account-
ability and transparency of the original scientic
Second, the range of collected natural resources
used for commercialization sometimes spans
political borders and/or dierent communi-
ties’ customary boundaries and, as such, may
not be covered by benet-sharing protocols
or aorded protection of intellectual property
rights. Furthermore, many benet-sharing laws
are complex and outdated and source countries
have not been able to keep up with appro-
priate regulations to deal with the emergent
technologies of bioprospecting and biotechnol-
ogy. Yet, maybe the most damaging eect of
not having specic bioprospecting laws is the
inability of source-country governments to hold
bioprospectors accountable for the misappro-
priation of benets. In the end, even with laws
in place, keeping bioprespectors accountable is
Richardson wbieg0587.tex V1 - 03/23/2016 9:05 P.M. Page 5
k k
extremely challenging for source countries due
to the largely secretive nature of drug discovery
and the lack of transparency of the research
Finally, laws governing biodiversity programs
and associated benet-sharing agreements are
sometimes complex and dicult to under-
stand. The potential for problems thus exists
between parties who understand the terms of
the agreements and those who do not. These
misunderstandings may extend into mistrust
among government institutions and may develop
into over-strict polices causing unnecessary
restrictions even for host-country scientists to
access material for basic research. Many questions
also remain as to the real value of biogenetic
resources and traditional knowledge, which
remains dicult to calculate in economic terms
and, as such, there are gross miscalculations and
expectations as to the benets that can be gained
from bioprospecting.
Due to these complex issues coupled with the
onset of new technologies, major pharmaceu-
tical rms have, on the whole, for some time
now been moving away from bioprospecting
and shutting down their natural products divi-
sions. Instead, the industry has made a strategic
shift toward the use of libraries of computer
derived generated compounds a process called
combinatory chemistry or “combichem.” The
advantage of combichem is that it enables
molecules to be “tailored” to t the desired
target. This method promises to shorten the
time and lessen the nancial burden in bringing
home the blockbuster drug. Many arguments in
favor of synthetic drug development notwith-
standing, the pharmaceutical industry’s output
under combinatory chemistry has not lived up to
expectations, just as the industry has not lived up
to expectations. This lack of output has caused
some in the industry to rethink the important
role that natural products may still play in drug
In fact, to write o bioprospecting would be
to misunderstand the practice. Private biotech-
nology rms and laboratories who continue to
collect natural products have diversied their
approach. Beyond just researching drug dis-
covery, bioprospectors are putting their energy
and resources into an array of natural products,
including industrial biofuels, agrochemicals,
functional foods, cosmeceuticals, and nutraceu-
ticals. This also parallels shifts to collect natural
products from nontraditional sites, includ-
ing unexplored extreme environments (called
extremophiles), or plant, animal, or microor-
ganisms that thrive in extreme biophysical or
geochemical environments, such as deep-ocean
thermal vents or alkaline and saline pools.
Another major trend in the industry comprises
developing technologies of synthetic biology
and biomimicry, and the emerging work on
re-engineering life forms using models based on
nature. Recent discoveries of the rst synthetic
genome mapping may actually revive some pro-
grams which use natural compounds as a model
precursor for new drug discoveries. As syn-
thetic biology and biomimicry research expand,
however, a new wave of social resistance seems
to be growing as well. Although many of the
environments, practices, technologies, and laws
have transformed the practice of bioprospecting
over the years, resistance remains strong and the
schism remains between practice and critics’ calls
for more distributive and procedural justice.
SEE ALSO: Biodiversity; Biotechnology;
Environment and law; Environmental policy;
Ethnobotany; Green capitalism; Indigenous
technical knowledge; Natural resources; Nature
conservation; Neoliberalism and the
environment; Political ecology
Richardson wbieg0587.tex V1 - 03/23/2016 9:05 P.M. Page 6
k k
ETC Group. 2004. “From Global Enclosure to
Self-enclosure: Ten Years After – a Critique
of the CBD and the ‘Bonn Guidelines’ on
Access and Benet-Sharing (ABS).” Commu-
niqué, 83, January/February, Ottawa. http://
self-enclosure-ten-years-after- critique-cbd-and-
bonn-guidelines-access-and (accessed March 1,
Neimark, Benjamin, and Laura Tilghman. 2014.
“Bioprospecting a Biodiversity Hotspot:The Polit-
ical Economy of Natural Products Drug Discovery
for Conservation Goals in Madagascar.” In Con-
servation and Environmental Management in Mada-
gascar, edited by Ivan Scales, 296–323. London:
Parry, Bronwyn. 2004. Trading the Genome.New
York: Columbia University Press.
Rosenthal, Joshua P. 2006. “Politics, Culture, and
Governance in the Development of Prior Informed
Consent in Indigenous Communities.” Current
Anthropology, 47(1): 119–142.
Shiva, Vandana. 1997. Biopiracy: The Plunder of Nature
and Knowledge. Boston: South End Press.
Sneader, Walter. 2005. Drug Discovery: A History.
Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Svarstad, Hanne. 2005. “A Global Political Ecology
of Bioprospecting.” In Political Ecology across Spaces,
Scales, and Social Groups, edited by Susan Paulson
and Lisa Gezon, 239–256. New Brunswick, NJ:
Rutgers University Press.
Ten Kate, Kerry, and Sarah A. Laird. 1999. The Com-
mercial Use of Biodiversity:Access to Genetic
Resources and Benet-Sharing. London: Earth-
Wynberg, Rachel. 2010. “Hot Air over Hoodia.”
Grain, October 13.
entries/4047-hot-air-over-hoodia (accessed
December 9, 2013).
Further reading
McAfee, K. 1999. “Selling Nature to Save It? Biodi-
versity and Green Developmentalism.” Environment
and Planning D: Society and Space, 17(2): 133–154.
Neimark, Benjamin. 2012. “Green Grabbing at the
‘Pharm’ Gate: Overcoming the Barriers of Rosy
Periwinkle Production in Southern Madagascar.”
Journal of Peasant Studies, 39(2): 423–445.
Neimark, Benjamin. 2012. “Industrial Heartlands of
Nature: The Political Economy of Bioprospecting
in Madagascar.” Geoforum, 45(5): 580–590.
Voeks, Robert. A. 2004. “Disturbance Pharma-
copoeias: Medicine and Myth from the Humid
Tro pic s . Annals of the Association of American Geog-
raphers, 94(4): 868–888.
Richardson wbieg0587.tex V1 - 03/23/2016 9:05 P.M. Page 7
k k
Please note that the abstract and keywords will not be included in the printed book, but
are required for the online presentation of this book which will be published on Wiley
Online Library ( If the abstract and keywords are not
present below, please take this opportunity to add them now.
The abstract should be a short paragraph of between 150– 200 words in length and there
should be 5 to 10 keywords
Abstract: Since its introduction at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, bioprospecting (drug discovery
from nature) has been heralded by the conservation community as a model for achieving sustainable
development in areas of high biodiversity. Yet, bioprospecting was continually confronted by critics
who deemed it nothing less than biopiracy, or the misappropriation of traditional knowledge and
nature. This critique eventually transformed the practice in many ways, including how scientists were
able to access and share benets from commercialization. Even today, as bioprospectors try to reinvent
themselves through new technologies and scientic approaches, resistance to the commercialization
of nature and knowledge remains deeply entrenched.
Keywords: biopiracy; bioprospecting; market-based conservation; sustainable development
Full-text available
Madagascar has always held a special place on the bioprospecting map. Designated as one of the world's "hottest" biodiversity hotspots, scientists believe the extremely high flora and faunal endemism contain unique potential for the commercialisation of natural products. Years of collections by bioprospectors in Madagascar are beginning to pay off, not necessarily from drug discovery, but through the biodata from their botanical collections. In the paper, we highlight the links between labour and value over time to illustrate the historical process of collecting inventories of biodata and calculating biodiversity metrics. As we demonstrate, biodata originally used for the purposes of drug discovery and scientific exploration are now being repurposed in biodiversity offsetting programs for multinational mining operations in Madagascar. This project of "re-mining" biodata has reinforced the power of select research institutions which now service their expertise for biodiversity offsetting initiatives. In sum, botanical agencies are far from apolitical actors in these new iterations of market-conservation but active participants in a new age of green grabbing.
Full-text available
New supranational environmental institutions, including the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the 'green' World Bank, reflect attempts to regulate international flows of 'natural capital' by means of an approach I call 'green developmentalism: These institutions are sources of eco-development dollars and of a new 'global' discourse, a postneoliberal environmental-economic paradigm. By the logic of this paradigm, nature is constructed as a world currency and ecosystems are recoded as warehouses of genetic resources for biotechnology industries. Nature would earn its own right to survive through international trade in ecosystem services and permits to pollute, access to tourism and research sites, and exports of timber, minerals, and intellectual property rights to traditional crop varieties and shamans' recipes. I contend that green developmentalism, with its promise of market solutions to environmental problems, is blunting the North-South disputes that have embroiled international environmental institutions. But by valuing local nature in relation to international markets-denominating diversity in dollars, euros, or yen-green developmentalism abstracts nature from its spatial and social contexts and reinforces the claims of global elites to the greatest share of the earth's biomass and all it contains. Meanwhile, the CBD has become a gathering ground for transnational coalitions of indigenous, peasant, and NGO opponents of 'biopiracy' and the patenting of living things, and advocates of international environmental justice. They have begun to put forward counterdiscourses and alternative practices to those of green developmentalism.
Full-text available
Why did an early effort to build an ethical bioprospecting relationship with indigenous people in Peru survive when a more sophisticated approach with arguably better opportu- nities for indigenous communities in Mexico later foundered in a sea of criticism? Two projects funded under the Inter- national Cooperative Biodiversity Groups (ICBG), one work- ing with Aguaruna people in Peru and another working with Maya people in Chiapas, Mexico, have struggled with iden- tification of appropriate representation of community inter- ests and with concerted campaigns by nongovernmental or- ganizations (NGOs) to halt their efforts despite broad interest among the indigenous communities they contacted. The Peru ICBG ultimately succeeded in developing credible working partnerships and carried the project through to completion, while the Maya (Mexico) ICBG became mired in defense of its approach to prior informed consent and was terminated early. In this paper I summarize relevant aspects of the history of these two landmark projects and draw some lessons about the role of culture, politics, and local governance in the dif- fering outcomes of their efforts. In particular, I point to the role of preexisting and broadly representative indigenous gov- ernance as a key factor in determining the feasibility and integrity of prior informed consent for the use of traditional knowledge. This conclusion is important because it suggests concerted movement away from the traditional model of in- dividually oriented ethnobotanical studies for bioprospecting that involves indigenous communities toward one that is structured around institutional relationships. The central thesis of the ICBGs is that research and de- velopment projects designed to discover new pharmaceutical precursors in developing countries can, carefully constructed and equitably managed, produce benefits to health, conser- vation, and sustainable development. Since 1993 several agen- cies of the U.S government—the National Institutes of Health
Full-text available
The following article contrasts contemporary rosy periwinkle (Catharanthus roseus) extraction in southern Madagascar with original bioprospecting research conducted 50 years ago. My study shows how plant extraction firms have shifted their approaches by creating new labor forms, which devolve risk and increase exploitation in attempts to capture the valuable biogenetic material needed for drug discovery. The periwinkle symbolizes a complex picture of many dynamic barriers to capitalist penetration at work, including the natural, social and political. Over time, these barriers change and act in conjunction to provide a complex commodity chain expressing many exploitative labor relations of green capitalism.
Full-text available
The much-publicized quest for miracle drug plants in tropical rainforests has provided compelling support for the preservationist agenda. This article questions the assumptions that underpin this claim, particularly the myth that pristine forest represents the primary repository of nature's medicinal providence. After tracing colonial European efforts at medicinal plant discovery, intellectual property exploitation, and plant transference and acclimation, I review the recent resurgence of scientific interest in tropical folk pharmacopoeias. In spite of the image marketed by environmental entrepreneurs, the medicinal foraging preference of rural tropical groups is largely successional mosaics of their own creation—trails, kitchen gardens, swiddens, and forest fallows. Focusing on the subsistence transition from hunting and gathering to small-scale cultivation, I propose that disturbance pharmacopoeias are the logical outcome of changing subsistence strategies, ecological processes, and disease patterns. Salient, familiar, accessible, and rich in bioactive compounds, anthropogenic nature represents the ideal tropical medicine chest. Whereas bioprospecting enterprises carried out during the colonial period and at present employ similar rhetoric—deadly disease, miracle cures, and fantastic profits—these endeavors were in the past and continue to be buttressed by fictitious notions of virgin tropical nature and the mysterious healing powers of its “primitives.”Key Words: pharmacopoeia, tropical rainforest, ethnobotany, medicinal plants, human ecology.
Political ecology merges concern for aspects in the natural environment (ecology) with a focus on relationships between people-environment and peoplepeople (political). The burgeoning literature in political ecology deals with environment and development issues, emphasising the perception of problems among various stakeholders and others (Blaikie and Brookfield 1987, Bryant and Bailey 1997, Peet and Watts 1996, Stott and Sullivan 2000; also see chapter 2). Political ecology attempts to understand various types of influences across scales, sometimes also involving multiple spaces. © 2005 by Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. All rights reserved.
Written by a leading authority with an excellent reputation and ability for writing a good narrative, Drug Discovery: A History is a far cry from simply a list of chemical structures. This lively new text considers the origins, development and history of medicines that generate high media interest and have a huge social and economic impact on society. Set within a wide historical, social and cultural context, it provides expanded coverage of pre-twentieth century drugs, the huge advances made in the twentieth century and the latest developments in drug research. Hallmark features: Up-to-the-minute information in drug research. Vignettes of special and unusual information, and anecdotes. Discusses drug prototypes from all sources. More comprehensive than other volumes on history of drug discovery. From the reviews: " excellent bibliographic resource for those interested in the background papers that serve as the foundation for discovery of specific drug entities." JOURNAL OF MEDICAL CHEMISTRY, June 2006. "...a very comprehensive overview of drug development. It should be on the shelf on any aspiring pharmacist, medicinal chemist, or person interested in the history of therapeutic agents." JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION, February 2006.
bioprospecting new form of appropriation of indigenous knowledge and their cultural and natural resource sovereignty
In this authoritative and comprehensive volume the authors explain the provisions of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) on access and benefit-sharing, the effect of national laws to implement these, and aspects of typical contracts for the transfer of materials. They provide a unique sector-by-sector analysis of how genetic resources are used, the scientific, technological and regulatory trends and the different markets for products using biotechnology.