From rhwinth@mind.net Sun Feb 6 12:17:14 2000 Received: from mxu1.u.washington.edu (mxu1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.8]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW99.09/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id MAA46546 for ; Sun, 6 Feb 2000 12:17:13 -0800 Received: from ego.mind.net (ego.mind.net [206.99.66.9]) by mxu1.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW99.09/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id MAA01458 for ; Sun, 6 Feb 2000 12:17:12 -0800 Received: from rhwinth (ip234.mind.net [206.151.159.166]) by ego.mind.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id MAA04880 for ; Sun, 6 Feb 2000 12:17:07 -0800 From: "Robert Winthrop" To: Subject: RE: Biodiversity PR Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2000 12:21:26 -0800 Message-ID: <000101bf70df$be5dcee0$a69f97ce@rhwinth.mind.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 In-Reply-To: <569767474.949757539@no206.joh.cam.ac.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 Niall O'Shea identifies an important issue in asking about the the role of "green-talk" public relations in making the role of multinational corporations in "developing" societies appear innocuous if not downright friendly. He specifically mentions the actions of pharmaceutical companies in bioprospecting for ethnobotanical knowledge to jump-start drug research and development as a telling case. He says: "Shaman Pharmacueticals, a particularly adept maneuverer, set up The Healing Forest Conservancy 'NGO' as a way to negotiate it's way through 'civil society', compensation to indigenous peoples for bioprospecting." But whatever the validity of the more general critique, he has chosen an unfortunate example for his thesis. He suggests that Healing Forest Conservancy (HFC) is simply there to provide a figleaf of legitimacy for drug research that--absent the protective coloration--would be considered unethical. I disagree. I've had a chance to discuss HFC's program with environmental activists from both Latin America and South Asia. I heard only praise for the ethics of HFC's director, Katy Moran (a fellow anthropologist), though I also heard considerable scepticism on the more general issue of pharmaceutical industry "bioprospecting." Personally I find the short- and long-term program for benefit sharing that HFC monitors imaginative and ethical. Others may disagree. But I think it's important to examine each case on its merits. The broader point is that globalization ensures that no society or community can long remain isolated, either culturally or economically. The critical issue, given the enormous disparities of power between north and south and--within developing societies--between center and periphery, is to find equitable relationships that maximize local control. HFC's programs pursue certain strategies in this direction; there are alternative approaches out there as well. For information on HFC's approach to these issues, a useful article is: Katy Moran, "Returning Benefits from Ethnobotanical Drug Discovery to Native Communities," in BIODIVERSITY AND HUMAN HEALTH. Edited by Francesca Grifo and Joshua Rosenthal. Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1997. Regards, Rob Winthrop ===================================== C U L T U R A L S O L U T I O N S PO Box 401 • Ashland, OR 97520, USA 541-482-8004 • fax 541-552-0825 web site: www.CultureSolve.com ===================================== > .