Biodiversity Sustainability of Phytomedicine Research: a 3-dimensions analysis around the North-South divide

The use of plants in medicine can be traced to the beginnings of civilization and natural products dominated therapeutics until the end of the 19th century. The Industrial Revolution and the development of organic chemistry resulted in a preference for synthetic products for pharmacological treatments (Rates, 2001). However, according to the World Health Organization (WHO, 2008), about 65 80% of the population in developing countries depend on plants for their primary health care. During the last decades, popularity of alternative medicines increased worldwide, especially phytomedicine. The global trade of medicinal plants was around $62 billion in ted to be $5 trillion by 2050 (Kumari et al., 2011). The rising demand of plant-based drugs is creating heavy pressure on some plant populations in the wild due to over-harvesting, raising conservation and equity issues in regard to biodiversity and traditional knowledge (TK)(Arihan et al., 2007). Reducing the pressure on medicinal plants is therefore a tough challenge both for policy makers and economists (Timmermans, 2003). linked to the use of plants have been debated worldwide and significant divergences exist as to whether IPR should be applied (IBC Working Group, 2010). To protect TK, there are two approaches: a positive protection route and a defensive approach route, with IP or non-IP related tools, legally binding or nonbinding instruments. The debate on the right tools is not over (Van Overwalle, 2005). There are arguments for the benefit sharing under the IPR, considered as a new legal form of biopiracy (Patil, 2012), whereas others argue that the IPR is a legal tool to protect the rights of knowledge holders and sustain innovation for the benefit of public health. (Author)