A Social Network Perspective on the 30 Cases Of Biopiracy: Background Information and Sources

Description

This document is published to supplement the journal article titled "Disclosure of Origin within European Biotechnology Patent Law: A Social Network Perspective" and submitted to the GRUR International: Journal of European and International Intellectual Property Law. The content of this document provides comprehensive data gathered by the author, describing the background and sources of the 30 cases of biopiracy analyzed in that article and introducing a social network perspective by presenting edge list data. The use of any content in this document must be accompanied by a proper citation to that journal article.

Steps to reproduce

To arrive at this data, the author has conducted a comprehensive and in-depth review of the existing literature based on a systematic online search. The literature includes a wide spectrum of published legal and scientific research, project reports, legal documents related to access and benefit-sharing agreements, newspapers, and patent records, all of which have been cited in the attached document. The cases have been carefully scrutinized, drawing from a multitude of sources to minimize the risk of misinformation and altered narratives regarding the flow of genetic resources and the associated traditional knowledge, as well as the position of specific nodes within the network. The selection of cases does not adhere to specific time constraints; rather, the boundaries of the dissemination of resources are ultimately defined by the availability of information within published materials. The criteria for selecting the 30 cases of biopiracy include the availability of published information regarding the flow of genetic resources and the associated traditional knowledge, the ability to attribute the genetic resource and the associated traditional knowledge to at least one indigenous or local community representing the origin of the relevant resource, and the presence of actions corresponding to biopiracy by at least one of the nodes. Additionally, the inclusion of cases from diverse continents and regions has been considered during the case selection. The resulting set of 26 cases primarily involves instances of misappropriation and patenting of genetic resources, with a smaller number involving traditional knowledge. Cases with dubious ties between most nodes, as well as putative cases of biopiracy lacking supporting evidence beyond hearsay, have been meticulously excluded from the selection. Finally, to the extent permitted by available data, links representing the biotrade of genetic resources have also been integrated into the social-network-analysis-based narratives of some cases, providing a broader view of their dissemination through various routes.

Categories

Funding

Licence