Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Antarktik Canlı Kaynaklarında Biyoürünleştirme, Çevresel Muhafaza ve Etik Prensipler

Year 2024, Volume: 5 Issue: 1, 1 - 19, 30.06.2024
https://doi.org/10.53501/rteufemud.1350015

Abstract

Ticari olarak yararlı genetik ve biyokimyasal kaynakların belirlenmesi amacıyla Antarktika'nın flora ve faunası üzerine bilimsel araştırmalar yürütülmektedir. Bu eğilim artarken biyoürünleştirme faaliyetlerinin kıta üzerinde nasıl sürdürüleceği başta mülkiyet hakkı olmak üzere birçok soruyu beraberinde getirmektedir. Bu bağlamda bu çalışma Antarktika'da yürütülen biyoürünleştirme faaliyetlerinin kıtayı yöneten küresel sistem dahilinde nasıl düzenlendiğini, mevcut düzenlemelerin sistem içinde ne derece gelişebildiğini, sistemdeki boşlukların erişim ve fayda paylaşımına karşı nasıl çalıştığını analiz edecektir. Değerlendirme sürecinde sözleşmelerden, araştırma raporlarından, patent başvuru istatistiklerinden, ön makalelerden ve mülakatlardan yararlanılacaktır. Antarktik canlı formlarında yürütülen biyoürünleştirme faaliyetleri artan sayıdaki patent alımlarıyla birlikte hassas bir ekosistem ve kıtanın kara, deniz ve iç su biyomlarında yaşayan organizmalar için tehdit unsuru oluşturmaktadır. Bu bağlamda kıta rejimini oluşturan Antarktika Antlaşmalar Sistemi bilgi paylaşım ilkelerini desteklemek, etik prensipleri dikkate almak, çevresel muhafaza ve canlı kaynakların sürdürülebilir kullanımı için biyoürünleştirme konusunda kapsamlı bir mevzuatın hazırlanmasına ihtiyaç duymaktadır.

Supporting Institution

TÜBİTAK

Project Number

121K842

Thanks

Bu çalışma Kutup 1001 projesi kapsamında geliştirilmiştir.

References

  • ASOC, (2013) (2018). https://globaloceanforum.com/areas-of-focus/areas-beyond-national-jurisdiction/ , 8 Mart 2021.
  • ATCM, XL. (2017). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Info/FinalReports?lang=e, 1 Ocak 2022.
  • ATCM, XLI. (2018). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Meetings/Past/85, 30 Şubat 2022.
  • ATCM, XLII. (2019). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Meetings/Past/87, 3 Şubat 2022.
  • ATCM, XXXI. (2008). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Meetings/Past/71, 8 Şubat 2022.
  • ATCM, XXXIV. (2011). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Meetings/Past/76, 22 Ekim 2022.
  • ATCM, XXXV. (2012). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Meetings/Past/77, 22 Kasım 2022.
  • ATCM, XXXVI. (2013). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Meetings/Past/78, 14 Kasım 2022.
  • ATS, Antarctic Treaty, CCAMLR, Environment Protocol, Meetings, Parties (1959). https://www.ats.aq/index_e.html, 4 Aralık 2022.
  • Capon RJ (2001). Marine bioprospecting- Trawling for treasure and pleasure. European Journal of Organic Chemistry (4):633–645.
  • CCAMLR, XXX. (2011). https://www.ccamlr.org/en/ccamlr-xxx, 1 Nisan 2022.
  • Chown, S. L., Huiskes A.H., Gremmen, N.J., Lee, J.E., Terauds, A., Crosbie, K., Bergstrom, D.M. (2012). Continent-wide risk assessment for the establishment of nonindigenous species in Antarctica. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(13), 4938-4943.
  • Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (1992). http://legal.un.org/avl/ha/cpbcbd/cpbcbd.html, 11 Nisan 2022.
  • Doruk, E. (2018). Governing of Global Commons in the Scope of International Regime. unpublished PhD thesis. Izmir: Ege University.
  • Foster, J.K., Nicol, S., Kawaguchi, S. (2011). The use of patent databases to predict trends in the krill fishery. Ccamlr Science, 18(2011), 135-144.
  • Frenot, Y., Chown, S.L., Whinam, J., Selkirk, P.M., Convey, P., Skotnicki, M., Bergstrom, D.M. (2005). Biological invasions in the Antarctic: extent, impacts and implications. Biological reviews, 80(1), 45-72.
  • Greiber, T. (2012). An explanatory guide to the Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit-sharing (No. 83). iucn.
  • Guyomard, A.I. (2010). Ethics and bioprospecting in Antarctica. Ethics in science and environmental politics, 10(1), 31-44.
  • Hemmings, A.D. (2009). From the new geopolitics of resources to nanotechnology: emerging challenges of globalism in Antarctica. The Yearbook of Polar Law Online, 1(1), 55-72.
  • Hughes, K.A., Bridge, P.D. (2010). Potential impacts of Antarctic bioprospecting and associated commercial activities upon Antarctic science and scientists. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 10(1), 13-18.
  • Hughes, K.A., Bridge, P.D. (2010). Potential impacts of Antarctic bioprospecting and associated commercial activities upon Antarctic science and scientists. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 10(1), 13-18.
  • Jabour-Green, J., Nicol, D. (2003). Bioprospecting in areas outside national jurisdiction: Antarctica and the Southern Ocean. Melb. J. Int'l L., 4, 76.
  • Jabour, J. (2009). The Australian continental shelf: Has Australia's high-latitude diplomacy paid off?’. Marine Policy, 33(2), 429-431.
  • Jabour, J. (2010). Biological prospecting: the ethics of exclusive reward from Antarctic activity. Ethics in science and environmental politics, 10(1), 19-29.
  • Jabour, J. (2013). Biological prospecting in the Antarctic: fair game?. In: Brady A.M., (ed.), The Emerging Politics of Antarctica, Routledge, Oxon, pp. 242-257.
  • Laird, S., Johnston, S., Wynberg, R., Lisinge, E., Lohan, D. (2003). Biodiversity Access and Benefit–Sharing Policies for Protected Areas: An Introduction. Instituto Universitario de Estudios Avanzados de la ONU, Japón.
  • Levin, S.A. (2013). Encyclopedia of biodiversity. Elsevier Inc.
  • Meduna, V. (2015). The Search for Extremophiles. In Liggett, D., Storey, B., & Cook, Y. (eds), Exploring the Last Continent, Springer, Cham., pp. 463-476.
  • Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA). www.pharma.org/publications/publications/10.08.2001.528.cfm, 22 Eylül 2022.
  • Polar Regions Unit, UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Polar Regions: Challenges and Possibilities, Report (2007).
  • Saul, B., Stephens, T. (eds) (2015). Antarctica in international law. Bloomsbury Publishing.
  • Shiva, V. (1999). Betting on biodiversity: Why genetic engineering will not feed the hungry or save the planet. Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology.
  • Slobodian, L., Kinna, R., Kambu, A., Ognibene, L. (2015). Bioprospecting in the global commons: legal issues brief. UNEP,-http://www. unep. org/delc/Portals/119/Biosprecting-Issuepaper. pdf.
  • Straus, J. (2008). How to break the deadlock preventing a fair and rational use of biodiversity. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 11(4), 229-295.
  • The US Patent and Trademark Office (2023). www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/search-patents, 2 Mart 2023.
  • Tiller, R., De Santo, E., Mendenhall, E., & Nyman, E. (2019). The once and future treaty: towards a new regime for biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Marine Policy, 99, 239-242.
  • Triggs, G. D. (1986). Antarctica: A Conflict of Interest. Current Affairs Bulletin, 63(6), 14.
  • United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (2022). https://www.un.org/en/observances/biological-diversity-day/convention, 8 Eylül 2022.
  • United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2022). https://www.unep.org/es/node/976, 10 Kasım 2022.
  • Wijkman, P.M. (1982). Managing the global commons. International Organization, 36(3), 511–536.
Year 2024, Volume: 5 Issue: 1, 1 - 19, 30.06.2024
https://doi.org/10.53501/rteufemud.1350015

Abstract

Project Number

121K842

References

  • ASOC, (2013) (2018). https://globaloceanforum.com/areas-of-focus/areas-beyond-national-jurisdiction/ , 8 Mart 2021.
  • ATCM, XL. (2017). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Info/FinalReports?lang=e, 1 Ocak 2022.
  • ATCM, XLI. (2018). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Meetings/Past/85, 30 Şubat 2022.
  • ATCM, XLII. (2019). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Meetings/Past/87, 3 Şubat 2022.
  • ATCM, XXXI. (2008). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Meetings/Past/71, 8 Şubat 2022.
  • ATCM, XXXIV. (2011). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Meetings/Past/76, 22 Ekim 2022.
  • ATCM, XXXV. (2012). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Meetings/Past/77, 22 Kasım 2022.
  • ATCM, XXXVI. (2013). https://www.ats.aq/devAS/Meetings/Past/78, 14 Kasım 2022.
  • ATS, Antarctic Treaty, CCAMLR, Environment Protocol, Meetings, Parties (1959). https://www.ats.aq/index_e.html, 4 Aralık 2022.
  • Capon RJ (2001). Marine bioprospecting- Trawling for treasure and pleasure. European Journal of Organic Chemistry (4):633–645.
  • CCAMLR, XXX. (2011). https://www.ccamlr.org/en/ccamlr-xxx, 1 Nisan 2022.
  • Chown, S. L., Huiskes A.H., Gremmen, N.J., Lee, J.E., Terauds, A., Crosbie, K., Bergstrom, D.M. (2012). Continent-wide risk assessment for the establishment of nonindigenous species in Antarctica. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(13), 4938-4943.
  • Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (1992). http://legal.un.org/avl/ha/cpbcbd/cpbcbd.html, 11 Nisan 2022.
  • Doruk, E. (2018). Governing of Global Commons in the Scope of International Regime. unpublished PhD thesis. Izmir: Ege University.
  • Foster, J.K., Nicol, S., Kawaguchi, S. (2011). The use of patent databases to predict trends in the krill fishery. Ccamlr Science, 18(2011), 135-144.
  • Frenot, Y., Chown, S.L., Whinam, J., Selkirk, P.M., Convey, P., Skotnicki, M., Bergstrom, D.M. (2005). Biological invasions in the Antarctic: extent, impacts and implications. Biological reviews, 80(1), 45-72.
  • Greiber, T. (2012). An explanatory guide to the Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit-sharing (No. 83). iucn.
  • Guyomard, A.I. (2010). Ethics and bioprospecting in Antarctica. Ethics in science and environmental politics, 10(1), 31-44.
  • Hemmings, A.D. (2009). From the new geopolitics of resources to nanotechnology: emerging challenges of globalism in Antarctica. The Yearbook of Polar Law Online, 1(1), 55-72.
  • Hughes, K.A., Bridge, P.D. (2010). Potential impacts of Antarctic bioprospecting and associated commercial activities upon Antarctic science and scientists. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 10(1), 13-18.
  • Hughes, K.A., Bridge, P.D. (2010). Potential impacts of Antarctic bioprospecting and associated commercial activities upon Antarctic science and scientists. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 10(1), 13-18.
  • Jabour-Green, J., Nicol, D. (2003). Bioprospecting in areas outside national jurisdiction: Antarctica and the Southern Ocean. Melb. J. Int'l L., 4, 76.
  • Jabour, J. (2009). The Australian continental shelf: Has Australia's high-latitude diplomacy paid off?’. Marine Policy, 33(2), 429-431.
  • Jabour, J. (2010). Biological prospecting: the ethics of exclusive reward from Antarctic activity. Ethics in science and environmental politics, 10(1), 19-29.
  • Jabour, J. (2013). Biological prospecting in the Antarctic: fair game?. In: Brady A.M., (ed.), The Emerging Politics of Antarctica, Routledge, Oxon, pp. 242-257.
  • Laird, S., Johnston, S., Wynberg, R., Lisinge, E., Lohan, D. (2003). Biodiversity Access and Benefit–Sharing Policies for Protected Areas: An Introduction. Instituto Universitario de Estudios Avanzados de la ONU, Japón.
  • Levin, S.A. (2013). Encyclopedia of biodiversity. Elsevier Inc.
  • Meduna, V. (2015). The Search for Extremophiles. In Liggett, D., Storey, B., & Cook, Y. (eds), Exploring the Last Continent, Springer, Cham., pp. 463-476.
  • Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA). www.pharma.org/publications/publications/10.08.2001.528.cfm, 22 Eylül 2022.
  • Polar Regions Unit, UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Polar Regions: Challenges and Possibilities, Report (2007).
  • Saul, B., Stephens, T. (eds) (2015). Antarctica in international law. Bloomsbury Publishing.
  • Shiva, V. (1999). Betting on biodiversity: Why genetic engineering will not feed the hungry or save the planet. Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology.
  • Slobodian, L., Kinna, R., Kambu, A., Ognibene, L. (2015). Bioprospecting in the global commons: legal issues brief. UNEP,-http://www. unep. org/delc/Portals/119/Biosprecting-Issuepaper. pdf.
  • Straus, J. (2008). How to break the deadlock preventing a fair and rational use of biodiversity. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 11(4), 229-295.
  • The US Patent and Trademark Office (2023). www.uspto.gov/patents-application-process/search-patents, 2 Mart 2023.
  • Tiller, R., De Santo, E., Mendenhall, E., & Nyman, E. (2019). The once and future treaty: towards a new regime for biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. Marine Policy, 99, 239-242.
  • Triggs, G. D. (1986). Antarctica: A Conflict of Interest. Current Affairs Bulletin, 63(6), 14.
  • United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (2022). https://www.un.org/en/observances/biological-diversity-day/convention, 8 Eylül 2022.
  • United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) (2022). https://www.unep.org/es/node/976, 10 Kasım 2022.
  • Wijkman, P.M. (1982). Managing the global commons. International Organization, 36(3), 511–536.
There are 40 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Subjects Bioprocessing, Bioproduction and Bioproducts
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Elçin Doruk 0000-0002-8547-7443

Project Number 121K842
Publication Date June 30, 2024
Published in Issue Year 2024 Volume: 5 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Doruk, E. (2024). Antarktik Canlı Kaynaklarında Biyoürünleştirme, Çevresel Muhafaza ve Etik Prensipler. Recep Tayyip Erdogan University Journal of Science and Engineering, 5(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.53501/rteufemud.1350015

Indexing

22936   22937   22938  22939     22941  23010   23011  23019  23025