Skip to main content Accessibility help
  • Access
  • Open access
  • Print publication year: 2018
  • Online publication date: December 2018

7 - Biopiracy Flashpoints and Increasing Tensions over ABS in Canada

from Part II - Hurdles to ABS
  • View HTML
    • Send chapter to Kindle

      To send this chapter to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Available formats

      Send chapter to Dropbox

      To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Available formats

      Send chapter to Google Drive

      To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Available formats


This chapter uses selected Canadian case studies to explore the use and exploitation of genetic resources and associated Indigenous or traditional knowledge in Canada; first, to demonstrate that biopiracy is a felt and increasing reality in Canada, and second, to interrogate the potentials and pitfalls of existing Canadian access and benefit-sharing (ABS) policy, especially with regard to its failure to incorporate Indigenous peoples. It argues that a combination of progressive research and entrepreneurship on the one hand, and the opening up of Canada’s Arctic region and its bounty of marine genetic resources on the other, will only produce new tensions over ABS. This wealth of genetic resources, the policy imperative of reconciliation with Canada’s Indigenous peoples, and the urgent need to sustain biodiversity and combat climate change will heighten existing tensions between Indigenous peoples and local communities and other potential ABS stakeholders in the Canadian context. Canada’s position as both a producer and user of genetic resources will therefore become more pronounced. Consequently, the dynamic between researchers, industry and Indigenous peoples will become increasingly fraught and problematic unless urgent steps are taken to implement an Indigenous-sensitive ABS policy in close partnership with Indigenous peoples across Canada.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO
Biotech Around the World: Focus on Canada (2008) 3 Biotechnology Journal (7): 848–51. Available at
Canada. Environment and Climate Change Canada. Biodiversity Convention Office. Canadian Biodiversity Strategy: Canada’s Response to the Convention on Biological Diversity. [Ottawa]. 1995.–8754-C7DD12761EFA/CBS_e.pdf.
Canada (2). Environment and Climate Change Canada. Northern Workshop on Access to Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge and Benefit-Sharing. [Ottawa]. 2006.
Canada (3). Managing Genetic Resources in the 21st Century: Domestic Policy Guidance for Canada [Ottawa] 2010.
Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee (CBAC), Patenting Higher Life Forms: A Report to the Government of Canada, online: (2002)–598–2001–2E.pdf.
Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (Tri-Council). ‘Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans, December 2010’. Available at:
CBC News. ‘I Ruined the Call’: Hunting Mishap Leads Thunder Bay Brothers to Develop Throat Lozenge’. 22 September 2016. Accessed October 04, 2017.
Cuerrier, Alain, Downing, Ashleigh, Patterson, Elisabeth, and Haddad, Pierre. (2012). ‘Aboriginal Antidiabetic Plant Project with the James Bay Cree of Québec: An Insightful Collaboration’. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 6:3: 251–70.
Galloway, Gloria. ‘Inuit Will Write Marine Management Plan for Eastern End of Northwest Passage’. The Globe and Mail, 28 September 2017. Accessed October 4, 2017.
Geary, J et al. (2013). ‘Access and Benefit Sharing of Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge in Northern Canada: Understanding the Legal Environment and Creative Effective Research Agreements’. International Journal of Circumpolar Health 72:1.
Greer, David and Harvey, Brian. 2004. Blue Genes: Sharing and Conserving the World’s Aquatic Biodiversity. London: Earthscan.
Gwich’in Social and Cultural Institute. 2004. ‘Working with Gwich’in Traditional Knowledge in the Gwich’in Settlement Region: Traditional Knowledge Policy’. Accessible at:
Gwich’in Tribal Council. ‘Gwich’in Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement’. Accessed September 04, 2017.
Kerr, R. 2012. Marine Microbial Bioprospecting in Nunavut a Pilot Program. University of Prince Edward Island Available from: 20PEI%20-%20Russell%20Kerr/01-APPLICATION/120807– 10YN047-Non-Tech%20Summary-IA2E.pdf.
Kuhnlein, Harriet V and Turner, Nancy J. Traditional Plant Foods of Canadian Indigenous Peoples: Nutrition, Botany and Use. Philadelphia: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, 1996.
Mason, Peter G and Brodeur, Jacques. 2013. ‘Access and Benefit Sharing and Biological Control’ In: Mason, Peter G. and Roy, David (eds.), Biological Control Programmes in Canada 2001–2012. Gillespie. Wallingford: CABI.
McDermott, Larry and Wilson, Peigi. 2010. Ginawaydaganuk: Algonquin Law on Access and Benefit Sharing. Policy Matters 17, 205–14.
‘Nunavut Research Institute (NRI)’. Accessed November 1, 2017.
Nunavut Land Claims Agreement (1993). Available at:
Oguamanam, C, Koziol, C, Lesprance, A and Morales, J. 2017. Environmental and Regulatory Reviews: Discussion Paper. [Ottawa].
Oguamanam, C. 2005. ‘Genetic Use Restriction (or Terminator) Technologies (GURTs) in Agricultural Biotechnology: The Limits of Technological Alternatives to Intellectual Property’. Canadian Journal of Law and Technology 4:5976.
Oguamanam, C. 2006. ‘Intellectual Property Rights in Plant Genetic Resources: Farmers’ Rights and Food Security of Indigenous and Local Communities’. Drake Journal of Agricultural Law 11:273305.
Oguamanam, C. (2006a). ‘Regime Tension in the Intellectual Property Rights Arena: Farmers’ Rights and Post-TRIPS Counter Regime Trends’. Dalhousie Law Journal 29:413453.
Oguamanam, C. 2012. Intellectual Property in Global Governance: A Development Question. London: Routledge.
Gillespie, A. 2011. Conservation, Biodiversity and International Law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Oguamanam, Chidi. 2018. ‘Wandering Footloose: Traditional Knowledge and the Public Domain Revisited’. Journal of World Intellectual Property, 14 March 2018 online
Oguamanam, Chidi, Phillips, Freedom-Kai, and Nichols, Joshua. Focus Group Report: Summary of ABS Canada Eastern Focus Group Sessions. Publication no. 1. Ottawa: ABS Canada, 2015.
Oguamanam, Chidi, Koziol, Chris, and Phillips, Freedom-Kai. Focus Group Report: Summary of ABS Canada Eastern Focus Group Sessions. Publication no. 2. Ottawa: ABS Canada, 2016.
Oguamanam, Chidi, Koziol, Chris, and Lesperance, Andrea. Focus Group Report: Summary of ABS Canada Eastern Focus Group Sessions. Publication no. 3. Ottawa: ABS Canada, 2017.
Oguamanam, Chidi and Jain, Vipal. 2017. ‘Access and Benefit Sharing, Canadian and Aboriginal Research after the Nagoya Protocol: Digital DNA and Transformations in Biotechnology’. Journal Environmental Law and Practice 3:79112.
Saini, M. 2012. ‘A Systematic Review of Western and Aboriginal Research Designs’. National Collaborating Center for Aboriginal Health. [cited 2017 October 19]. Available from:
Scassa, T and Taylor, F. 2017. ‘Legal and Ethical Issues Around Incorporating Traditional Knowledge in Polar Data Infrastructures’. Data Science Journal 16:114.
Species at Risk Act. 2002. Available at:
United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies, UNU-IAS Report on Bioprospecting in the Arctic (Yokohama, Japan, 2008), available from: