Researcher(s):
Kelsey White-Davis
ENVS course(s): 400 Initiated: September 2013 Completed: May 2014 Go to project site
|
The rapid evolution of global conceptions and treatments for healing practices has challenged the status of those that are heavily situated in history. In the biodiversity rich landscape of Ecuador, traditional medicine is framed as a static and outdated practice primarily due to the global rise of allopathic medicine. Bioprospecting holds the potential to transform traditional medicine into a dynamic practice again, however, its allopathic foundation has led to a frictional negotiation. As a result, allopathic practices have supplanted older practices and have become the dominant health service in Ecuador. The implications of this single focused system are primarily experienced by indigenous populations, due to their historical ties with traditional medicine. In an effort to explore if bioprospecting aids in the legitimization of traditional medicine, I applied cluster analysis. I selected six primary actors that included the economic value of biodiversity preservation, the National Cancer Institute, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Ecuador’s Intellectual Property Rights (IEPI) organization, an Ecuadorian pharmaceutical company, and patent revision for equal benefits in bioprospecting. I selected primary sources when possible and otherwise extreme case examples. I then analyzed how each source defined four reoccurring concepts; biodiversity, (traditional) medicine, traditional knowledge and indigenous peoples. I was able to deduce if the sources supported or marginalized traditional medicine within the context of bioprospecting. Negotiating the rights for traditional medicine within the economic framework of bioprospecting, has given indigenous peoples more power and voice. It, however, has done little to legitimize traditional medicine in its original context, thus perpetuating a gap in health care services and failing to draw in underserved indigenous populations in Ecuador.