AFRICA: BIOTECH FIRMS HAVE THEIR EYES ON AFRICA, ...
OTC 17.10.98 01:21
PARIS, (Oct. 14) IPS - European Union (EU) rules limiting the
range of biotechnological activity appear to be prompting some
biotech firms to look for new locations where they can operate
more freely.
In fact, biotech industrialists and researchers have reportedly
started hinting about relocating, possibly to Africa, so as to
circumvent strict EU regulations prohibiting some activities.
Operations banned in Europe include cloning humans, modifying the
genetic identity of a human being and artificial reproducing
embryos that have the same genetic information as another person,
whether alive or dead.
Also included on the banned list are inventions whose
exploitation or publication would violate public order or morals,
and any modification of the genetic make-up of animals that would
cause them to suffer or to become physically handicapped where
this is of no substantial medical usefulness to man or animal.
There are also restrictions to the manipulation of vegetable
species and animal breeds.
To get around this arsenal of constraints, transnationals are
reportedly looking towards Africa as the place to go to operate
with total impunity, and they are said to be banking on the
elimination of trade barriers under the World Trade Organization
(WTO) and moves to dismantle barriers to investment, touted by
various developed nations.
This holds dangers for Africa, as some European legislators
pointed out at a late-September session of the European
Parliament.
Catherine Lalumiere, president of the Radical Alliance (AR)
faction in the European parliament in Strasbourg, fears that in a
world in which communications technology wipes out distances,
there is a high risk that the biotech companies will go to Africa
and carry out research and other activities banned elsewhere.
She said the United Nations should call a global meeting of
decision-makers, researchers, industrialists, bioethics
committees and human rights groups to draw up an international
code of conduct in this area.
Other parliamentarians agreed. Gijs De Vries of the Netherlands
felt there was an imperative need for such a conference otherwise
"the life sciences, whose aim thus far was to defend certain
basic values, would become 'death sciences' on a continent that
has to face other problems."
The stakes of such a conference are all the higher since
biotechnology has become a huge money-making affair. In Europe
alone, the biotech market is expected to amount to 80 billion
ecus in two years time. In 1997 it was a mere 10 billion ecus.
One ecu is equal to $1.20.
Carlo Casini of the European People's Party said such a meeting
needed to be held urgently "if we still hope to find
solutions for facing up to the invasion of genetically modified
organisms and the rapid advances made daily in research, for
which Africa is, of course, unprepared."
"What would these multinationals do if a crisis like the mad
cow disease broke out in that part of the world?" asked
Casini.
He pointed out that the United States boasts of having the safest
food system in the world, yet its Food and Drug Administration
(FDA), the federal body in charge of food safety, reports
millions of cases of food poisoning each year.
Willi Rothley, vice president of the European Parliament's
commission on legal affairs and citizen's rights, also saw such a
meeting as necessary, although he felt consideration should be
given to the fact that setting up biotech industries on the
African continent can improve consumers' lives by providing them
with quality food and keeping them in good health.
"Moreover, thousands of jobs would be created so, at such a
meeting, a distinction would have to be made between what is
useful and what could be a source of danger for these
countries," he argued.
Global regulations of the type Lalumiere would like to see
adopted would also govern farm products like bananas, tomatoes
and oranges that many African nations export and which
genetically modified fruits and vegetables might end up crowding
out of the market.
For example, transgenic varieties of cash crops such as coffee
and cocoa that Nestle is finalizing at its centers in Tours,
France, threaten African economies.
Over the next two years, the sale of medicinal drugs and
chemicals in Europe will amount to 23.9 billion and 14.6 billion
ecus respectively, said German parliamentarian Wilfried
Telkamper, a member of the Green group in Strasbourg. However,
"83 percent of the biodiversity and 80 percent of the
resources needed for biotechnological inventions are in African
countries in particular, and in the South in general."
"Bear in mind that these resources are very often exploited
without the agreement of the local populations," said
Telkamper.
Such a conference "could draw up principles enabling these
populations to derive benefit from the exploitation of their
patrimony" so it needs to be held quickly, he added.
But some observers link this burst of solidarity with Africa to
Europe's desire to seek support in the biotechnology market as it
competes against the United States, the leading force in the
sector.
Others note that while parliamentarians in Strasbourg are trying
to get a summit on biotechnology onto the global agenda, in
Brussels, the European Commission plans to spend 206 billion ecus
on 152 projects related to biotechnological development.
This budget line is expected to increase with a view to the
implementation of the EC's 1999-2002 research program.
Copyright 1998