BIODIVERSITY is dwindling at an unsettling rate throughout the world and it has been estimated that 50 species become extinct daily and it has been projected that by 2020, 15 per cent of biodiversity will be lost. More than half of plant and animal species live exclusively in the rain-forests of the Third World.

Pakistan is also blessed with all types of climates which give rise to a myriad of natural flora and fauna, some of which are in the danger of extinction. Deforestation through activities such as mining, timber harvesting, farming cash-crops and cattle ranching – short-term remedies,– is, therefore, a major concern.

The commercial potential of biodiversity has driven pharmaceutical and biotechnological companies to seek out and extract useful biological resources before it is too late. The top 150 prescription drugs sold in the USA, 57 per cent are derived from natural resources. Most antibacterial agents (78 per cent) and anticancer compounds (61 per cent) available worldwide are derived from natural sources.

Likewise, marine-derived therapeutics have a great potential. Marine ecosystems represent 95 per cent of the biosphere, and coastal regions are particularly promising because of the highly adapted species found in these harsh environments. Animals, especially venomous species, have provided a highly rewarding source of new drugs.

Biodiversity prospecting is the exploration, extraction and screening of biological diversity and indigenous knowledge for commercially valuable genetic and biochemical resources. While it is true that such prospecting does not always involve the use of indigenous knowledge, it is clear that valuable chemical compounds derived from plants, animals and micro-organisms are more easily identified and prove to be of a great commercial value when collected with indigenous knowledge and/or found in territories traditionally inhabited by indigenous peoples.

Biodiversity prospecting is not new, of course. “Take-and-run” describes the old approach to collecting, lately dubbed “bio-piracy.” The recorded history of international plant collecting missions goes back at least 3500 years when Egyptian rulers began bringing plants home after military expeditions. In the last century, the British Empire instituted regular plant collections.

During the Voyage of the Beagle, Charles Darwin simply took what interested him, from the Galapagos and elsewhere, and brought it home.  The Royal Botanical Gardens took rubber trees from Brazil, and planted them in Southeast Asia. They took cinchona seeds from Bolivia, in violation of national law, and planted them in India.  Similarly, commodore Perry’s naval mission to Japan collected a wide variety of plants to bring back to the United States.  But no money changed hands in the process, nor was recognition given to the indigenous farmers who selected, maintained and improved traditional crop varieties.

The traditional knowledge of indigenous people is highly valuable: it is important for both biological and cultural conservation, and it is arguably the most effective means of discovering new medicines from nature. Indigenous cultures view nature as an extension of their society. They do not attempt to classify and compartmentalize; for example, there is usually no distinction made between food and medicine.

They have a holistic view of nature and society where the well-being of both go hand in hand. Their knowledge and culture are thus inextricably linked to the land on which they live, and life is a common property not subject to ownership. Their struggle for self-determination and rights to land and resources cannot be separated from their campaign against intellectual property rights.

A growing number of pharmaceutical corporations, biotechnology companies (and their intermediaries) are stalking the forests, fields and waters of the developing world in search of biological riches and indigenous knowledge. Western-based institutions seek access to tropical/sub-tropical biodiversity for the primary purpose of developing patented and profitable products.

Under the vast majority of current bio-prospecting agreements, when indigenous peoples share information or genetic materials, they effectively lose control over such resources, regardless of whether or not they are compensated. For example, a plant cultivated in Indian subcontinent, neem (Azadirachta indica), has been pirated by a developed country which has got patented different compounds isolated from this plant. Owing to this piracy by a developed country, the indigenous people have no right to claim about this plant.

It is generally acknowledged that about one in 10,000 chemicals derived from mass screening of plants, animals and microbes eventually results in a potentially profitable drug. By contrast, a detailed interview with indigenous healers by ethno-botanists identifies the most valuable plants. For example, Shaman Pharmaceuticals claim that 50 per cent of the plants collected as a result of talking to indigenous healers provide hits in screening programmes.

With each interview, more medicinal applications for a particular plant become apparent, so performing only a few interviews is inappropriate. Often the same plant is used by different cultures for the same disease – Shaman targets these plants in particular. Unfortunately, the indigenous cultures are under threat from the patterns of social interaction and less knowledge is being handed down.

Where three different communities are found to use the same plant kind for medicinal purposes, Shaman targets the plant for further study. About half the plants collected by its researchers come up positive in screening tests, making the “filter” of indigenous knowledge 5,000 times more effective than random collection.

It is often difficult for indigenous peoples’ organizations to know precisely with whom they are negotiating, or to whom they are ultimately providing information and genetic materials. It is becoming increasingly clear that most Western-based corporations do not bid directly for access to biodiversity, but instead work through intermediaries.

Intermediaries may be private companies who are in the business of collecting and selling biological specimens, public sector institutions, non-governmental and non-profit organizations such as scientific research institutes, botanical gardens, conservation/ environmental groups, or ethno-botanists employed by corporations under contract.

For example, the Carnivore Preservation Trust: is a small, non-profit organization that “rescues” endangered wild animals from the tropics and puts them in captive breeding programmes. This wildlife conservation organization makes extra money on the side by collecting plant specimens for Glaxo Pharmaceutical in Laotian forests.

According to the Bangkok Post, the Trust has made a deal with Glaxo to collect 100 plant samples for about (US) $65 each—but the project could expand to 1,000-1,500 samples per year.

In Pakistan, a similar situation is also going on, particularly, in northern areas. As these areas are blessed with a rich source of plants, so these are fascinating the pharmaceutical industries of developed countries. A large number of NGOs are working in these areas for so called conservation of medicinal plants and nobody knows what they are doing.

The writers of this article have witnessed that a plant found around Kaghan valley, is sold at Rs6000 kg-1 by the local people to be exported to a developed country. The situation, certainly, demands urgent intervention by the government/private entrepreneurs for finding out the importance and the potential of the plant.

The convention on biological diversity entered into force in December, 1993. It offered a multilateral facade for addressing conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, but no multilateral mechanisms for making it happen. In reality, the Convention promotes bilateral deals (commercial contracts and other agreements for access to biodiversity) while failing to provide a strong plan of action-based, multi-country collaboration.

We must take care of our national biodiversity and national laws should be constituted and implemented promptly to save our economy.

The first major bilateral contract for bio-prospecting was made public in September, 1991 when Merck & Co. (a US-based pharmaceutical corporation) announced a two-year, $1.135 million deal with the Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad (INBio) of Costa Rica, a private, non-governmental research institute.

INBio agreed to provide Merck’s drug-screening programmes with chemical extracts from wild plants, insects and micro-organisms. In return, Merck agreed to give INBio a two-year research budget of $1.135 million, an undisclosed share of royalties on any resulting commercial products, and technical assistance and training to establish in-country capacity for drug research.

Although the Merck/INBio agreement was hailed by some as a “model” agreement for bioprospecting, it ignores the rights and roles of indigenous peoples.

Unfortunately, there is no mechanism to monitor the number of contractual agreements, or the countries/corporations/institutions that are involved. While it is possible to obtain some information about “high-profile” bio-prospecting agreements such as the Merck/INBio agreement mentioned earlier, there may be hundreds of bilateral agreements that are shrouded in relative secrecy and receive no public scrutiny.

By and large, the terms and conditions under which indigenous peoples might benefit financially are controlled by Western corporations that are free to claim intellectual property on indigenous knowledge and biodiversity. Indigenous communities will find these same intellectual property systems culturally and ethically alien, as well as politically and economically inaccessible.

Pakistan is far behind even from its neighbouring countries like India, Nepal etc. for proper exploitation of its natural resources and getting patent its invaluable plants and other products. To address this problem, under the umbrella of government/ private entrepreneurs dealing with medicinal plants should establish projects in collaboration with traditional healers, local communities and pharmaceuticals companies of developed countries for the identification of plants having latent qualities.