Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Traditional Knowledge, Sustainability, and International Intellectual Property Law: Biopiracy in Patent-Intensive Industries

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Sustainable Boardrooms

Part of the book series: Responsible Leadership and Sustainable Management ((RLSM))

Abstract

Innovation is a key driver in the growth of certain businesses since Patent law incentivizes it. However, certain business practices aimed to create value through patents tend to appropriate Traditional Knowledge (hereinafter referred to as “TK”) possessed by Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities (hereinafter referred to as “IPLC”). The Global North, over the course of the last century, promoted its methods of knowledge protection, which protect its commercial interests, through various International Intellectual Property Law (IIP) instruments. The enforcement of these instruments through national legislations has often facilitated unauthorized appropriation and exploitation without any regard for the interests of IPLC. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) constituted an Intergovernmental Committee (IGC) to proactively deal with the concerns of IPLCs regarding the threat to their Traditional Knowledge by Western Intellectual Property law. This chapter argues that appropriating TK is not a sustainable business practice. It then takes a Third World approach to examine the draft articles prepared by the IGC with regards to Traditional Knowledge, and Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources to argue that they fail to further the interests of IPLCs and the Global South and perpetuate the asymmetrical power relationships between the North and the South.

Open African Innovation Research (Open AIR) is carried out with financial support from the International Development Research Centre, Canada, the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, and the Queen Elizabeth Scholars Program. More information about Open AIR's current and previous supporters can be found at www.openair.africa. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent those of Open AIR's funders.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abdel-Latif, A. (2017). Revisiting the creation of the IGC: The limits of constructive ambiguity? In D. F. Robinson, A. Abdel-Latif, & R. Pedro (Eds.), Protecting traditional knowledge (pp. 10–30). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adhikari, R, & Adhikari, K. (2004). UPOV: Faulty agreement and coercive practices. In Adhikari, R. & Adhikari, K. (Eds.), Evolving Sui generis options for the Hindu-Kush Himalayas. South Asia watch on trade (pp. 73–82). Economics & Environment (SAWTEE).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ansong, A. (2018). Is the protection of traditional knowledge feasible under intellectual property law and other international regimes? The Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, 19(1), 13–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Assembly of First Nations Aboriginal Traditional Knowledge and Intellectual Property Rights Discussion Paper. (2011). Assembly of First Nations. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from https://books.scholarsportal.info/uri/ebooks/ebooks0/gibson_cppc/2011-12-20/1/10506713

  • Beare, M. (Ed.) (2012). Biopiracy. In Encyclopedia of transnational crime & justice (pp. 29–30). Sage Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, A. (2015). Legislating on biopiracy in Europe: Too little, too late? In M. Rimmer (Ed.), Indigenous intellectual property: A handbook of contemporary research (pp. 365–381). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Beer, M. (2006). Protecting echoes of the past: Intellectual property and expressions of culture. Canterbury Law Review, 12(1), 94–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Betzold, C., & Flesken, A. (2014). Indigenous peoples in international environmental negotiations: Evidence from biodiversity and climate change. International climate change law and policy (pp. 63–83). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhutani, S. (2019). PepsiCo controversy: Globally, India has always refused to give in on IPR on plant varieties. In The Wire. Retrieved February 03, 2023, from https://thewire.in/agriculture/pepsico-controversy-globally-india-has-always-refused-to-give-in-on-ipr-on-plant-varieties

  • Biber-Klemm, S., Cottier, T., Cullet, P., & Berglas, D.S. (2006). The current law of plant genetic resources and traditional knowledge. In Biber-Klemm, S., Cottier, T., & Berglas, D.S. (Eds.), Rights to plant genetic resources and traditional knowledge: basic issues and perspectives (pp. 56–111). CABI Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borsari, B., & Kunnas, J., et al. (2020). Agriculture production and consumption. In W. Leal Filho, A. M. Azul, & L. Brandli (Eds.), Responsible consumption and production (pp. 1–11). Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brascoupé, S., & Endemann, K. (1999). Intellectual property and aboriginal people: A working paper. Intellectual Property Policy Directorate, Industry Canada. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/tk/en/databases/creative_heritage/docs/ip_aboriginal_people.pdf

  • Brown, K. (1999). Paper promises. Alternative LJ, 24(5), 221–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunsdon, D. (2015). Recognizing indigenous legal values in modern copyright law. Western Journal of Legal Studies, 6(3), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brush, S. B. (2005). Protecting traditional agricultural knowledge biodiversity, biotechnology, and the legal protection of traditional knowledge. Washington University Journal Law and Policy, 17, 59–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bullens, L. (2022). Biopiracy: The fight for fairness in the scientific exploitation of natural resources. In France 24. Retrieved February 03, 2023, from https://www.france24.com/en/environment/20221209-biopiracy-the-fight-for-fairness-in-the-scientific-exploitation-of-natural-resources

  • Burgis-Kasthala, M. (2016). Scholarship as dialogue: TWAIL and the politics of methodology symposium—Third world approaches to international criminal law. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 14(4), 921–938.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Caenegem, W. (2015). Geographical indications and indigenous intellectual property. In M. Rimmer (Ed.), Indigenous intellectual property: A handbook of contemporary research (pp. 289–310). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chander, A., & Sunder, M. (2004). The romance of the public domain. California Law Review, 92(5), 1331–1374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chimni, B. S. (2006). Third world approaches to international law: A manifesto. International Communications Law Review, 8(1), 3–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chimni, B. S. (1992). Political economy of the Uruguay round of negotiations: A perspective. International Studies, 29(2), 135–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020881792029002001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dagne, T. (2012). The protection of traditional knowledge in the knowledge economy: Cross-cutting challenges in international intellectual property law. International Communications Law Review, 14(2), 137–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dhar, B. (2017). India’s position in the intergovernmental committee for the protection of traditional knowledge. In D. F. Robinson, A. Abdel-Latif, & P. Roffe (Eds.), Protecting traditional knowledge (pp. 253–264). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drahos, P. (2002). Developing countries and international intellectual property standard-setting. Journal of World Intellectual Property, 5(5), 765–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drahos, P. (1999). Biotechnology patents, markets, and morality. European Intellectual Property Review, 21(9), 441–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drahos, P., & Braithwaite, J. (2017). Information feudalism: Who owns the knowledge economy? Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dutfield, G. (2001). TRIPS-related aspects of traditional knowledge. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, 33(2), 233–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutfield, G. (2008). Turning plant varieties into intellectual property: The UPOV convention. In G. Tansey (Ed.), The future control of food: A guide to international negotiations and rules on intellectual property, biodiversity and food security (pp. 27–47). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erstling, J. (2009). Using patent to protect traditional knowledge. Tex Wesleyan Law Review, 15(2), 295–334.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandes, V. (2022). Litigation on PepsiCo’s wafer-quality potato: What farmers’ rights expert says. In The Federal. Retrieved November 24, 2022, from https://thefederal.com/news/litigation-on-pepsicos-wafer-quality-potato-what-farmers-rights-expert-says/

  • Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2004). International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredriksson, M. (2022). Balancing community rights and national interests in international protection of traditional knowledge: A study of India’s traditional knowledge digital library. Third World Quarterly, 43(2), 352–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2021.2019009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gertler, M. S., & Levitte, Y. M. (2005). Local nodes in global networks: The geography of knowledge flows in biotechnology innovation. Industry and Innovation, 12(4), 487–507. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662710500361981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gervais, D. (2021). The TRIPS agreement: Drafting history and analysis (5th ed.). Sweet & Maxwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, V. (2013). Appropriation without representation—The limited role of indigenous groups in WIPO’s intergovernmental committee on intellectual property and genetic resources, traditional knowledge, and Folklore note. Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law, 16(3), 629–668.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K. (2004). WIPO-UNEP study on the role of intellectual property rights in the sharing of benefits arising from the use of biological resources and associated traditional knowledge. World Intellectual Property Organization and United Nations Environment Programme

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, H. L. A., & (Herbert LA). (2012). The concept of law (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Haugen, H.M. (2007). The right to food and the TRIPS agreement: With a particular emphasis on developing countries’ measures for food production and distribution. Brill Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hine, R. (2019). Bioprospecting. A dictionrionary of biology. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ILO. (1991). C169—Indigenous and tribal peoples convention. 27 July 1989, 1650, UNTS, Entered into force 5 September 1991. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:12100:0::NO::P12100_ILO_CODE:C169

  • ILO. (2023). Ratifications of C169—Indigenous and tribal peoples convention, 1989 (No. 169). In International Labour Organization. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p=NORMLEXPUB:11300:0::NO:11300:P11300_INSTRUMENT_ID:312314:NO

  • Isaac, G. E., & Kerr, W. A. (2004). Bioprospecting or biopiracy: Intellectual property and traditional knowledge in biotechnology innovation. Journal of World Intellectual Property, 7(1), 35–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, B. L., & Finney, B. (2019). Defining sustainable business—Beyond greenwashing. Vanderbilt Environmental Law Journal, 37(2), 89–131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jishnu, L. (2021). Plant protection authority sets right its potato blunder. In: DownToEarth. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/agriculture/plant-protection-authority-sets-right-its-potato-blunder-80694

  • Laszlo, C., et al. (2010). Sustainable value creation. In C. Laszlo, K. Christensen, & D. Fogel (Eds.), Berkshire encyclopedia of sustainability (pp. 437–442). Berkshire Publishing Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson, C. (2017). Relationships between the work of the WIPO IGC and other forums. In Robinson, D.F., Abdel-Latif, A., & Roffe, P. (Eds.), Protecting traditional knowledge. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, P. (2019). Reconceptualizing the role of intellectual property rights in shaping industry structure. Vanderbilt Law Review, 72(4), 1197–1284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehman, B. (2003), The pharmaceutical industry and the patent system (pp. 1–14). International Intellectual Property Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lightbourne, M. (2003). Of rice and men: An attempt to assess the Basmati affair. Journal World of Intellectual Property, 6(6), 875–894.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindstrom, L. (2009). Kava pirates in Vanuatu? International Journal of Cultural Property, 16(3), 291–308. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0940739109990208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lopes, F. (2022). Why there is a fight over the potatoes used to make lay’s chips. Retrieved November 24, 2022, from https://www.indiaspend.com/agriculture/the-lays-chips-potato-variety-case-indian-farmers-rights-and-intellectual-property-laws-834952.

  • Markham, R. (2022). Promoting kava exports, ignoring sustainability. In Devpolicy blog from the development policy centre. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from https://devpolicy.org/promoting-kava-exports-ignoring-sustainability-20220124/

  • Marvel, M. (2012). Encyclopedia of new venture management. SAGE Publications Inc.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Menell, P. S. (2007). Intellectual property and the property rights movement research & development. Regulation, 30(3), 36–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mgbeoji, I. (2006). Global biopiracy: Patents, plants, and indigenous knowledge. UBC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morin, J.-F., & Gold, E. R. (2014). An integrated model of legal transplantation: The diffusion of intellectual property law in developing countries. International Studies Quarterly, 58(4), 781–792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunez, R. G. A. (2008). Intellectual property and the protection of traditional knowledge, genetic resources and folklore: The peruvian experience LL. M. Thesis. Max Planck Yearbook United Nations Law, 12, 487–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, R. J. (2016). Patent, then publish. In Genentech: Breakthrough science. One moment, one day, one person at a time. Retrieved January 17, 2023, from https://www.gene.com/stories/patent-then-publish

  • Oguamanam, C. (2017). Ramifications of the WIPO IGC for IP and development. In D. F. Robinson, A. Abdel-Latif, & P. Roffe (Eds.), Protecting traditional knowledge (pp. 339–346). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oguamanam, C. (2015). Pressuring ‘suspect orthodoxy’: Traditional knowledge and the patent system. In M. Rimmer (Ed.), Indigenous intellectual property: A handbook of contemporary research (pp. 313–333). Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oguamanam, C. (2006). Regime tension in the intellectual property rights Arena: Farmers’ rights and post-TRIPS counter regime trends. Dalhousie Law Journal, 29(2), 413–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okafor, O.C. (2008). Critical third world approaches to International Law (TWAIL): Theory, methodology, or both? Special Issue: Selected Papers from the Workshop Situating Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL): Inspirations, Challenges and Possibilities. International Communications Law Revier, 10(4), 371–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oluwatobiloba, M. (2020). Climate action and sustainability: Indigenous peoples are part of the solution. WIPO Magazine, 1, 44–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pain, E. (2016). French institute agrees to share patent benefits after biopiracy accusations. In Science. Retrieved February 03, 2023, from https://www.science.org/content/article/french-institute-agrees-share-patent-benefits-after-biopiracy-accusations

  • Pollock, N. J. (2009). Sustainability of the Kava trade. The Contemporary Pacific, 21(2), 265–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popova-Gosart, U. (2009). Protection of traditional knowledge and indigenous peoples. In Popova-Gosart, U. (Ed.) Traditional knoweldge and indigenous peoples. L’auravetl’an information & education network of indigenous peoples and world intellectual property organization (pp. 40–45).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rai, S. (2011, August 25). India-U.S. fight on basmati rice is mostly settled. The New York Times. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from https://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/25/business/india-us-fight-on-basmati-rice-is-mostly-settled.html

  • Rama Rao, S. (2009). The relationship between intellectual property and the protection of traditional knowledge and cultural expressions. In U. Popova-Gosart (Ed.), Traditional knoweldge and indigenous peoples. L’auravetl’an information & education network of indigenous peoples and world intellectual property organization (pp. 17–25).

    Google Scholar 

  • Redux, R. (1987). Shall in legislative drafting notes and comments. South African Law Journal, 104(1), 186–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D. F., Abdel-Latif, A., & Roffe, P. (Eds.). (2017). Protecting traditional knowledge: The WIPO intergovernmental committee on intellectual property and genetic resources, traditional knowledge, and folklore. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roffe, P. (2017). Preferential trade agreements and the protection of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. In D.F. Robinson, A. Abdel-Latif, P. Roffe (Eds.), Protecting traditional knowledge. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosanowski, S. (2015). Protection of traditional cultural expressions within the New Zealand intellectual property framework: A case study of the Ka Mate haka. In M. Rimmer (Ed.), Indigenous intellectual property: A handbook of contemporary research (pp. 264–288). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rourke, M. (2018). Who are ‘Indigenous and Local Communities’ and what is ‘Traditional Knowledge’ for virus access and benefit-sharing? A textual analysis of the convention on biological diversity and its Nagoya protocol

    Google Scholar 

  • Saiia, D. H. (2018). Sustainability. In The SAGE encyclopedia of business ethics and society. SAGE Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schindel, D. E. (2010). Biology without borders. Nature, 467(7317), 779–781. https://doi.org/10.1038/467779a

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sell, S. K. (2003). Private power, public law: The globalization of intellectual property rights. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shim, Y.-G. (2003). Intellectual property protection of biotechnology and sustainable development in international law. North Carolina Journal of International Law & Commmercial Regulation, 29(2), 157–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siswandi, A. G. (2015). The Nagoya protocol: Unfinished business remains unfinished. In M. Rimmer (Ed.), Indigenous intellectual property (pp. 334–364). Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Söderberg, J. (2002). Copyleft vs. Copyright: A marxist critique. First Monday, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v7i3.938

  • Soleri, D., Cleveland, D., & Eriacho, D. (1994). Gifts from the creator: Intellectual property rights and folk crop varieties. In T. Greaves (Ed.), Intellectual property rights for indigenous peoples: A sourcebook (pp. 19–39). Society for Applied Anthropology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, M. (2017). An indigenous perspective on the WIPO IGC. In D. F. Robinson, A. Abdel-Latif, & P. Roffe (Eds.), Protecting traditional knowledge (pp. 219–229). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. (1995). 15 April 1994, 1869 UNTS 299 (entered into force 1 January 1995)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tödtling, F., Lehner, P., & Trippl, M. (2006). Innovation in knowledge intensive industries: The nature and geography of knowledge links. European Planning Studies, 14(8), 1035–1058. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310600852365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (2023). Sustainability. In United Nations. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from https://www.un.org/en/academic-impact/sustainability

  • United Nations. (1993). Convention on Biological Diversity. 5 June 1992, 1760, UNTS 79 Entered into force 29 December 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. (2014). Nagoya protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity. 29 October 2010, UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/1, Entered into force 12 October 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples. (2007). GA Res 61/295, UNGAOR, 61st Sess, Supp No 49, UN Doc A/61/295.

    Google Scholar 

  • UPOV. (1961). International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants. 2 December 1961, Entered into force 10 August 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vermeylen, S. (2010). Law as a narrative: Legal pluralism and resisting Euro-American (Intellectual) property law through stories part 1: Papers from the Zurich conference. Journal Legal Pluralism & Unofficial Law, 61, 55–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidal, J. (2019, September 12) Conrad Gorinsky obituary. The Guardian. Retrieved January 02, 2023, from https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/sep/12/conrad-gorinsky-obituary

  • Wang, A. W. (2010). Rise of the patent intermediaries. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 25(1), 159–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendland, W. (2017). The evolution of the IGC from 2001 to 2016: An insider’s perspective. In D.F. Robinson, A. Abdel-Latif, & P. Roffe (Eds.), Protecting traditional knowledge. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, W. A. (2004). Introduction: Indigenous knowledge recovery is indigenous empowerment. American Indian Quarterly, 28(3/4), 359–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WIPO General Assembly WIPO. (2003). Report of Thirtieth (16th Ordinary) Session. World Intellectual Property Organization, Geneva. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/govbody/en/wo_ga_30/wo_ga_30_8.pdf

  • WIPO. (2004). WIPO development agenda: Background (2004–2007). WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization. Retrieved February 03, 2023 https://www.wipo.int/ip-development/en/agenda/background.html

  • WIPO General Assembly WIPO. (2009). Report of Thirty-Eighth (19th Ordinary) Session. World Intellectual Property Organization, Geneva. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/govbody/en/wo_ga_38/wo_ga_38_20.pdf

  • WIPO IGC. (2022a). Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore. WIPO/GRTKF/IC/45/4. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/en/wipo_grtkf_ic_45/wipo_grtkf_ic_45_4.pdf

  • WIPO IGC. (2022b). Intergovernmental committee on intellectual property and genetic resources, traditional knowledge, and folklore. WIPO/GRTKF/IC/43/4. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/en/wipo_grtkf_ic_43/wipo_grtkf_ic_43_4.pdf

  • WIPO. (2023a). Traditional knowledge. WIPO world intellectual property organization. Retrieved January 29, 2023, from https://www.wipo.int/tk/en/tk/index.html

  • WIPO. (2023b). Sustainable development goals and intellectual property. WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization. Retrieved February 02, 2023, from http://www.wipo.int/sdgs/en/index.html

  • WIPO. (2023c). Diplomatic conference to conclude an international legal instrument relating to intellectual property, genetic resources and traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources. WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization. Retrieved January 08, 2023, from https://www.wipo.int/diplomatic-conferences/en/genetic-resources/index.html

  • WIPO. (2023d). Intergovernmental Committee (IGC). WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization. Retrieved February 03, 2023, from https://www.wipo.int/tk/en/igc/index.html

  • WIPO Background Brief No. 2 The WIPO Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge, and Folklore.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods, M. (2002). Food for thought: The biopiracy of jasmine and basmati rice. Albany Law Journal of Science and Technology, 13(1), 123–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Trade Organization. (2023). Understanding the WTO—Intellectual property: protection and enforcement. WTO World Trade Organization. Retrieved December 10, 2022, from https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/agrm7_e.htm

  • WTO World Trade Organization. (2016). WTO members and observers. World Trade Organization. Retrieved February 03, 2023, from https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/org6_e.htm

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Open AIR and ABS-Canada, Centre for Law, Technology and Society, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada

    Anmol Patel

Authors
  1. Anmol Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anmol Patel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Arbitrator and Associate Professor, Manipal Law School, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Bengaluru, India

    Apoorvi Shrivastava

  2. Chairperson and Director, MBI Global, Oxford, UK

    Amlan Bhusan

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Patel, A. (2023). Traditional Knowledge, Sustainability, and International Intellectual Property Law: Biopiracy in Patent-Intensive Industries. In: Shrivastava, A., Bhusan, A. (eds) Sustainable Boardrooms. Responsible Leadership and Sustainable Management. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4837-6_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation