Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Towards more equal footing in north–south biodiversity research: European and sub-Saharan viewpoints

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Biodiversity and Conservation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Research collaboration between developed countries from the northern hemisphere and developing countries in the southern hemisphere is essential for the understanding and protection of the major proportion of biodiversity located in the tropics. Focusing on the case of sub-Saharan Africa, we here assess the real involvement of northern versus southern contributors, and caution against unequal academic benefit sharing arising from non-commercial biodiversity research that may ultimately hamper sustainable knowledge transfer and long-term biodiversity conservation. We discuss possible drivers that may have led to a business of raw biodiversity data. While we fully support the current efforts to stamp out biopiracy through international biodiversity policies and agreements, we illustrate that such legislative frameworks may further constrain biodiversity research, especially in countries where regulations are poorly streamlined and bureaucracy remains rather inert. We therefore ask for workable solutions towards more equal footing in north–south biodiversity research, and propose a number of steps to transgress the current barriers towards a more fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from biodiversity research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Boshoff N (2009) Neo-colonialism and research collaboration in Central Africa. Scientometrics 81:413–434

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cincotta RP, Wisnewski J, Engelman R (2000) Human population in the biodiversity hotspots. Nature 404:990–992

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cock J, Fig D (2000) From colonial to community based conservation: environmental justice and the national parks of South Africa. Soc Trans 31:22–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cracraft J (1995) The urgency of building global capacity for biodiversity science. Biodivers Conserv 4:463–475

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guo Z, Zhang L, Li Y (2010) Increased dependence of humans on ecosystem services and biodiversity. PLoS ONE 5:e13113

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton C (2006) Biodiversity, biopiracy and benefits: what allegations of biopiracy tell us about intellectual property. Dev World Bioeth 6:158–173

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hanson T, Brooks TM, Da Fonseca GA, Hoffmann M, Lamoreux JF, Machlis G, Mittermeier CG, Mittermeier RA, Pilgrim JD (2009) Warfare in biodiversity hotspots. Conserv Biol 23:578–587

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison A-L (2006) Who’s who in conservation biology—an authorship analysis. Conserv Biol 20:652–657

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hawksworth DL, Dentinger BTM (2013) Antibiotics: relax UK import rules on fungi. Nature 4:169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahanty S, Russell D (2002) High stakes: lessons from stakeholder groups in the biodiversity conservation network. Soc Nat Res 15:179–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers N , Mittermeier RA, Mittermeier CG, Da Fonseca GAB, Kent J (2000) Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853–858

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Plumptre AJ, Davenport TRB, Behangana M, Kityo R, Eilu G, Ssegawa P, Ewango C, Meirte D, Kahindo C, Herremans M, Peterhans JK, Pilgrim JD, Wilson M, Languy M, Moyer D (2003) The biodiversity of the Albertine Rift. Biol Conserv 134:178–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roe D, Mohammed EY, Porras I, Giuliani A (2013) Linking biodiversity conservation and poverty reduction: de-polarizing the conservation-poverty debate. Conserv Lett 6:162–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schei PJ, Tvedt MW (2010) Genetic resources in the CBD: The wording, the past, the present and the future. Secretariat to the convention on biological diversity, ad hoc open-ended working group on access and benefit sharing. In: 9th meeting, Cali, Columbia, 22–28 March 2010. UNEP/CBD/WG-ABS/9/INF/1

  • Schuklenk U, Kleinsmidt A (2006) North–south benefit sharing arrangements in bioprospecting and genetic research: a critical ethical and legal analysis. Dev World Bioeth 6:122–134

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Secretariat of the convention on biological diversity (2010) Linking biodiversity conservation and poverty alleviation: a state of knowledge review. CBD Technical Series No. 55

  • Szablowski D (2010) Operationalizing free, prior, and informed consent in the extractive industry sector? Examining the challenges of a negotiated model of justice. Can J Dev Stud 30:111–130

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnhout E, Bloomfield B, Hulme M, Vogel J, Wynne B (2012) Conservation policy: listen to the voices of experience. Nature 488:454–455

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zachos FE, Habel JC (eds) (2011) Biodiversity hotspots—distribution and protection of conservation priority areas. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Christian Habel.

Additional information

Communicated by David Hawksworth.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Habel, J.C., Eggermont, H., Günter, S. et al. Towards more equal footing in north–south biodiversity research: European and sub-Saharan viewpoints. Biodivers Conserv 23, 3143–3148 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-014-0761-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-014-0761-z

Keywords

Navigation