Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

The Ethics of Patenting and Genetically Engineering the Relative Hāloa

2015; Routledge; Volume: 82; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/00141844.2015.1028564

1469-588X

Mascha Gugganig,

Organic Food and Agriculture

ABSTRACTThis article investigates the patenting and genetic engineering of the plant taro (Colocasia esculenta), which Native Hawaiians consider their elder brother and ancestor Hāloa. It explores how molecular scientists at the University of Hawai'i through their research activities inadvertently disrupted this relationship and concurrently provoked a resurgence of Native Hawaiians' interest in their creation story Kumulipo and connection to their kin Hāloa. The juxtaposition of purportedly value-free scientific practices with a value-laden indigenous epistemology exposes the former's debatable characterisation as 'objective'. Scientific practices such as patenting or genetically engineering taro are discussed as hybrids that are composed of molecular scientists with real intentions; a plant as kin, ancestor and embodied god Kāne; and an indigenous people with real kinship to a non-human being. In consequence, the described case exemplifies how scientific practices are as malleable and situated as the concept of nature, while both concurrently shape each other.KEYWORDS: Genetic engineeringkinship studiesintellectual property rightsHawaiihybriditytaro AcknowledgementsI want to thank kalo farmer Jerry Konanui, Penny Levin, Chris Kobayashi, Bryna 'Oliko Storch and anonymous kalo farmers for their helpful suggestions. Further thanks go to my supervisor at UBC John Barker, at CTAHR to Hector Valenzuela and Mehana Blaich Vaughan, the anonymous reviewer of Ethnos, as well as to Solomon Enos and Eliza K. Jewett for their permission to use their artworks. Last but not least, I would like to extend my thanks to Victoria Boydell and Katharine Dow for organising the panel 'Nature and Ethics' at the AAA conference in 2011, which led to this special issue.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.Notes1. As Stone asserts (Citation2010: 382), the terminology is as contested as the technology itself. While he suggests genetic modification as a neutral and shared term among opponents and proponents, fieldwork on Kaua'i has shown that on both sides critics found the term genetic modification misleading, as it also suggests conventional hybridisation of plants. Among critics, genetic engineering was generally seen as a more accurate definition (Gugganig, Citation2013). In this article, 'GMO' or genetically modified organisms are referred to in references and citations only.2. If not otherwise indicated, all translations from Hawaiian to English refer to the online dictionary www.wehewehe.org. All people of Hawaiian ancestry are referred to with a capitalised 'N', Native Hawaiians, regardless of their blood quantum.3. The USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand have not signed the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (United Nations Citation2008). The Cartagena Protocol (Citation2000) was not signed by the USA and Australia, and was not ratified by Canada and Argentina.4. The License Agreement for Pa'akala shall serve as an example for the other two patents.5. Interview with Kobayashi, 2011. Kobayashi does not distinguish between taro plants she and Native Hawaiians have grown and the patented varieties from UH. To her, as to many other taro farmers, they are all Hāloa.6. While the ringspot virus-resistant GE 'Rainbow' papaya is referred to as a success story within the scientific community (see Voosen Citation2011), it remains a debated topic among environmental activists and consumers (see Bondera Citation2006). It is curious to note that the GE papaya, which entered the market in the 1990s, did not provoke much concern over this biotechnology.7. The CTAHR report does not detail how many Hawaiian taro varieties were tested (2009: 20).8. In the development of tissue culture, the Bun Long variety created most regenerative calli (tissue), while the Hawaiian Maui Lehua produced none (He et al. Citation2013: 372).9. All information related to this meeting was provided by a taro grower who attended the meeting.10. Hashimoto asserted collaboration with Sir William D. Souza of the Royal Order of Kamehameha I to form a forum/review board to discuss research raising cultural concerns 'in the Hawaiian community' (2005). Yet who speaks for an indigenous community is contested, as discussed by Greene (Citation2004), and so, Souza's role as spokesperson for 'the Hawaiian community' is equally challenged (see Nobrega Citation2005).11. Mana: divine power, authority.12. Plant pathologists argue that in Hawai'i's environment taro rarely flowers (de la Peña Citation1990; Miyasaka Citation2006; He et al. Citation2013: 379), possibly referring to the unlikeliness of cross-pollination due to the different timing that a female flower becomes receptive and the pollen sheds (see Yamakawa Citation2008). Taro farmer Bryna 'Oliko Storch recalls this argument as proof of the disconnection between scientists and the practice of taro farming (Interview, 2013. All following citations refer to this interview) as taro growers not infrequently observe flowering among all Hawaiian taro varieties, as well as seed taro production in the lo'i (Konanui Citation2008; see also Levin Citation[2007] 2009 for further discussion; pers conversation 2014).13. The focus on non-GMO research requires members to not discuss or entertain GMO issues in Task Force meetings, despite numerous farmers' frustration over this fact (OHA, Citation2009: 27; Storch, personal communication, 2013). However, the Task Force clarified the meaning of 'taro security' and 'taro purity' in its 2009 report, stating clearly that one layer of the definition of 'taro purity' was to be non-GE.14. I thank Mehana Vaughan for pointing this out to me.15. It is pertinent to note that Lovell did not earn a university degree (Aha n.a.).16. I thank Penny Levin for pointing this out (pers. conversation 2014).17. Task Force members found this report inaccurate and insensitive, partly because it was intended for legislators as propaganda piece.18. What defines such harm is contested, yet only few Kānaka Maoli see biotechnology as a potential tool to sustain kalo (see Lovell Citation2006; Helm Citation2008).19. Interview with Valenzuela, 2013. All following citations refer to this interview.20. Interview with Valenzuela, 2013.21. Leo (Citation2006). Andre Perez was mistakenly cited as Mario Perez.22. See, for instance, Keanu Sai's 'Proclamation of the acting Council of Regency declaring Provisional Laws for the Kingdom' (Citation2014).