@article{9d9995a12ee84598b7de103529432f80,
title = "Genetic prospecting and biodiversity development agreements",
abstract = "Biodiversity loss continues, in part, because local benefits from wildland preservation are limited. Biodiversity development agreements (BDAs) intend, through bioprospecting efforts, to distribute benefits of biodiversity to those who bear preservation costs. Analysis of two case studies suggests that monetary returns from bioprospecting could be substantial, though realization of returns is uncertain and likely to take time. Considerable non-monetary benefits from BDAs have included training and increased infrastructure and institutional capacity. BDAs probably will not finance desired land preservation, nor is it certain they can influence land use. Nonetheless, carefully structured BDAs can be useful components of biodiversity conservation programs. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd.",
keywords = "Biodiversity, Conservation policy, Genetic resource conservation, Land use",
author = "Kelly Day-Rubenstein and Frisvold, {George B.}",
note = "Funding Information: The initial training of parataxonomists was also supported by the US Agency for International Development, the Swedish International Development Authority, and the Pew Charitable Trusts. Funding Information: Not all of Costa Rica's BDAs involve prospecting for chemicals. As noted, data efforts have been an integral part of INBio mission. Intergraph Corporation, a US information company, and INBio have been collaborating on a Biodiversity Information Management System. Intergraph has supplied hardware and software to INBio, in exchange for the opportunity to sell computer resources to biodiversity users ( Meyer, 1996 ). INBio's database, containing biogeographic and taxonomic about both species and ecosystems ( Sittenfeld and Artuso, 1995 ), has been praised because it offers Costa Rica the opportunity to benefit from its biodiversity outside the chemical prospecting arena ( Nature Biotechnology, 1998 ). This data effort has garnered additional support from the World Bank in 1997, when the World Bank's Global Environmental Facility signed an agreement with INBio to further develop biodiversity data resources in Costa Rica ( World Bank, 1997 ). The seven-year project, which began in 1998, involves nearly $8 million in resources. Funded activities also include training, equipment, and institutional strengthening. Additional inventories have been financed by the Missouri Botanical Garden and the Dutch Government. The Dutch effort (which is expected to provide $12 million to INBio) also includes provisions for infrastructure building, training, and joint ventures with the private sector ( World Bank, 1997 ). Funding Information: Besides the Merck BDA, INBio was part of an International Cooperative Biodiversity Group (ICBG). This program was begun by the US National Institute of Health (NIH), the US National Science Foundation, and the US Agency for International Development. Costa Rica (through INBio and the Guanacaste Conservation Area) cooperated with Cornell University and Bristol-Myers to collect and screen insects as a source of drugs ( Rouhi, 1997 ). The project used a targeted screening approach to focus on insects that use chemicals in plant/predator interactions ( Rosenthal, 1996 ). The project's leader pointed out that drug discovery, economic development, and conservation were the stated goals of Costa Rica's ICBG. However, the ICBG also sought ecological information that is useful for conservation, but that does not necessarily lead to drug discoveries ( Rouhi, 1997 ). One goal of the ICBG program has been to balance prospects for long-term and short-term economic returns. NIH's representative, Josh Rosenthal noted that source countries should “… maximize the research process itself to provide alternatives to unsustainable use of genetic resources” ( Rouhi, 1997 , p 29). Costa Rica's ICBG was described as “front-loaded with infrastructure building” ( Rouhi, 1997 , p 29). Because this BDA was initiated by the public sector, it was believed to yield better immediate returns to the source country, as well as the ongoing possibility of future royalty payments. ",
year = "2001",
doi = "10.1016/S0264-8377(01)00016-3",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "18",
pages = "205--219",
journal = "Land Use Policy",
issn = "0264-8377",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "3",
}