Counterplans Inuit Consult cp
Download 0.65 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Turn — bioprospecting wrecks Antarctic biodiversity — that turns the case
- Status quo solves — massive Antarctic bioprospecting research happening now
Antarctic Bioresearch1NC — Bio-ResearchBioprospecting regulations are illegal and lack of an enforcement mechanism tanks solvencyDavis 2011, (Jason Davis has a ph.D in philosophy from Ohio State University, “Reconsidering Antarctic Bioprospecting through Territorialities of Science, Property, and Governance”, [ https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap/10?0::NO:10:P10_ETD_SUBID:73399 ] , //hss-RJ) The question of whether or not bioprospecting activities in Antarctica violate the principles behind the third article of the Antarctic Treaty is not a simple one to answer. In deconstructing the question, it seems to assume that bioprospecting is an inherently scientific activity, which has not yet been established solidly. If bioprospecting is to be considered a scientific activity, then scientists should take responsibility for explaining and/or defending it as such. Scientists seem unable to fully commit to this project, however, because bioprospecting is a hybrid activity that involves science, commerce, and politics. Bioprospecting may be considered either exploitation-driven or technology-driven science in the Jabour and Nicol typology mentioned earlier. As such, Antarctic scientists are seemingly faced with a choice to either call for this form of science to be accepted, as part of the diverse postmodern typology of sciences is accepted, or reformed to match more Mertonian expectations of science in Antarctica. These two choices need not be considered mutually exclusive, however. Scientists could both accept bioprospecting activities as a type of Antarctic science while at the same time engaging in efforts to tweak it to make it more acceptable. Beyond the consideration of whether or not bioprospecting is science, there is the complication that arises from the territorial focus that arises from Article Three's declaration that observations and results from Antarctica should be shared. If bioprospecting research is conducted on data derived from a sample library which includes Antarctic biota (such as the Census of Antarctic Marine Life), but not conducted by scientists who have ever been to Antarctica, are the observations and results of their research still considered to be from Antarctica? The ability for the ATS or SCAR to control scientific research that is conducted outside of the territorial confines of Antarctica is questionable. Whereas such organizations might find success excluding scientists from returning to Antarctica if they violate expectations of scientific exchange, imposing penalties on parties that might not even be under the jurisdiction of ATS member states presents a seemingly insurmountable challenge. Turn: the plan increases competition for extremophiles — that undermines Antarctic cooperation and disincentivizes future researchKirby 2004, (Alex Kirby is a BBC News Online environment correspondent, “Antarctica's resources 'at risk'”,[ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/3444753.stm] , //hss-RJ) The UN University says "extremophiles", creatures adapted to life in the polar wastes, are being relentlessly hunted in what is virtually a new gold rush. A successful search could uncover new drugs, industrial compounds and some commercial applications, the UN says. It says the existing Antarctic Treaty System cannot adequately regulate the possible consequences to Antarctica. The UN University's report, The International Regime For Bioprospecting: Existing Policies And Emerging Issues For Antarctica, is published by its Institute of Advanced Studies, based in Tokyo, Japan. Survival mysteries The publication comes a week before the start of a meeting on 9 February of the UN's Convention on Biological Diversity in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Extremophiles comprise principally bacteria, which have the remarkable ability to thrive in conditions that would be hazardous to other lifeforms - extremes of temperature, radiation, salinity, and metal toxicity. These organisms, which have fundamentally different metabolisms to normal microbes, are found in hydrothermal vents on the deep-ocean floor and in rocks and springs hundreds of metres below the surface of the Earth. Understanding their biology may lead scientists to tap new energy sources and make novel drugs. But it is the race to find and exploit the microbes that can survive in the very cold, dry or salty conditions of Antarctica that is raising particular concern for the UN University. Its report says the search to unlock the secrets of these lifeforms' success could be a repeat of the 19th Century's gold rush, a free-for-all to find and patent new cancer treatments, antibiotics and industrial products. Dr A H Zakri, the institute's director, said: "Biological prospecting for extremophiles is already occurring and is certain to accelerate in Antarctica and the Southern Ocean. "This report suggests that efforts to exploit this new frontier are now threatening to outpace the capacity of national and international law to regulate... ownership of genetic materials, the issuing of patents... and the potential environmental consequences of harvesting these resources." However, it is not just bacteria that are being targeted. Higher lifeforms are being investigated, too. One promising discovery is a glycoprotein which prevents Antarctic fish from freezing. It could help fish farmers, extend the shelf life of frozen food, improve surgery and tissue transplants, and make plants more tolerant of freezing. Other Antarctic discoveries include an extract from green algae for use in cosmetic skin treatment, and anti-tumour properties in a strain of yeast. New era of competition The report says Antarctic bioprospecting so far has usually been the work of consortia of public and private bodies, like universities and pharmaceutical companies. It says: "This has made it difficult to draw a clear line between scientific research and commercial activities." Sam Johnston, the report's co-author, says the Antarctic Treaty System, the main international agreement governing activity on the continent, does not specifically regulate bioprospecting. He told BBC News Online: "The search for extremophiles threatens the hallmarks of Antarctic scientific research, its transparency and cooperation. "We're not saying there's much danger of environmental damage, but it does pose a challenge. "It's likely to inhibit scientists in the future, and companies will be less interested in working in the Antarctic because there won't be any clarity over who owns what." Turn — bioprospecting wrecks Antarctic biodiversity — that turns the caseSlobodian et al. 2010, (*Lydia Slobodian is an emerging legal professional in the field of international environmental law. In 2012 she graduated magna cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center, where she focused on international law, environmental law, trade law, the supreme court and the federal system, and legal philosophy. She is currently working as a visiting attorney at the Environmental Law Institute, **Rémy Kinna was a researcher in the Global Governance of International Watercourses at UNESCO Centre for Water Law, Policy and Science and is currently Humanitarian Program Management Coordinator (East Asia) at Oxfam Australia, ***Alphonse Kambu holds a doctorate in law with specific emphasis on environmental law and policy from Chiba University in Japan. Prior to joining UNEPs Division of Environmental Law and Conventions (DELC) as a Legal Officer, he was Director of Ishikawa International Cooperation Research Center, a Special Programme of the United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS), which is now the International Operating Unit of UNU-IAS that he was instrumental in establishing. Before that he worked with IUCN-The World Conservation Union as an IUCN-Ford Foundation Fellow and taught at the Tokyo Management College and various other universities in Japan. ****Lara Ognibene is a legal officer at the United Nations Environmental Programme, “Bioprospecting In The Global Commons: Legal Issues Brief”, [ http://www.unep.org/delc/Portals/119/Biosprecting-Issuepaper.pdf ] , //hss-RJ) Bioprospecting has the added potential to cause negative impacts on delicate ecosystems of the deep seabed and Antarctica. In situ experiments in and around the Deep Seabed can introduce light and noise or change water temperature, which, in-turn, can affect pro-creation and the survival of organisms in these areas. Bioprospecting activities can also produce pollution in the form of debris or discharge from vessels and equipment. Additionally, inadvertent movement of organisms through disrupting currents or discarding of scientific samples can lead to biological contamination. Finally, there is the usual possibility of over-exploitation in harvesting organisms in these regions and the flow on environmental impacts. Yet, this aspect is unclear due to the lack of information about ecosystems in these marine habitats. In this respect, the precautionary principle7 would seemingly apply to any future environmental regulations developed to govern bioprospecting activities in the High Seas and Antarctica. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (‘the Assessment’) est- mates that the current and projected future impact of bioprospecting on ecosystems is low, because the amount of material that needs to be harvested is normally small.8 The Assessment also states that there is a strong synergy between biodiversity preservation and bioprospecting, since the latter benefits from preserving the former. However, it warns that great uncertainty remains about the potential impact of bioprospecting activities. As the projected impact is minimal, although uncertain, bioprospecting does not presently implicate provisions of international agree¬ments which regulate actions likely to have serious adverse environmental impacts in the commons. The legal implications of any potential environmental impacts from bioprospecting are not explored in detail through this issue brief, but must be a consideration for decision-makers in drafting future laws and policies to regulate this activity. materials between States, particularly for developing nations. Additionally, there are no clear guidelines on the environmental standards bioprospecting expeditions must meet. The content and interplay between the existing laws governing bioprospecting in the High Seas and Antarctica are examined below, along with the legal gaps and uncertainties this exposes in the current framework. Status quo solves — massive Antarctic bioprospecting research happening nowUNU-IAS 2007, (The United Nations University - Institute of Advanced Studies (UNU-IAS) is amongst the newest in the network of research and training centres within the UNU system. The UNU-IAS mission is to undertake research and postgraduate education on issues at the forefront of knowledge, policy development and learning, “Biological Prospecting in Antarctica: Review, Update and Proposed Tool to Support a Way Forward”, [ http://www.unep.org/dewa/Portals/67/pdf/Atcm30_ip067_e.pdf ] , //HSS-RJ) Molecules derived from nature, particularly those produced by plants and microorganisms, have an excellent record of providing novel chemical structures for development as new pharmaceuticals. The screening of microbes, such as bacteria and fungi, continues to represent an important route to the discovery of novel bioactive and therapeutic chemicals. Of increasing interest is the evaluation of the potential of lesser-known and/or new microbial taxa. Microorganisms represent the largest reservoir of undescribed biodiversity, and hence possess the greatest potential for the discovery of new products of commercial interest. Although much still remains to be known about Antarctic microbes, an increasing number of new Antarctic microorganisms are being described, particularly from marine environments (sea ice seawater), but also from the lakes, terrestrial biotopes and the cryosphere4 5 6 . New species and genera from diverse bacterial phyla are being found. More recently, the diversity of fungal taxa, as well as microalgae and small invertebrates, have started to be investigated and new strains are being isolated. Antarctic terrestrial environments have also been found to be a rich source of both novel species and rare genera of Actinobacteria. Many of the novel Antarctic bacterial species belong to genera with very strong track records for producing pharmaceutically active compounds (e.g. Streptomyces, Nocardia, and Micromonospora).7 At present, genomic information on Antarctic species is limited mainly to a number of fish species and microbes. However, an increasing number of Antarctic genomics projects are being funded and will significantly increase the amount of molecular information available on a much wider range of species in the near future. For example, genome information exists for psychrophilic organisms isolated from Antarctica. Recent discoveries of note include, for example, the demonstrated ability of two microbes of the type Archae to form a chemically linked unit called a biofilm, enabling them to survive and multiply in cold conditions. A basic examination of published research relating to extremophiles in the Antarctic reveals that a wide variety of research activities have been carried out. The journal Extremophiles, and international journal edited by Springer10, has published 21 articles relating to novel discoveries from Antarctic extremophiles between 1999 and 2007. Much of this research relates to the characterization of cold-adapted bacteria, genes, proteins and enzymes from Antarctica. Specimens have been collected from a variety of Antarctic environments, including Antarctic seawater, marine sediments, sea ice, mineral soils and inland waters. In addition, Antarctic fish and plants have been a focus of genetic research. Other examples include a screening for antimicrobial activities in 723 bacteria from 24 lineages (alpha, beta and gamma Proteobacteria, Cytophaga-Flavobacterium-Bacteroides branch, and the high and low percentage G+C Gram-positives), as well as in 158 fungal strains from Antarctic lakes’ microbial mats11. The Antarctic Bibliography component of the Cold Regions Bibliography project12 provides a comprehensive source of literature relating to Antarctica. A quick search of this database turned up 9 articles relating to research on Antarctic microbes, 200 related to the genes of Antarctic organisms, and over a thousand relating to bacteria. This basic literature search demonstrates the volume of scientific research being carried out. This point is also underscored by the formation, in 2002, of the International Society for Extremophiles (ISE), which aims to exchange information and experience between scientists in the rapidly growing field of research on extremophiles13. In addition, a number of universities have research programmes carrying out research in Antarctic extremophiles14. Of interest is also the work of the Institute for Genomic Research (TIGR), which reports that the establishment of an Antarctic Microbial Observatory is in progress. The considerable amount of extremophile research discussed above may demonstrate a growing interest in the novel genetic resources of extremophiles, and in the potential commercial applications of those genetic resources. Previous documents considered by the ATCM pointed out the difficulty in distinguishing between purely scientific research and commercial ventures. Much of the basic scientific research relating to extremophiles may produce commercial applications in the future, even though the purpose of that research may have been primarily scientific. In the past, many companies have cited the lack of baseline information about Antarctic biodiversity, and in particular on Antarctic genetic resources, as an impediment to investing resources in commercially-oriented research in Antarctica. This knowledge base is now growing, though is yet far from complete. The volume of increase in research may, however, soon result in lessening some of the cited knowledge-related impediments to bioprospecting in Antarctica. Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 0.65 Mb. Share with your friends:
|