Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Are Life Patents Ethical? Conflict between Catholic Social Teaching and Agricultural Biotechnology's Patent Regime

  • Published:
Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Patents for genetic material in theindustrialized North have expandedsignificantly over the past twenty years,playing a crucial role in the currentconfiguration of the agricultural biotechnologyindustries, and raising significant ethicalissues. Patents have been claimed for genes,gene sequences, engineered crop species, andthe technical processes to engineer them. Mostcritics have addressed the human and ecosystemhealth implications of genetically engineeredcrops, but these broad patents raise economicissues as well. The Catholic social teachingtradition offers guidelines for critiquing theeconomic implications of this new patentregime. The Catholic principle of the universaldestination of goods implies that genes, genesequences, and engineered crop varieties areineligible for patent protection, although theprocesses to engineer these should be eligible.Religious leaders are likely to make a moresubstantive contribution to debates aboutagricultural biotechnology by addressing theselife patents than by speculating that geneticengineering is ``playing God.''

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Barbour, I., Ethics in an Age of Technology (Harper Collins, New York, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  • Barton, J. H., “The Impact of Contemporary Patent Law on Plant Biotechnology Research,” Stanford Technology Law Review (http://stlr.stanford.edu/STLR/Symposia/Antitrust/ 99_VS_3/, 1999).

  • Benbrook, C., “Who Controls and Who Will Benefit from Plant Genomics?” paper presented at the American Academy for the Advancement of Science, February 19, 2000 (www.biotech-info.net/AAASgen.html, accessed February 25, 2000).

  • Brown, A., “America Holds the Cards,” The Guardian, November 15, 2000 (www. guardianunlimited.co.uk, accessed November 17, 2000).

  • Bruce, D., and A. Bruce, Engineering Genesis: The Ethics of Genetic Engineering in Non-Human Species (London, Earthscan, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brush, S. B., “Is Common Heritage Outmoded?” in S. Brush and D. Stabinsky (eds.), Valuing Local Knowledge (Island Press, Washington DC, 1996), pp. 143-165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buttel, F. H., “Biotechnology, Agriculture, and Rural America: Socioeconomic and Ethical Issues,” in S. M. Gendel, A. D. Kline, D. M. Warren, and F. Yates (eds.), Agricultural Bioethics: Implications of Agricultural Biotechnology (Ames, Iowa, Iowa State University Press, 1990).

    Google Scholar 

  • Buttel, F. H., “GMOs: The Achilles Heel of the Globalization Regime?” paper presented at the annual meeting of the Rural Sociology Society, Washington DC, August 2000. Catechism of the Catholic Church (Liguori Publications, Liguori, Missouri, 1994).

    Google Scholar 

  • Catholic News Service, “Vatican Experts OK Plant, Animal Genetic Engineering” (www. catholicnews.com, accessed October 17, 1999).

  • Dawkins, K., Gene Wars: The Politics of Biotechnology (Seven Stories Press, New York, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • Deane-Drummond, C., Theology and Biotechnology (Geoffrey Chapman, London, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, D., “Some Recent Tendencies in the Industrial Reorganization of the Agro-Food System,” in W. H. Friedland, L. Busch, F. H. Buttel, and A. P. Rudy (eds.), Towards a New Political Economy of Agriculture (Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  • GRAIN (Genetic Resources Action International Network), “Intellectual Property Rights and Biodiversity: The Economic Myths,” Global Trade and Biodiversity in Conflict 3 (1998), 1-19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinberg, R., Cloning the Buddha: The Moral Impact of Biotechnology (Quest Books, Wheaton, Illinois, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Henriot, P. J., E. P. DeBerri and M. J. Scultheis, Catholic Social Teaching: Our Best Kept Secret (Orbis Books, Maryknoll, New York, 1987/1992).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hubbell, B. and R. Welsh, “Transgenic Crops: Engineering a More Sustainable Agriculture?” Agriculture and Human Values 15(1) (1998), 43-56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kammer, F., Doing Faith justice: An Introduction to Catholic Social Thought (Paulist Press, Ramsey, New Jersey, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kevles, D., “Diamond v. Chakrabarty and Beyond: The Political Economy of Patenting Life,” in A. Thackray (ed.), Private Science: Biotechnology and the Rise of the Molecular Sciences (University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 1998).

    Google Scholar 

  • King, D., “Patent Offices Hand Cotton and Soya Monopolies to W. R. Grace,” Genethics News 1 (1994), 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kloppenburg, J. R., First the Seed: The Political Economy of Plant Biotechnology (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York, 1988).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lacy, W. B., “Commercialization of University Research Brings Benefits, Raises Issues and Concerns,” California Agriculture 54(4) (2000), 72-79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesser, W., “Intellectual Property Rights and Concentration in Agricultural Biotechnology,” AgBioForum 1(2) (1998), 56-61.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAfee, K., “Selling Nature to Save It? Biodiversity and Green Developmentalism,” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 17(2) (1999), 133-154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Middendorf, G., M. Skladany, E. Ransom and L. Busch, “New Agricultural Biotechnologies: The Struggle for Democratic Choice,” Monthly Review 50(3) (1998), 85-97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meek, J., and P. Brown, “How US Muscle Bent the Rules in Europe,” The Guardian, November 15, 2000 (www.guardianunlimited.co.uk, accessed November 17, 2000).

  • Neves, O., Presentation to the People's Forum on theWTO by a delegate from the Vatican. osvaldoneves@mclink.it (1999).

  • Peters, C. J., “Genetic Engineering in Agriculture: Who Stands to Benefit?” Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 13 (2000), 313-327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, T., Playing God? Genetic Determinism and Human Freedom (New York, Routledge, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, M., “Monsanto Campaign Tries to Gain Support for Gene-Altered Food,” New York Times, December 8, 1999, p. A1.

  • Polanyi, K., The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Time (Beacon Hill, Boston, 1957/1944).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pontificia Academia Pro Vita, Biotecnologie Animali E Vegetali: Nuove Frontiere E Nuove Responsabilità (Città del Vaticano: Liberia Editrice Vaticana, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pope John Paul II, “The Ecological Crisis: A Common Responsibility,” in D. Christiansen and W. Grazier (eds.), “And God Saw That It Was Good”: Catholic Theology and the Environment (United States Catholic Conference, Washington DC, 1996), pp. 215-222.

  • father/john_paul_ii/speeches/index.htm, accessed November 23, 1999).

  • father/john_paul_ii/speeches/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_200 01111_jubilagric_en.html, accessed November 22, 2000).

  • Press, E. and J. Washburn, “The Kept University,” The Atlantic, March 2000. http:// www.theatlantic.com/issues/2000/03/press.htm

  • RAFI (Rural Advancement Foundation International), “Control of Cotton: The Patenting of Transgenic Cotton,” RAFI Communiqué (1993).

  • RAFI, “ 'Species' Patent on Transgenic Soybeans Granted to Transnational Chemical Giant W. G. Grace,” RAFI Communiqué (1994).

  • RAFI, “Utility Plant Patents: A Review of the US Experience,” RAFI Communiqué (1995).

  • RAFI, Enclosures of the Mind: Intellectual Monopolies (www.rafi.org, 1997).

  • RAFI, Out of Control (www.rafi.org, 1998).

  • RAFI, Monsanto is Behind Anti-Farmer Legislation to Regulate Open-Pollinated Seed Cleaners (www.rafi.org, 1999).

  • RAFI, AgBiotech's Five Jumbo Gene Giants (www.rafi.org, 2000a).

  • RAFI, USDA Refuses to Abandon Terminator Technology (www.rafi.org, 2000b).

  • Sclove, R. E., Democracy and Technology (The Guilford Press, New York, 1995).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shiva, V., Biopiracy: The Plunder of Nature and Knowledge (South End Press, Boston, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • Spillane, C., Recent Developments in Biotechnology as the Relate to Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (Background Paper No. 9, Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, FAO, Rome, 1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Teitel, M. and H. Shand, The Ownership of Life: When Patents and Values Clash (The C. S. Fund, Freestone, California, 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • USCC (United States Catholic Conference), Renewing the Earth: An Invitation to Reflection and Action on the Environment in Light of Catholic Social Teaching (National Council of Catholic Bishops, Washington, 1991).

    Google Scholar 

  • USCC, Tenth Anniversary Edition of Economic Justice for All: Catholic Social Teaching and the US Economy (National Council of Catholic Bishops, Washington, 1986/1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark Office), Patent #5,159,153 (1992).

  • USPTO, Patent #5,188,958 (1993).

  • Wrage, K., “Agracetus Claims Patent on 'All' Genetically Engineered Cotton,” AgBiotechnology News (December 1992), p. 1.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Studies, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, 95064, USA

    Keith Douglass Warner

Authors
  1. Keith Douglass Warner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Warner, K.D. Are Life Patents Ethical? Conflict between Catholic Social Teaching and Agricultural Biotechnology's Patent Regime. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 14, 301–319 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012293732083

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012293732083

Search

Navigation