Bioprospecting of Biotechnological Resources in Island countries: Lessons from the Costa Rican Experience

by Ana Sittenfeld, Jorge Cabrera and Marielos Mora

Do More

See also

Discuss this publicationShare your views with other visitors, and read what they have to say

Introduction

Bioprospecting, defined as the systematic search for valuable, molecules, genes and organisms in nature, has the potential to offer island countries a means to use biodiversity without disrupting nature; to add value to their natural resources; to ensure that such resources are protected and used in a sustainable manner; and to build the necessary skills to apply biotechnology in improving quality of life (Sittenfeld and Villers 1993; Sittenfeld and Lovejoy, 1999). Today, important developments in biotechnology are rapidly generating new financial opportunities derived from the use of biological resources. However, such biotech opportunities that impact on managing the economy and the environment will in this century depend on how issues between biotechnology and biodiversity are treated and implemented within the principles of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

Because of its nature, bioprospecting is at the intersection of biodiversity conservation and the use of biotechnology and thus has consequences in the areas of legal and regulatory frameworks; technology transfer and business development; intellectual property rights and facilitation of local, national and international collaborations (Sittenfeld, 1996; Tamayo et al., 1997; Sittenfeld and Lovejoy, 1998). Though the bioprospecting principle may be simple, the interaction between biotechnology use and biodiversity conservation and its sustainable does require a careful designed strategy to complement other aspects of biodiversity protection and socio-economic development.

The screening of samples from the wild has always been a prominent activity in ancient and modern pharmaceutical industries. Almost half of the best-selling pharmaceuticals are directly extracted from nature or have active components in natural products that serve as the lead compounds, the majority of them having been obtained from microbial sources (Demain, 1998). Currently, the incorporation of automated selection and assay screens, in concert with the development of robust molecular biology techniques and information systems for application in the pharmaceutical and agricultural sectors, has allowed the bioprospecting process to rapidly analyse a large number of samples obtained from nature. Nevertheless, even with the new technologies; the frequency of discovery of target molecules per sample is low. Also, a new pharmaceutical or a new genetically modified (GM) plant variety may require 10- 15 years to bring to market and cost more than $300 million in research and development (Ten Kate, 1995; Shear, 1999; Thayer, 1998). These barriers severely limit possibilities for many developing countries, and particularly small island countries to fully bioprospect biodiversity and subsequent product development on their own, thus rendering imperative cooperative agreements with industries and research centers in the developed nations (Sittenfeld, 1996).

Any consideration of biodiversity and biotechnology use is framed by its dependence on larger natural systems in interaction with human systems. The consequences of biotechnology, as any other technology, entail both opportunity and risk (Dale et al., 2002). The current debate between environmental activists and biotechnology industries is also preventing tropical countries, from implementing fundamental and balanced decisions for bioprospecting biodiversity.

Add a comment

Enter your details and a comment below, then click Submit Comment. We’ll review and publish the best comments.