HFor thousands of years, man has explored nature to extract resources that guarantee his survival. In ancient times, he used animal skins to protect himself from the cold. In the mid-1970s, this relationship began to take on very different shapes, mainly due to the advancement of biotechnology. The possibility of discovering raw materials for the development of commercial products and processes has attracted the attention of numerous countries and private corporations. This interest generated, in turn, bioprospecting contracts signed by nations in the North, possessors of knowledge and money, and in the South, holders of important natural resources. But how long are these partnerships? Have they provided advantages to developing countries and contributed to the preservation of the environment? The answers to these and other questions should emerge from a study being conducted by a team of researchers from the Geosciences Institute (IG) at Unicamp. The work, expected to be completed in September 2007, aims to identify the nature and impact of these agreements on the production and use of knowledge.

The coordination of the research, entitled Nature and Impact of North-South Partnerships in the Production and Use of Knowledge in Bioprospecting (Parbio), is in charge of professors Lea Maria Leme Strini Velho and Maria Conceição da Costa, both from the Department of Scientific and Technological Policy (DPCT) of the IG. According to them, who have been studying aspects related to international scientific cooperation for several years, partnerships between North and South countries are normally marked by asymmetries. Often, they explain, the former rely on institutions that have high financial resources and more consolidated teams than the latter. “In other words, the conditions for entering the partnership are almost always unequal”, says Professor Lea.

Regarding agreements in the area of ​​bioprospecting, according to the IG professor, a new element has emerged in recent years. Northern nations began to be represented by private corporations and not by research institutions. In other words, companies interested in exploring the biodiversity of Southern countries entered the scene to obtain resources that allow them to develop profitable products or processes. Although this activity is regulated by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), established in 1992 with the aim of establishing rules for the preservation of biodiversity and the fair sharing of benefits arising from the transformation of its genetic resources, it involves many other aspects.

The legal and regulatory frameworks established by developing countries are also part of the cooperation agreements. Such standards have, in theory, the function not only of ratifying the guarantees provided for in the CBD, but also of creating mechanisms that ensure extra advantages for Southern nations, such as the transfer of technology resulting from bioprospecting. Thus, the partnership would constitute a game in which everyone would win. But are these conditions confirmed in practice? To be able to answer this question, IG researchers are analyzing the position of four countries in the Southern Cone, all of which have areas located in the Amazon region: Brazil, Colombia, Peru and Suriname. The idea, as Professor Maria Conceição says, is to check how these nations are institutionally dealing with the issue of bioprospecting.

Initially, Unicamp experts are analyzing the legal and regulatory frameworks. They want to identify how each country works with issues that are fundamental to the success of cooperation, such as preserving the environment, sharing the benefits generated by the activity, accounting for traditional knowledge, among others. Researchers are also mapping existing initiatives. They will then select two of them to carry out case studies. The final objective is to detail how partnerships work. In other words, they want to see whether nations that supply natural resources actually obtain advantages from contracts.

According to Professor Lea, the aim of the work, which is being financed by a Canadian public body, the International Development Research Center (IDRC), is to promote a broad and comparative study. “At the end, we will make a great summary of the results achieved, showing the convergences and divergences depending on the positioning of each country”, she adds. As at the end of the project, Parbio will have generated a vast database containing quantitative and qualitative information about bioprospecting, it is likely that it can serve as a tool to guide countries interested in future cooperation actions in this area. “That, at least, is our desire”, says Professor Lea.

Brazil - Although Parbio is in full development, the project coordinators have already been able to verify several points in relation to Brazil's position on bioprospecting. The first and most important of these refers to the rigidity of the legislation that deals with the subject. “It is so complex and draconian that it is driving potential partners away. There are cases of companies that were interested in establishing cooperation with the country, but gave up and looked for African nations, where laws are more flexible. This situation was passed on to us by several researchers interviewed throughout the study”, reveals professor Maria Conceição da Costa. More than protecting local biodiversity, Brazilian regulations practically prevent access to it. “Not to mention the bureaucratic aspects, which take a long time to process proposals”, adds Professor Lea.

However, this type of stance does not prevent Brazil's natural resources from continuing to be explored scientifically and commercially by developed countries. If they do not leave the national territory through legal means, this ends up happening through actions linked to biopiracy. “This issue needs to be better analyzed by the country. We have to choose between keeping things the way they are or finding a more flexible model, which allows us to simultaneously preserve biodiversity and obtain scientific and economic advantages from its rational and sustained exploitation. Parbio does not intend to define the path to be followed, but rather to provide consistent elements that contribute to this choice being made responsibly”, says Lea Maria Velho. Other information about Parbio can be obtained on the project page, at the following address: www.ige.unicamp.br/parbio.

PARBIO OBJECTIVES

Describe and understand the breadth of North-South partnerships in biotechnology applied to bioprospecting activities Build a picture of the different ways in which benefits for participants can derive from partnerships and how such partnerships can improve scientific and technological capabilities in countries of the South Investigate the relationships between partnership and the development of local innovation systems Identify political and socio-economic conditions in which North-South partnerships offer greater chances of contributing to sustainable development