Re-purposing the master's tools: the open source seed initiative and the struggle for seed sovereignty

References

• Almekinders, C. and J. Hardon, eds. 2006. Bringing farmers back into breeding. Wageningen: Agromisa Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Anti-Infringement Bureau for Intellectual Property Rights on Plant Material. 2013. Home. http://www.aib-seeds.com/en/home/31.aib [Accessed on 21 August 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Aoki, K. 2009. ‘Free seeds not free beer’: Participatory plant breeding, open source seeds, and acknowledging user innovation in agriculture. Fordham Law Review, 77(5), 2275–2310.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertacchini, E. 2009. Regional legislation in Italy for the protection of local varieties. Journal of Agriculture for International Development, 103(1/2), 51–63.
   Google Scholar
• Blakeney, M. 2012. Patenting of plant varieties and plant breeding methods. Journal of Experimental Botany, 63(3), 1069–1074. doi: 10.1093/jxb/err368
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bocci, R. 2009. Seed legislation and agrobiodiversity: Conservation varieties. Journal of Agriculture and Environment for International Development, 103(1–2), 31–49.
   Google Scholar
• Brush, S.B. 2007. Farmers’ rights and protection of traditional agricultural knowledge. World Development, 35(9), 1499–1514. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2006.05.018
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Center for Food Safety. 2004. Monsanto vs. US farmers. Washington, DC: Center for Food Safety.
   Google Scholar
• CGIAR (Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research). 2013. Managing CGIAR intellectual assets for the benefit of smallholder farmers. Available at http://www.cgiar.org/consortium-news/managing-cgiar-intellectual-assets-for-the-benefit-of-smallholder-farmers/ [Accessed 22 August 2013).
   Google Scholar
• Coffman, W.R., W.H. Lesser, and S.R. McCouch. 2007. Commercialization and the scientific research process: The example of plant breeding. In: P.E. Stephan and R.G. Ehrenburg, eds. Science and the university. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Desmarais, A. 2007. La Vía Campesina: Globalization and the power of peasants. Halifax: Fernwood Press.
   Google Scholar
• Douthwaite, B. 2002. Enabling innovation: A practical guide to understanding and fostering technical change. Boston, MA: Zed Books.
   Google Scholar
• Dusollier, S. 2007. Sharing access to intellectual property through private ordering. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 82(3), 1391–1435.
   Google Scholar
• Esping-Andersen, G., R. Friedland, and E.O. Wright. 1976. Modes of class struggle and the capitalist state. Kapitalistate, 4–5, 186–220.
   Google Scholar
• ETC Group. 2013. Gene giants seek ‘philanthrogopoly’. ETC Group Communiqué Issue #10.
   Google Scholar
• European Seed Association. 2011. IP enforcement tool-kit for vegetable seed companies. European Seed Association. Available at http://www.euroseeds.org/publications/position-papers/intellectual-property/esa_11.0068.7 [Accessed 15 August 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Eyzaguirre, P.B. and E. Dennis. 2007. The impacts of collective action and property rights on plant genetic resources’. World Development, 35(9), 1489–1498. doi: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2006.05.017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farmers Yield Initiative. 2013. Farmers yield initiative. Available from http://www.farmersyieldinitiative.com/ [Accessed on 21 August 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Fowler, C. 2003. The status of public and proprietary germplasm and information: An aassessment of recent developments at FAO. IP Strategy Today No. 7-2003. Ithaca, NY: bioDevelopments-International Institute, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Free Software Foundation. 2012. What is copyleft? Available at http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/ [Accessed on 22 July 2012].
   Google Scholar
• Fuglie, K., P. Heisey, J. King, and D. Schimmelpfennig. 2012. Rising concentration in agricultural input industries influences new farm technologies. Available from http://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2012-december/rising-concentration-in-agricultural-input-industries-influences-new-technologies.aspx#.UiU5UD_pySo [Accessed on 2 July 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Gepts, P. 2004. Who owns biodiversity, and how should the owners be compensated? Plant Physiology, 134(April), 1295–1307. doi: 10.1104/pp.103.038885
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graf, G., S. Cullen, K. Bradford, D. Zilberman, and A.B. Bennet. 2003. The public-private structure of intellectual property ownership in agricultural biotechnology. Nature Biotechnology, 21, 989–995. doi: 10.1038/nbt0903-989
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graf, G.D., B.D. Wright, A.B. Bennet, and D. Zilberman. 2004. Access to intellectual property is a major obstacle to developing transgenic horticultural crops. California Agriculture, 58(2), 120–126. doi: 10.3733/ca.v058n02p120
   Google Scholar
• GRAIN (Genetic Resources Action International). 2005. Latin America: The mantra of privatisation. Seedling, July, 36–40.
   Google Scholar
• Greene, S. 2004. Indigenous people incorporated? Culture as politics, culture as property in biopharmaceutical bioprospecting. Current Anthropology, 45(2 April), 211–237. doi: 10.1086/381047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayden, C. 2003. When nature goes public: The making and unmaking of bioprospecting in Mexico. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heller, M. and R. Heisenberg. 1998. Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research. Science, 280, 698–701. doi: 10.1126/science.280.5364.698
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hope, J. 2008. Biobazaar: The open source revolution and biotechnology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Howard, P. 2009. Visualizing consolidation in the global seed industry: 1996–2008. Sustainability, 1, 1266–1287. doi: 10.3390/su1041266
   Google Scholar
• Hughes, S. and E. Deibel. 2006/7. Opinion piece: Plant breeder's rights, room for maneuver? Tailoring Biotechnologies, 2(3 Winter), 77–86.
   Google Scholar
• Jefferson, R. 2006. Science as a social enterprise: The CAMBIA BiOS initiative. Innovations, Fall, 11–42.
   Google Scholar
• Kirby, M. 2001. ‘An interview with Erik Olin Wright.’ Available from http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~wright/kirby_wright.pdf [Accessed on 2 September 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Kloppenburg, J. 1988. First the seed: The political economy of plant biotechnology, 1492–2000. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kloppenburg, J. 2004. First the seed: The political economy of plant biotechnology, 1492–2000. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kloppenburg, J. 2010. Impeding dispossession, enabling repossession: Biological open source and the recovery of seed sovereignty. Journal of Agrarian Change, 10(3 July), 367–388. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0366.2010.00275.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kloppenburg, Jr. and D. Kleinman. 1987. Seed wars: Common heritage, private property, and political strategy’. Socialist Review, 95(September-October), 7–41.
   Google Scholar
• Kotschi, J. and G. Kaiser. 2012. Open-source für saatgut: Diskussionspapier. Göttingen: AGRECOL.
   Google Scholar
• Lorde, A. 1984. Sister outsider. Berkeley, CA: Crossing Press.
   Google Scholar
• Louwaars, N., H. Dons, G. Van Overwalle, H. Raven, A. Arundel, D. Eaton, and A. Nelis. 2009. Breeding business: The future of plant breeding in the light of developments in patent rights and plant breeder's rights. CGN Report 2009–14, Wageningen: Centre for Genetic Resources.
   Google Scholar
• Lusser, M., C. Parisi, D. Plan, and E. Rodriguez-Cerezo. 2012. Deployment of new technologies in plant Breeding. Nature Biotechnology, 30(3 March), 231–239. doi: 10.1038/nbt.2142
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LVC (La Vía Campesina). 2001. The position of Vía Campesina on biodiversity, biosafety and genetic resources. Development, 44(4), 47–51. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.development.1110291
   Google Scholar
• LVC (La Vía Campesina). 2011. La Vía Campesina Bali Seed Dclaration. Available at http://climateandcapitalism.com/2011/03/20/la-via-campesina-the-bali-seed-declaration/ [Accessed 18 March 2011].
   Google Scholar
• LVC (La Vía Campesina). 2013a. La Vía Campesina: Our seeds, our future. Available at http://viacampesina.org/downloads/pdf/en/EN-notebook6.pdf [Accessed 15 August 2013].
   Google Scholar
• LVC (La Vía Campesina). 2013b. Tunis 2013: If we rely on corporate seed, we lose food sovereignty. Available at http://viacampesina.org/en/index.php/actions-and-events-mainmenu-26/world-social-forum-mainmenu-34/1394-tunis-2013-if-we-rely-on-corporate-seed-we-lose-food-sovereignty [Accessed 25 August 2013].
   Google Scholar
• LVC (La Vía Campesina). 2013c. The Jakarta call. Available at http://viacampesina.org/en/index.php/our-conferences-mainmenu-28/6-jakarta-2013/resolutions-and-declarations/1428-the-jakarta-call [Accessed 14 June 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Marx, K. 1998. The communist manifesto. New York, NY: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Mgbeoji, I. 2006. Global biopiracy: Patents, plants, and indigenous knowledge. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Michaels, T. 1999. General Public License for Plant Germplasm: A proposal by Tom Michaels. Paper presented at the 1999 Bean Improvement Cooperative Conference, Calgary, Alberta.
   Google Scholar
• Mooney, P.R. 1979. Seeds of the earth: A private or a public resource. Ottawa: Inter Pares.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, D. 2007. Plant breeding and biotechnology: Societal context and the future of agriculture. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, K., D. Lammer, S. Lyon, B. Carter, and S. Jones. 2004. Breeding for organic and low-input farming systems: An evolutionary-participatory breeding method for inbred cereal grains. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 20(1), 48–55. doi: 10.1079/RAF200486
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mushita, A. and C.B. Thompson. 2007. Biopiracy of biodiversity: Global exchange as enclosure. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nicholson, P. 2012. Food sovereignty, a basis for transforming the dominant economic and social model: An interview of Paul Nicholson, La Vía Campesina. Geneva: CETIM.
   Google Scholar
• Nigh, R. 2002. Maya medicine in the biological gaze: Bioprospecting research as herbal fetishism. Current Anthropology, 43(3), 451–477. doi: 10.1086/339745
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OSSI (Open Source Seed Initiative). 2013. OSSI basic principles.
   Google Scholar
• Pardey, P., B. Koo, J. Drew, J. Horwich, and C. Nottenburg. 2013. The evolving landscape of plant varietal rights in the United States, 1930–2008. Nature Biotechnology, 31(1 January), 25–29. doi: 10.1038/nbt.2467
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollack, S. 2009. Crop scientists say biotechnology seed companies are thwarting research. The New York Times, (February 20), B3.
   Google Scholar
• Santilli, J. 2012. Agrobiodiversity and the law. New York: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Schurman, R. and D. Kelso. 2003. Engineering trouble: Biotechnology and its discontents. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• SEARICE (Southeast Asia Regional Initiatives for Community Empowerment). 2009. Revisiting the streams of participatory plant breeding. Quezon City, Philippines: SEARICE.
   Google Scholar
• Shiva, V. 1997. Biopiracy: The plunder of nature and knowledge. Boston, MA: South End Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shiva, V. 2012a. The seed emergency: The threat to food and democracy. Available at http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/02/201224152439941847.html [Accessed 20 August 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Shiva, V. 2012b. Defending seed freedom. Available at http://seedfreedom.in/declaration/ [Accessed 25 August 2013].
   Google Scholar
• Shiva, V., C. Lockhart, and R. Schroff (eds.) 2013. The law of the seed. New Delhi, India: Navdanya International.
   Google Scholar
• Srinivas, K. 2002. The case for BioLinuxes: And other pro-commons innovations. In Sarai reader 2002: The cities of everyday life. New Delhi: Center for the Study of Developing Societies, 321–328.
   Google Scholar
• Stallman, R. 2002. Free software definition. In free software, free society: Selected essays of Richard M. Stallman. Boston, MA: GNU Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stallman, R. 2013. Why open source misses the point of free software. Available from http://www.gnu.org/philospohy/open-soruce-misses-the-point.html [Accessed on 19 December 2012].
   Google Scholar
• Stone, G. 2007. The birth and death of traditional knowledge: Paradoxical effects of biotechnology in India. In: C. McManis, ed. Biodiversity and the law: Intellectual property, biotechnology and traditional knowledge. Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Tracy, W.F. 2003. What is plant breeding? In: M. Sligh and L. Lauffer, eds. Summit proceedings: Summit on seeds and breeds for 21st century agriculture. Pittsboro, NC: Rural Advancement Foundation International.
   Google Scholar
• U.S. Senate. 2010. International treaty on plant genetic resources for agriculture, report to accompany treaty doc. 110–19. Committee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC: USGPO.
   Google Scholar
• Vivas-Egui, D. and M.J. Oliva. 2010. Biodiversity related intellectual property provisions in free trade agreements. Issue Paper No. 4, Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development.
   Google Scholar
• Weber, S. 2004. The success of open source. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Winston, E. 2008. What if seeds were not patentable? Michigan State Las Review, 2008, 321–344.
   Google Scholar
• Wittman, H. 2009. Interview: Paul Nicholson, La Vía Campesina. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(3 July), 676–682.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zilberman, D., S.E. Sexton, M. Marra, and J. Fernandez-Conejo. 2013. The economic impact of genetically engineered crops. Choices. Available from http://ecnr.berkeley.edu/vfs/PPs/Sexton-Ste/web/choices.pdf [Accessed on 2 July 2013].
   Google Scholar