Skip navigation
advertisement

Bioprospectors feel backlash in Hawaii


< Prev | 1 | 2

But tough ethical questions are being raised about allowing private companies to patent and profit from Mother Nature: Who owns the living thing that yields the revenue? Are companies simply pirating local knowledge and resources from indigenous people?

“With more pharmaceutical companies turning to exploring other new technologies as sources for new drugs, it is becoming increasingly clear that poor countries might never realize the full benefits of their genetic endowments,” the United Nations said in April prior to convening that month a meeting at New York headquarters of experts on the subject.

The area is mostly unregulated, especially in international waters, and there are mounting calls in the United States and the United Nations to establish legal frameworks for such work.

Story continues below ↓
advertisement | your ad here

Legislation in the Hawaii legislature to ban bioprospecting has stalled, though lawmakers are expected to soon release an inventory of all bioprospecting agreements that the University of Hawaii has with industry.

The Convention on Biological Diversity has been ratified by 188 countries, but not the United States, and enforcement provisions appear weak, said Honolulu intellectual property attorney Seth Reiss.

A long history of colonialism in the remote bioprospecting hotspots of the world has also created mistrust of prospectors — even if most mining projects only involve scooping up a smidgen of DNA to tease out novel enzymes and proteins to make new products.

“We are taking spoonfuls or handfuls of dirt or water and we aren’t disturbing the environment or depleting the resources in any way,” said Martin Sabarsky, a spokesman with San Diego-based Diversa Inc., which has rights to mine University of Hawaii discoveries for novel genes.

“We are finding things that haven’t been found before and we think that adds value in many different ways,” Sabarsky said.

Diversa’s’ 15 bioprospecting endeavors around the world, including in Mexico, Ghana and Russia, have netted 200 patents with 500 more pending.

So far, though, the company has managed to get only one product — an animal feed supplement — to market.

Many locals accuse the University of Hawaii, which in 2003 began sending Diversa exotic microbes unearthed by researchers in volcanoes and elsewhere in the state, of giving away things that belong to the Hawaiian people and cannot be sold.

“It’s not about the money so much,” said Le’a Kanehe, a lawyer with the nonprofit group Indigenous Peoples Council on Biocolonialism. “It’s really about our relationship with the land. Our rights aren’t being recognized.”

taro plants
Marco Garcia / AP
The massive heart-shaped leaves of taro plants stand against a sunny sky in Honolulu at the University of Hawaii on Friday.

Nowhere is the bioprospecting issue more contentious than in Hawaii, the most biologically diverse state in the country and home to more than 22,000 species of plant and animal. Close to 9,000 of those species are found only in Hawaii.

The patenting of the taro plants is just the latest dust-up between native Hawaiians and the school.

Eduardo Trujillo, the researcher who developed the three disease-resistant strains and patented them, said his work saved the sacred plant from devastation.

“The patents are intended to protect the new hybrid taro cultivars for exclusive use by our farmers,” Trujillo said in an e-mail reply to questions from The Associated Press.

According to Hawaiian legend, the cosmic first couple gave birth to a stillborn, Haloa, from whose gnarled body sprang the broad-leafed taro plant, whose roots also happen to yield one of Hawaii’s best-known foods — poi.

The Hawaiian people, it is believed, came from a second brother, making the taro plant part of their common ancestry.

“Our genealogy arises from the taro,” said Hawaii activist Mililani Trask. “The taro patents are a desecration.”

Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


< Prev | 1 | 2

Resource guide