This article employs multi-sited ethnography as a tool to explore the relationships among farmer seed exchange practices, intellectual property rights legislation, and biodiversity. Specifically, it investigates these issues in the historically, ecologically and culturally diverse contexts of the Costa Rican and Latvian organic agriculture movements, as these small countries negotiate their places in the economic trading blocs of the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and the European Union (EU), respectively. The juxtaposition of two such different cases reveals the micro-processes whereby the imposition of intellectual property rights on seeds replaces the centrality of social kin networks through which seeds are exchanged with bureaucratic transactions. This shift from exchanging seeds among kin to tracing the genetic lineage of seeds is part of a global process of commodification and control of seeds. Increasing efforts to “harmonize” intellectual property rights on seeds and plant varieties throughout the world will have profound impacts on food production, small farmer livelihoods and social networks, and agricultural biodiversity.
AistaraG (2008) Land and seeds: The cultural, ecological, and global politics of organic agriculture in Latvia and Costa Rica. PhD dissertation, University of Michigan.
2.
AistaraG (2009) Maps from space: Latvian organic farmers negotiate their place in the European Union. Sociologia Ruralis49(2): 132–150.
3.
AistaraG. (forthcoming) Weeds or wisdom? Permaculture in the eye of the beholder on Latvian eco-health farms. LockyerJVetetoJ. Environmental Anthropology Engaging Ecotopian Imaginaries: Bioregionalism, Permaculture, and Ecovillages for a Sustainable Future. New York and London. Berghahn.
4.
ArromJJ (1951) Criollo: Definición y matices de un concepto. Hispania34(2): 172–176.
5.
Asamblea Legislativa de la Republica de Costa Rica (2007) Ley para el desarrollo, promoción y fomento de la actividad agropecuaria orgánica N° 8591 del 14 de Agosto 2007.
6.
BalutanskyKSourieauM-A (1998). Introduction. In: BalutanskyKSourieauM-A (eds). Caribbean Creolization: Reflections on the Cultural Dynamics of Language, Literature, Identity. Gainesville. University Press of Florida.
7.
BellonMRRisopoulosJ (2001) Small-scale farmers expand the benefits of improved maize germplasm: A case study from Chiapas, Mexico. World Development29(5): 799–811.
8.
BrushS (1999) Bioprospecting the public domain. Cultural Anthropology14(4): 535–555.
9.
BurawoyM (2000). Reaching for the global. In: BurawoyM (ed.) Global Ethnography. Berkeley. University of California Press1–40.
10.
CarazoELizanoX. and MAOCO. Defendemos Nuestras Semillas Criollas: Conozcamos Cuales Son Sus Amenazas Inmediatas. (2007) San Jose. MAOCO.
11.
CarazoEVValverdeEV (2009) Significado psicosocial de las semillas y las prįcticas asociadas a ellas para personas campesinas agroecológicas. Licenciatura. Universidad de Costa Rica.
12.
CarstenJ (1995) The substance of kinship and the heat of the hearth: Feeding, personhood, and relatedness among Malays in Pulau Langkawi. American Ethnologist22(2): 223–241.
13.
CarstenJ. (2000) Cultures of Relatedness: New Approaches to the Study of Kinship. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
14.
CassidyR (2009). Arborescent culture: Writing and not writing racehorse pedigrees. In: BamfordSLeachJ (eds). Kinship and Beyond: The Genealogical Model Reconsidered. Oxford. Berghahn.
15.
ClevelandDMurrayS (1997) The world’s crop genetic resources and the rights of indigenous farmers. Current Anthropology38(4): 477–515.
16.
ClevelandDSoleriDSmithSE (1994) Do folk crop varieties have a role in sustainable agriculture?BioScience44(11): 740–751.
17.
De LaetM (2000) Patents, travel, space: Ethnographic encounters with objects in transit. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space18:149–168.
18.
DunnE (2004) Privatizing Poland: Baby Food, Big Business, and the Remaking of Labor. Ithaca, NY. Cornell University Press.
19.
EdelmanM (1999) Peasants against Globalization: Rural Social Movements in Costa Rica. Stanford, CA. Stanford University Press.
20.
EglitisD (2002) Imagining the Nation: History, Modernity and Revolution in Latvia. University Park, PA. Penn State Press.
21.
EscobarA (1998) Whose knowledge, whose nature? Biodiversity, conservation, and the political ecology of social movements. Journal of Political Ecology5:53–82.
22.
European Coordination Via Campesina (2009) Upov denies participation to farmers’ and civil society organizations. Press release, 28 October.
FranklinS (2001). Biologization revisited: Kinship theory in the context of the new biologies. In: FranklinSMcKinnonS (eds). Relative Values: Reconfiguring Kinship Studies. Durham, NC and London. Duke University Press302–325.
25.
FranklinSLuryCStaceyJ (2000). Units of genealogy. In: FranklinSLuryCStaceyJ (eds). Global Nature, Global Culture. London. SAGE68–93.
International Commission on the Future of Food and Agriculture. Manifesto on the Future of Seeds. (2006) Florence, Italy. International Commission on the Future of Food and Agriculture.
32.
JördensR (2005) Progress of plant variety protection based on the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV Convention). World Patent Information27:232–243.
33.
KloppenburgJ (1988) First the Seed: The Political Economy of Plant Biotechnology, 1492–2000. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
34.
Lammerts van BuerenEWilboisK-PØstergårdH (2007) European perspectives of organic plant breeding and seed production in a genomics era. JARTS Witzenhausen89:101–120.
35.
LatourB (1993) We Have Never Been Modern. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press.
36.
LatourB (2005) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford. Oxford University Press.
LewontinRC (1998) The maturing of capitalist agriculture: Farmer as proletarian. Monthly Review72–84.
39.
MaggioniL (2004) Conservation and use of vegetable genetic resources: A European perspective. Canadian International Development Agency.
40.
MAOCO. Manifiesto sobre las semillas criollas. (2007) MAOCO.
41.
MarcusGE (1998). Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography. In: MarcusGE (ed.) Ethnography through Thick and Thin. Princeton, NJ. Princeton University Press, 79–104.
42.
MarxK (1988 [1932]) The Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts of 1844. New York. Prometheus.
43.
MenserM (2008) Transnational participatory democracy in action: The case of La Via Campesina. Journal of Social Philosophy39(1): 20–41.
44.
MintzS (1971). The socio-historic background to pidginization and creolization. In: HymesD (ed.) Pidginization and Creolization of Languages: Proceedings of a Conference Held at the University of the West Indies, Mona, Jamaica, April, 1968. London and New York. Cambridge University Press481–498.
Red de Coordinación en Biodiversidad. Exposición Upov – Proyecto Ley de Obtenciones Vegetales 1 y 2. (2007) San Jose. Red de Coordinación en Biodiversidad.
49.
Red de Coordinación en Biodiversidad. Proyecto de Ley de Semillas: Tiro de Gracia para la Agricultura Nacional. (2008) San Jose. Red de Coordinación en Biodiversidad.
50.
RobertsE (2007) Extra embryos: The ethics of cryopreservation in Ecuador and elsewhere. American Ethnologist34(1): 181–199.
51.
RodriguezS (2008) Resistance to Upov and the Privatisation of Life in Costa Rica GRAIN Bio-IPR. Available at: http://www.grain.org/bio-ipr/?id=537, accessed September 2010.
52.
SalazarRLouwaarsNPVisserB (2007) Protecting farmers’ varieties: New approaches to rights on collective innovations in plant genetic resources. World Development35(9): 1515–1528.
53.
SchneiderD (1984) A Critique of the Study of Kinship. Ann Arbor. University of Michigan Press.
54.
ScottJC (1998) Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. New Haven, CT. Yale University Press.
55.
SrinivasanCS (2003) Concentration in ownership of plant variety rights: Some implications for developing countries. Food Policy28(5–6): 519–546.
StewartC. (2007) Creolization: History, Ethnography, Theory. Walnut Creek, CA. Left Coast Press.
58.
StrathernM (1988) The Gender of the Gift. Berkeley and London. University of California Press.
59.
StrathernM (1991). One man and many men. In: GodelierMStrathernM (eds). Big Men and Great Men: Personifications of Power in Melanesia. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
60.
StrathernM (1996) Cutting the network. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute2(3): 517–535.
61.
StrathernM. (2000) Audit Cultures: Anthropological Studies on Accountability, Ethics and the Academy. New York. Routledge.
62.
United States Department of Agriculture. Plant Materials Technical Note 10: Understanding Seed Certification and Seed Labels. (2009) Alexandria, VA. Natural Resources Conservation Service.
63.
UPOV. The Notion of Breeder and Common Knowledge in the Plant Variety Protection System Based Upon the UPOV Convention. (2002) Geneva. UPOV. Available at: http://www.upov.int/en/about/pdf/c_extr_19_2_rev.pdf, accessed September 2010.
Van DoorenT (2007) Terminated seed: Death, proprietary kinship and the production of (bio)wealth. Science as Culture16(1): 71–94.
66.
Van DoorenT (2008) Inventing seed: The nature(s) of intellectual property in plants. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space26:676–697.
67.
Van HeerwaardenJHellinJVisserRFvan EeuwijkFA (2009) Estimating maize genetic erosion in smallholder agriculture. Theoretical and Applied Genetics119:875–888.
68.
VellvéR (1992) Saving the Seed: Genetic Diversity and European Agriculture. London. Earthscan.
69.
VerderyK (2003) The Vanishing Hectare: Property and Value in Postsocialist Transylvania. Ithaca, NY. Cornell University Press.
70.
Vom BrockeKChristinckAWeltzienEPresterlTGeigerHH (2003) Farmers’ seed systems and management practices determine pearl millet genetic diversity patterns in semiarid regions of India. Crop Science43:1680–1689.
71.
YanY (2001). Practicing kinship in rural north China. In: FranklinSMcKinnonS (eds). Relative Values: Reconfiguring Kinship Studies. Durham, NC and London. Duke University Press224–245.
