Academic interest in the debate on biodiversity regulation, intellectual property, and indigenous knowledge has mushroomed in recent years. And what a contentious debate it is! Drug companies find themselves condemned as “biopirates” for stealing plants and plant-based indigenous knowledge from developing countries and then claiming them as intellectual property to be sold back to the source countries and communities at premium prices. These businesses counter that “biopiracy” is an exaggerated concern and that they are not responsible for the poverty of countries that have biodiversity and indigenous knowledge in abundance but are unable to exploit them commercially.
Hitherto an area of interest only to a handful of legal scholars, this is now a mainstream and respectable field of research. In many ways this is all to the good. So much of what has been written so far is emotional, rhetorical, and ill-informed. The calmer, more nuanced tone of most academic law writing, which usefully explains that this issue is not as black and white as it is usually painted, is thus to be welcomed. On the other hand, the relevant law journal articles have tended almost exclusively to cite other legal works, and this is unfortunate. Again and again, relevant and highly insightful social science literature is overlooked. Undoubtedly, sole reliance on legalistic approaches can provide reliable insights and sophisticated prescriptions; reductionism has its uses, here as elsewhere. But inevitably there will be unreliable and naïve ones too.
Ikechi Mgbeoji's fine book applies some much-needed erudition to the debate. The book displays a prodigious amount of reading, much of it nonlegal. However, it would have benefited from Mgbeoji delving deeper into the anthropological literature than he did. The book provides a wealth of fascinating historical facts, illuminating philosophical insights, and provocative assertions. Mgbeoji also clears up a number of popular misconceptions, including the mistaken assumption that until the 1992 Convention on Biological Diversity, the common heritage of mankind principle applied to plants growing or stored within national territories. Overall there is much to learn from the book and a great deal to agree with, whatever one may think of the biases inherent to his overall approach. He tries to be fair, and generally succeeds. But he does not pretend to be impartial; Mgbeoji is clearly on the side of the angels, who are the indigenous peoples and the developing countries. Admittedly, he is sometimes critical of these countries' governments, as he should be. However, he is quite robustly anti-Western.
Ambitiously, Mgbeoji digs deep to find the roots of the problem of biopiracy. What he unearths for us is the imposition of an all-dominating, inherently racist, male-oriented, and environmentally destructive Western worldview that has shaped not only international law, including patent law, but also the way that science is done and how business is normally conducted. The results for indigenous peoples and the environment are nothing short of disastrous. We also suffer, since without indigenous knowledge and biodiversity, the supply of new drugs and crop varieties will be drastically reduced.
Who or what is to blame? It is fashionable in some academic circles to accuse the Enlightenment. But Mgbeoji goes much further back in time to point the finger squarely at Judeo-Christian values. Mgbeoji makes a reasonably good case. Doubtless, a lot of his criticisms are perfectly valid. But they are case unproven, and also case overstated. The Book of Genesis does not give us carte blanche to be environmentally destructive. Evidence suggests that wiping out species and turning fertile landscapes into deserts has gone on for millennia and among peoples who had to that time never seen a Bible. These include the Maoris and Aboriginals, whose holistic worldviews are praised by Mgbeoji. One might add that mainly non-Christian China and India have their share of dark satanic mills spewing out noxious substances. The notorious Three Gorges Project in China was hardly inspired by Christianity or Judaism. In fact, Mgbeoji romanticizes non-Western cultures (pp. 52–4) while throughout the book condemning the West, giving it little credit for anything good. Even Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth are inspired by Zen Buddhism (p. 60). The West is the source of human rights as we understand them today, something not acknowledged in this book. As for the phrase Christian racism (p. 57), I would merely comment that Christian theology justifying racism is bad theology and not at all Christian.
Overall, criticisms and a few factual errors aside, this is a solid, thorough, and worthwhile contribution to a highly polarized debate. Those on both sides of the barricades would benefit from reading it, as would scholars from a number of disciplines who are interested in what has become a very high-profile debate.
