The globalized intellectual property laws which allow the pharmaceutical industry to operate in the manner it does are not just detrimental to humans, but also to the natural environment. Biological corridors refer to the integration of multiple developing countries into a strip of land by which multinational pharmaceutical corporations, as well as other types of multinational corporations, can target for raw materials (Delgado, 2002). The strange aspect of this process is that Environmental Non-Government Organizations (ENGOs), organizations which claim to be protectors of the natural environment, were the creators of it. Many multinational corporations (MNCs) give donations to ENGOs such as Conservation International (CI), an organization which operates in more than 23 countries, and according to Conservation International itself, acquires more than 83 million dollars per year for the biopiracy schemes it organizes for the likes of Monsanto, Intel, Pulsar, Hyseq, Bristol Squibb, Shaman and Dow Agrosciences (Delgado, 2002). 
              In this way, the circle of protection/exploitation of the environment is complete. MNCs want to have a good image, so they donate money to environmental non-governmental organizations which have access to conservation areas with lots of natural resources. These ENGOs, looking for more donations, will cooperate with these big bullies by helping them to exploit the very lands in which they help to protect. The problem with this, however, is that conservation efforts are in vain when pharmaceutical corporations, as well as other corporations, are exploiting plants and other resources at an ever increasing rate.

Conclusion

              This paper has shown how detrimental the international intellectual property rights laws under TRIPS are to the global South, as well as the environment. In line with TRIPS, the powerful pharmaceutical industry is able to go to developing countries and patent herbal medications to be used in the synthesizing of drugs from which they will pocket billions of dollars. Then, when the pharmaceutical industry puts patents on drugs, they create a monopoly which restricts the use of these treatments to only those who can afford them. In terms of the environment, these laws promote “inventions” created by the biotechnology industry (which pharmaceutical industry is part of) which involve the exploitation of nature at an ever increasing rate. Ironically, the organizations in which the majority of society trusts with conservation efforts, such as Conservation International, help multinational corporations to gain access to plants native to the global South. In return, they get funds from corporations which are currently using biotechnology and want to be viewed as a force for good. This means that while these sorts of organizations may get vast funds to protect the environment, they are mainly coming from corporations which they help to do more damage than these efforts can counteract. Various solutions to these problems have been put forth by various scholars, but even if they were implemented, they would not change the structure of the current global economy which is so reliant on inequality. In the past, creating private property was the only way in which capitalists could gain more capital, but now it is currently legal (and expected) that capitalists patent life itself!  The world is currently in crisis mode due to the blatant exploitation of the environment by powerful multinationals, and if capitalism is not overturned, it is likely that humanity will not be around for much longer due to the devastating effects of climate change.

References

Delgado, Gian Carlo. 2002. ‘Biopiracy and Intellectual Property as the Basis for
              Biotechnological Development: The Case of Mexico’. International Journal of Politics, 
              Culture and Society 16 (2): 297-316.                                                                                   
Gewertz, Nevin M., and Amado, Rivka. 2004.’Intellectual Property and the Pharmaceutical
              Industry: A Moral Crossroads Between Health and Property’. Journal of Business Ethics
              55: 295-308.                                                                                                                            
Kaur Plahe, Jagjit, and Nyland, Chris. 2003. ‘The WTO and patenting of life forms: policy
              options for developing countries’. Third World Quarterly 24 (1): 29-45.                              
              Shiva, Vandana. 2000. ‘North-South Conflicts in Intellectual Property Rights’. Peace Review 12
              (4): 501-508.                                                                                                                      
Zakrzewski, Peter A. 2002. ‘Bioprospecting or Biopiracy? The Pharmaceutical Industry’s Use of
              Indigenous Medicinal Plants as a Source of Potential Drug Candidates’. University of 
              Toronto Medical Journal 79 (3): 252-254.