跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(3.231.230.177) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/08/04 10:28
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:廖桂薰
研究生(外文):Kuei-hsun Liao
論文名稱:原住民遺傳物質之權利歸屬—以財產理論檢視人類基因多樣性研究
論文名稱(外文):Rights on Genetic Materials of Indigenous Peoples: Reviewing Human Genetic Diversity Research from a Proprietary Standpoint
指導教授:黃居正黃居正引用關係
指導教授(外文):Chu-cheng Huang
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立清華大學
系所名稱:科技法律研究所
學門:法律學門
學類:專業法律學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2004
畢業學年度:92
語文別:中文
論文頁數:67
中文關鍵詞:原住民族原住民基因多樣性遺傳多樣性財產財產權
外文關鍵詞:indigenous peoplesindigenous peopleaboriginal peoplesaboriginal peoplegenetic diversityproperty
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:1
  • 點閱點閱:278
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:58
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:3
鑑於原住民族遺傳上可能寓含之特殊性,一系列相關之基因多樣性研究於是興起。然而,在未能正視原住民族權利分配結構與市民法財產體制間差異的情況下,外界對原住民遺傳物質之取得與研究行為,將造成對原住民既有制度與價值系統的破壞。本文欲藉由描述兩系統在相關遺傳研究中所產生之衝突,強調承認原住民族獨特價值體系並賦予平行之解釋權力的必要性。
在結構上,本文將先行說明遺傳物質在市民法下之可交易性。接著,呈現原住民族財產制度與市民法之差異性,並論證維護該獨特制度之正當性。最後,針對將遺傳物質自原住民社會移轉至市民法系統下,對原住民既有制度可能造成的影響進行描述,並說明,只有在承認並尊重原住民族獨特制度的前提下,方能對於資源做出最適當之分配。
Finding that indigenous peoples may contribute to genetic diversity researches, researchers start to acquire genetic materials from them. Because indigenous peoples have proprietary institutions different from those in jus civile societies, the transfer of genetic materials between two kinds of societies may cause problems. In another word, without considering the differences, the overground system in an indigenous society would be damaged.
It is my attempt to show that recognizing and respecting the institutions in indigenous societies is the only way to allocate the resources properly. To come to the conclusion, the alienability of genetic materials in jus civile system is described at first. Then, I illustrate how the proprietary institutions in indigenous societies distinct from those in jus civile system, and demonstrate the legality of them. At last, the impact on proprietary institutions in indigenous societies due to the transfer of genetic materials is shown to support my opinion.
目錄
摘要 I
謝辭 II
目錄 III
壹.緒論 1
一、問題意識 1
二、研究範圍與定義 2
(一)原住民族與原住民 2
(二)財產 3
(三)基因多樣性研究 4
(四)遺傳物質之範圍 6
三、論文架構與結論 7
貳、市民價值體系下遺傳物質的定位—可交易性之探討 9
一、從人體部分(BODY PARTS)之定位 10
(一)人體、財產、可交易性與神聖性 10
(二)從身體到身體的部分 12
二、遺傳物質的可交易性 20
(一)遺傳物質上的權利劃分 20
(二)研究用遺傳物質之移轉與告知後同意 22
(三)遺傳物質專利 25
三、植基於社會價值的可交易性概念 29
參.原住民財產權系統之獨特性的合法基礎 31
一、原住民族與市民財產文化的歧異性 32
(一)文化歧異現象 32
(二)原住民族財產制度與市民財產制度的歧異 34
二、賦予原住民族自成主權地位的正當性 36
(一)時間與空間上的主張 37
(二)資源分配的平等 37
(三)透過集體權利的踐行而維護原住民自成主權的地位 38
三、個人、社群與集體權利 40
(一)集體權利的基本概念 40
(二)集體權利與個人權利的衝突 43
四、獨特財產系統的實踐 45
(一)原住民族權利在國際法上的主張 45
(二)原住民族權利在國內法上的實踐 47
肆、原住民族遺傳物質之研究與權利衝突—現狀之呈現與思考方向48
一、原住民族社會中的遺傳物質 49
(一)原住民族細胞株專利 50
(二)價值觀的歧異 51
二、原住民社會中遺傳物質交易模式之修正 53
(一)遺傳物質的取得—同意權的行使 54
(二)研究利益的分享 57
(三)治本之道—原住民族價值系統之承認 59
伍.檢討與建議 61
參考文獻 64
參考文獻
中文書籍
伯登海默(BODENHEIMER, EDGAR),《法理學¬—法哲學與法學方法(JURISPRUDENCE-THE PHILOSOPHY AND METHOD OF THE LAW)》, (鄧正來譯,范建得校閱,台北:漢興圖書有限公司,1999);
德沃金(DWORKIN, RONALD),《生命的自主權(LIFE’S DOMINION) 》,(郭貞伶、陳雅汝譯,台北:商周出版,2002);
JACQUIN, PHILIPPE,《印地安人:紅皮膚的大地(LA TERRE DES PEAUX—ROUGES) 》,(余中先譯,台北:時報文化1996);
杜利(TULLY, JAMES),《陌生的多樣性:歧異時代的憲政主義(STRANGE MULTIPLICITY: CONSTITUTIONALISM IN AN AGE OF DIVERSITY)》,(黃俊龍譯,台北:聯經出版2001)
威爾森(WILSON, EDWARD OSBORNE),《論人性(ON HUMAN NATURE)》,第25-39頁(鄭清榮譯,台北:時報出版,2002);
王澤鑑,《侵權行為法(1)》(自版,2001.7);
丘宏達,《現代國際法》 (台北:三民書局,2000);
黃應貴,《東埔社布農人的社會生活》(中央研究院民族學研究所1992);
臺灣總督府臨時臺灣舊慣調查會,《番族慣習調查報告書「第四卷」鄒族》,中央研究院民族學研究所編譯(中央研究院民族學研究所2000)

中文期刊/報告/碩博士論文
王泰升,〈台灣原住民的法律地位〉,行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告(行政院國家科學委員會1997)。
李明峻,許介鱗,〈國際法語原住民族的權利〉,《政治科學論叢》,第12期;
林子儀,〈基因資訊與基因隱私權—從保障隱私權的觀點論基因資訊的利用與法的規制〉,《當代公法新論(中) —翁岳生教授七秩誕辰祝壽論文集》(元照出版社2002);
陳文吟,〈探討美國MOORE V. REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA〉,《智慧財產權與國際私法—曾陳明汝教授六秩誕辰祝壽論文集》(蔡明誠發行1997);
陳叔倬,〈原住民人體基因研究之倫理爭議與立法保護〉,《生物科技與法律研究通訊》,第六期;
陳秀容,〈族裔社群權利理論:VERNON VAN DYKE的理論建構〉,《政治科學論叢》,第十期;
陳秀容,〈社群的互動與人權:關於社群權利的一種思考〉,《政治社群》(中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所1995);
陳舜伶,〈原住民運動中「權利法制化」進路的困局〉,台灣大學法律研究所碩士論文;
陳銘洋,趙威寧,〈台灣原住民族自治與立法〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,第74期;
黃居正,〈時間、勞動與生態—原住民財產權論述中的凝視〉,未發表;
黃居正,〈時間、勞動與生態—原住民財產權論述的基本組構〉,「台灣原住民族傳統醫療與生物倫理研習會」,福華文教會館203會議室(2004年5月14日);
楊允言,黃玉翎,〈國家公園與原住民〉,HTTP://203.64.42.21/IUG/UNGIAN/CHOKPHIN/HOAGU/KOKKAKONGHNG/KOKKAKONGHNG.HTM ;
蔡明誠,〈基因研究人體檢體採樣與原住民受試相關法律問題探討〉,《基因技術挑戰與法律回應:基因科技與法律研討會論文集》(林子儀,蔡明誠主編2003);
顏厥安,〈財產、人格,還是資訊?論人類基因的法律地位〉,「基因科技之法律管制體系與社會衝擊研究研討會」,國立台灣大學法律學院國際會議廳(2000年3月12日);
藤井志津枝,〈探討台灣原住民的土地問題〉,《原住民族權利國際研討會論文集》 (許介鱗編,1999);
嚴新富、鴻義章,〈臺灣原住民的藥用植物〉,「台灣原住民族傳統醫療與生物倫理研習會」,福華文教會館203會議室(2004年5月14日);
英文書籍
ANDREWS, LORI, & DOROTHY NELKIN, BODY BAZAAR, 67 ( CROWN PUBLISHER 2001);
APPELBAUM, PAUL S. ET AL., INFORMED CONSENT: LEGAL THORY AND CLINICAL PRACTICE, 211-219(NEW YORK :OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS 1987);
GOLD, E. RICHARD, BODY PARTS: PROPERTY RIGHTS AND THE OWNERSHIP OF HUMAN BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS (1998);
HEGEL, G. W. F., ELEMENTS OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF RIGHT (ALLEN W. WOOD ED., H. B. NISBET TRANS 1991);
KYMLICKA, WILL, LIBERALISM COMMUNITY AND CULTURE (2ND ED.1992);
KYMLICKA, WILL, MULTICULTURAL CITIZENSHIP (DAVID MILLER & ALAN RYAN EDS., OXFORD POLITICAL THEORY)(1995);
L.L. CAVALLI-SFORZA, P. MENOZZI, AND A. PIAZZA, THE HISTORY AND GEOGRAPHY OF HUMAN GENES (PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS 1994);
LOCKE, JOHN, TWO TREATIES OF GOVERNMENT (PETER LASLETT ED., CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS 1988)(1960);
MUNZER, STEPHEN R., A THEORY OF PROPERTY (JULES COLEMAN ED., CAMBRIDGE STUDIES IN PHILOSOPHY AND LAW 1990) ;
RADIN, MARGARET JANE, REINTERPRETING PROPERTY (THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS 1993);
RADIN, MARGARET JANE, CONTESTED COMMODITIES (HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS 1996);
RIDLEY, MATT, GENOME: THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF A SPECIES IN 23 CHAPTERS (HARPERCOLLINS PUBLISHERS 2000);
UNDERKUFFLER, L. S. THE IDEA OF PROPERTY: ITS MEANING AND POWER (OXFORD UNIV. PRESS, 2002).


英文論文
ANAYA, S. JAMES, THE CAPABILITY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW TO ADVANCE ETHNIC OR NATIONALITY RIGHTS CLAIM,IN THE RIGHTS OF MINORITY CULTURES 321 (WILL KYMLICKA EDS.,1995);
BARSH, RUSSEL LAWRENCE ET AL., PHARMACOGENOMICS AND INDIGENOUS PEOPLE: REAL ISSUES AND ACTORS, 11 CARDOZO J. INT’L & COMP. L. 365 (2003);
BHAT,AMAR THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH: AND THE PAPUA NEW GUINEA CELL LINE, 20.2 CULTURAL SURVIVAL (1996);
BOBROFF, KENNETH H., RETELLING ALLOMENT: INDIAN PROPERTY RIGHTS AND THE MYTH OF COMMON OWNERSHIP, 54 VAND. L. REV. 1559 (2001);
CALABRESI, GUIDO & A. DOUGLAS MELAMED, PROPERTY RULES, LIABILITY RULES AND INALIENABILITY: ONE VIEW OF THE CATHEDRAL, 85 HARV. L. REV. 1089 (1972);
CHRISTIE, JEAN, WHOSE PROPERTY, WHOSE RIGHTS?, 20.2CULTURAL SURVIVAL (1996);
CLAY, MEGAN & WALTER BLOCK, A FREE MARKET FOR HUMAN ORGANS, 27 J. SOCIAL, POLITICAL AND ECONOMICS STUDIES 227 (2002);
CRAWFORD, M. H., ANTHROPOLOGICAL GENETICS IN THE 21ST CENTURY: INTRODUCTION, 72 HUMAN BIOLOGY 3 (2000);
DODSON, MICHAEL & ROBERT WILLIAMSON, INDIGENOUS PEOPLES AND THE MORALITY OF THE HUMAN GENOME DIVERSITY PROJECT, 25 J. MEDICAL ETHICS 204 (1999);
EISENBERG, REBBECCA S., HOW CAN YOU PATENT GENE?, IN WHO OWNS LIFE 117 (DAVID MAGNUS ET AL. EDS. 2002);
JOHNSTON, DARLENE M, THE QUEST OF THE SIX NATIONS CONFEDERACY FOR SELF-DETERMINATION, IN INTERNATIONAL LAW AND INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 85 (S. JAMES ANAYA ED., 2003);
MEAD, AROHA TE PAREAKE, GENEALOGY, SACREDNESS, AND THE COMMODITIES MARKET, 20.2 CULTURE SURVIVAL(1996);
MEIER, BENJAMIN MASON, INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION OF PERSONS UNDERGOING MEDICAL EXPERIMENTATION: PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF INFORMED CONSENT, 20 BERKELEY J. INT'L L. 513(2002);
MUNZER, STEPHEN R., KANT AND PROPERTY RIGHTS IN BODY PARTS, 6 CAN. J. L. & JURISPRUDENCE 319 (1993);
MUNZER, STEPHEN R., HUMAN DIGNITY AND PROPERTY RIGHTS IN HUMAN BODY PARTS, IN PROPERTY PROBLEMS: FROM GENES TO PENSION FUNDS 25 (J. W. HARRIS ED.,1997);
MUNZER, STEPHEN R., PROPERTY, PATENTS, AND GENETIC MATERIAL, IN A COMPANION TO GENETICS 438 (JUSTINE BURLEY & JOHN HARRIS EDS., BLACKWELL COMPANIONS TO PHILOSOPHY, 2002)(1998);
RADIN, MARGARET JANE, MARKET-INALIENABILITY, 100 HARV. L. REV. 1849 (1987);
RAO, RADHIKA, PROPERTY, PRIVACY AND THE HUMAN BODY, 80 B.U.L. REV. 359 (2000);
STEVENSON, GELVINA RODRIGUEZ, TRADE SECRETS: THE SECRET TO PROTECTING INDIGENOUS ETHNOBIOLOCAL (MEDICAL) KNOWLEDGE, 32 N.Y.U. J. INT'L L. & POL. 1119 (2000);
TERWILLIGER, JOSEPH D., & HARALD H.H. GOERING, GENE MAPPING IN THE 20TH AND 21ST CENTURIES: STATISTICAL METHOD, DATA ANALYSIS, AND EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN, 72 HUMAN BIOLOGY 63 (2000);
THOMPSON, RICHARD H., ETHNIC MINORITIES AND THE CASE FOR COLLECTIVE RIGHTS, 99AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST 786 (1997);
TOOLEY, MICHAEL, PERSONHOOD, IN A COMPANION TO BIOETHICS 117 ( HELGA KUHSE & PETER SINGER EDS., BLACKWELL COMPANIONS TO PHILOSOPHY, 2001) (1998);
TULLY, JAMES, THE STRUGGLES FOR AND OF FREEDOM, IN POLITICAL THEORY AND THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 36 (DUNCAN IVISON ET AL. EDS.2000);
VAN DYKE, VERNON, THE INDIVIDUAL, THE STATE, AND ETHNIC COMMUNITIES IN POLITICAL THEORY, IN THE RIGHTS OF MINORITY CULTURES, 31 (WILL KYMLICKA EDS.,1995);
WARREN, MARY ANNE, THE MORAL STATUS OF THE GENE, IN A COMPANION TO GENETHICS, 147 (JUSTINE BURLEY & JOHN HARRIS EDS., BLACKWELL COMPANIONS TO PHILOSOPHY 2002) (1998);
WIESSNER, SIEGFRIED, RIGHTS AND STATUS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES: A GLOBAL COMPARATIVE AND INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ANALYSIS, IN INTERNATIONAL LAW AND INDIGENOUS PEOPLES 258 (S. JAMES ANAYA ED., 2003).

英文報導、報告或演說
HGDP ALGHERO SUMMARY REPORT, HGDP, HTTP://WWW.STANFORD.EDU/GROUP/MORRINST/HGDP/SUMMARY93.HTML
NEW QUESTIONS ABOUT MANAGEMENT AND EXCHANGE OF HUMAN TISSUE AT NIH / INDIGENOUS PERSON'S CELLS PATENTED, ETC COMMUNIQU��, MARCH 30,1996
PHASE II FOR HUMAN GENOME RESEARCH- HUMAN GENETIC DIVERSITY ENTERS THE COMMERCIAL MAINSTREAM, RAFI PRESS, JANUARY 21, 2000;
THE PATENTING OF HUMAN GENETIC MATERIAL, RAFI PRESS, JANUARY 30, 1994;
US GOVERNMENT DUMPS THE HAGAHAI PATENT, ETC NEWS ITEM, DECEMBER 3,1996
PETEAN, SAULO BROKEN PROMISES, BRAZZIL, HTTP://WWW.BRAZZIL.COM/P16DEC96.HTM
ROBINSON, MARY (UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS),BRIDGING THE GAP BETWEEN HUMAN RIGHTS AND DEVELOPMENT: FROM NORMATIVE PRINCIPLES TO OPERATIONAL RELEVANCE,(DECEMBER 3, 2001)
THAMBISETTY, SIVARAMJANI, HUMAN GENOME PATENTS AND DEVELOPING COUNTRIES, COMMISSION ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS STUDY PAPER 10, 28(2002)

案例資料
MOORE V. REGENTS OF UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, 51 CAL. 3D 120, 137(1990)
GREENBERG V. MIAMI CHILDREN’S HOSP. RESEARCH INST., INC., 264 F. SUPP. 2D 1064, 1074-1076 (S.D. FLA. 2003)
DIAMOND V. CHAKRABARTY , 447 U.S. 303 (1980)
AMGEN INC. V. CHUGAI PHARMACEUTICAL CO., 927 F.2D 1200 (FED CIR 1991)
OPINION OF THE JUSTICE, 365 MASS. 681,313 N.E. 2D 561(1974)
TAPSCOTT V. LESSEE OF COBBS, 52 VA. (11 GRATT.) 172 (1854)

其他中英文網頁資料
BIOCLUB, http://www.bioclub.org
BioScience, http://www.bioscience.org/guides/declhels.htm
Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, http://www.iprcommission.org
Cultural Survival, http://www.culturalsurvival.org
ETC Group, http://www.etcgroup.org/
European Patent Office, http://legal.european-patent-office.org
HGDP, http://www.stanford.edu/group/morrinst/hgdp/faq.html
Indigenous People Council on Biocolonialism, http://www.ipcb.org/resolutions/htmls/summary_indig_opp.html
International Labour Organization, http://www.ilo.org/public/english/region/ampro/mdtsanjose/indigenous/derecho.htm
Retention of Students in the Biological Sciences, http://opbs.okstate.edu
The Free Dictionary.com, http://www.thefreedictionary.com
United Nations, http://www.undp.org/csopp/CSO/NewFiles/ipaboutdef.html
聯合生命科技網http://ult.adsldns.org/ult/modules/news/
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top