Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Graduate Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2011 Wisdom in the earth: an examination of the history of intellectual property rights in plants and seeds Kevin Frank Howe Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Howe, Kevin Frank, "Wisdom in the earth: an examination of the history of intellectual property rights in plants and seeds" (2011). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 10338. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/10338 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Wisdom in the earth: an examination of the history of intellectual property rights in plants and seeds by Kevin F. Howe A dissertation submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Major: Agricultural History and Rural Studies Program of Study Committee: Pamela Riney-Kehrberg, Major Professor Amy Bix Charles Dobbs Kathleen Hilliard Jeffrey Houghtby Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2011 Copyright © Kevin F. Howe, 2011. All rights reserved. ii DEDICATION To my family for generous and tolerant support during this wonderful adventure and for all those who find their place in this world in the joy of learning. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………… iv Abstract………………………………………………………………………….. v Introduction……………………………………………………………………… 1 Chapter 1………………………………………………………………………… 20 Chapter 2………………………………………………………………………… 49 Chapter 3………………………………………………………………………… 92 Chapter 4………………………………………………………………………… 156 Chapter 5………………………………………………………………………… 214 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………….. 273 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………….. 283 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the Iowa State University History Department faculty and staff. I first visited Iowa State University in 1978 as a prospective freshman. Those days were defined by excitement over a seemingly limitless future, which is a joy and privilege of youth. I returned to Iowa State University in 2005, after nearly twenty years in the practice of law. My second visit, this time as a prospective middle-aged graduate student, was defined by uncertainty and trepidation as I sat down to discuss my goals with a professor who was easily ten years my junior. The rigors of law school and graduate school are similar in many respects but they are taught and written in different tongues and with different objectives. A law school is a trade school and a law degree is vocational. My concerns about whether I really belonged in higher academia were short- lived, however, as the entire faculty proved to be both welcoming and encouraging in my desire to research and write a dissertation on a topic of legal and political history. In the years of class work and research since my return to school, I rediscovered the excitement of learning. To all of you, particularly my committee chair, Pamela Riney-Kehrberg, and Professor Charles Dobbs, I thank you for friendship, encouragement and guidance. My years at Iowa State gave me a new appreciation and a deep respect for the precision and expertise reflected in your work. I am honored to join your ranks and to have the privilege of calling you peers. v ABSTRACT Economic influences played a dominant role in design and implementation of intellectual property laws and agriculture policy in America. These influences have helped shape the values and goals of people who created, administered and interpreted patent laws throughout the twentieth century, as well as those who promoted agriculture in America and later in the developing world. The historical motivations driving these two institutions help explain how and why plants entered the realm of intellectual property and why international aid organizations defined and measured progress in economic terms. Events that serve to illustrate these dynamics include the Plant Patent Act of 1930, the Plant Variety Protection Act of 1970, the Rockefeller Foundation’s agricultural outreach program in Mexico and the Foundation’s formation - in cooperation with the Word Bank, the Food and Agriculture Organization and the Ford Foundation - of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Resources (CGIAR). Review of documents particular to these events reveals a consistent philosophy of progress through profit that informed debate over use of intellectual property rights in plants. As aid organizations such as the Rockefeller Foundation and CGIAR embraced modern agriculture as a tool to help the developing world, they inherited and sometimes perpetuated this economic philosophy. The biotechnology revolution of the 1980’s enhanced the already valuable seed collections held by these institutions and forced them to reevaluate their traditional policy of free sharing and address if and how seeds should be protected and used to generate income and how profit from such activities should be allocated. The solutions to these difficult issues and the historical influences that shaped vi them help drive the contemporary debate on topics such as GMO food, environmental safety and cultural preservation. 1 INTRODUCTION Twenty-first century agriculture is rife with debate about the way the industrial world produces food. The debate swirls around diverse issues, which reflect genuine concerns for any rational and compassionate person but which offer no easy compromises. Environmental safety and human health are juxtaposed against the promise of abundant and nourishing food produced under varied and sometimes hostile conditions. The rights of small farmers to perpetuate their culture and traditions are juxtaposed against the opportunity for larger progressive farmers to usher in economic growth through more efficient and viable methods of food production. The morality of commercializing thousands of years of common labor and free sharing of natural resources is juxtaposed against the need to encourage entrepreneurs to invest money and years of research in the hope of producing a valuable new product. As is often the case when pragmatism meets idealism, advocates on both sides struggle to find a balance.1 Two common themes in this long running debate are money and power. As the science of agriculture becomes more complex and costly, the range of active participants (like the seeds they produce) becomes more narrow and uniform, resulting in 1 Many books and articles touch on this topic ranging from technical scientific reviews to general interest news articles. For introductory works relating to genetics, the environment and food safety, see, e.g., Larry D. Kier and Jay S. Petrick, “Safety assessment considerations for food and feed derived from plants with genetic modifications that modulate endogenous gene expression and pathways,” Food and Chemical Toxology 46, no. 8 (2008): 2591 – 2608; Tim Lang, “Food Control or Food Democracy: Re-engaging nutrition with society and the environment,” Public Health Nutrition 8 (2005): 730-737; Nicole Dyer, “Techno Food: Genetically Modified Crops cook up a sizzling debate,” Science World, Vol. 58, no. 6 (November 26, 2001): 16; Lisa Turner, “Weird Science,” Better Nutrition, Vol. 63, no.6 (June 2001): 40. For a review of issues relating to indigenous cultures, modern farming and intellectual property, see, e.g., David A. Cleveland and Stephen C. Murray, “The World's Crop Genetic Resources and the Rights of Indigenous Farmers,” Current Anthropology, Vol. 38, No. 4 (1997), 479 and Michael F. Brown, Who Owns Native Culture?, Cambridge: Harvard University Press (2003). 2 consolidation of assets critical to the world food supply.2 Technology has continually funneled agriculture into a commercial and industrial model, aided by the availability of private economic rights, including intellectual property rights, in plants and seeds. The science of plant production has also necessitated greater attention to the global environment, from which comes the raw materials that serve as ingredients for modified and improved crops. The need to preserve and protect the very environmental diversity that modern agriculture threatens to condense and unify demands balance between the long and short- term goals of modern agriculture as well as the proper commitment and participation of private industry, governments, philanthropies, academia and human rights organizations.3 Advancements in biotechnology and genetic modification thrust these issues into a highly public spotlight in recent decades. Media coverage, sometimes sensational, has brought this issue to a broad public audience, much of which is confronting these issues for the first time. The historical perceptions of both intellectual property and agriculture are instructive in fully understanding, perhaps even predicting, the thought processes that will likely guide what is for many a case of first impression. These well-established perceptions pre-date the current debate by over two hundred years and carry with them a 2 According to ETC Group, a non-profit farm advocacy organization (f/k/a Rural Advancement Foundation International), the top 10 seed corporations accounted for 55% of the commercial seed market worldwide based on 2006 revenues