Culture as we know it is generated from thoughts, emotions, attitudes and behaviors, networks of symbols, values, beliefs, and sensory perceptions. Culture itself also changes, differs and is transferred among generations. Memetics is a new field of science that tries to understand questions such as How does the mind work? How do humans learn and develop? How does culture form and transfer to future generations?

One of the major tenets of memetics is the meme, or meme concept. The meme concept is assumed as a mental unit to understand the structure and function of culture. Symbols (imaginations), cognates, archetypes, images, concepts, values, beliefs, emotions, attitudes, and behaviors that are produced inside the human mind are either memes or a meme set. Memes are described as mysterious codes of behavior, and the main production unit of reality and function of the human mind. Concepts like mind, cognition, and memory as well as the functioning of the genes and viruses have been instrumental in the development of the meme.

If we consider the human brain as a computer, genes can be regarded as units that make up the hardware, and memes as units for software. Speech and language skills enable the formation and transfer of memes that build mind and culture. Forms of literature and different sciences are also memes that help define a specific culture and civilization. It is accepted that memes are units that code, reproduce, and store ideas, emotions, and behaviors.

Since memes can only be reproduced in the mind and transferred via the brain’s activities, they are also described as the viruses of the cultural world. The common feature of biological and computer viruses is that they leak into the system by concealing themselves, and thus infect other structures in the medium by replicating there. Through memes, acting as agents (viruses) that reproduce and diversify ideas, culture is transferred via media, speech, and mass communication devices. One such example of this would be commercials. Commercials and other forms of advertisements are produced by utilizing powerful memes.

Genes and the laws of genetics help us to understand memes. Genes and memes are very similar to each other in terms of working principles. Just like genes, memes are also multidimensional and multifunctional. The roles that genes play in the biological world are similarly carried out by memes in the mind. There are regulatory memes, just like regulatory genes. There are immunoglobulin genes in charge of protecting against diseases, just as there are memes that guard against bad, harmful, and unwanted cultural practices. Ethical teachings, decency, the concept of right and wrong, lawful and unlawful are examples of memes that conserve a culture’s spiritual and ideological world.

Genes have helped the brain to develop in such a way that they store and reproduce memes. The synapses and neural networks of the brain are drawn towards certain memes. Neural genes and their products (neurotransmitters, neural networks and synapses) work in conjunction with these memes, spreading their content.

Knowledge is spread in this way. Like unlocking a door is dependent on a complete match and fit of the key and lock, the production, storage, reproduction, and transfer of memes relies on fitting with the proper genes. In other words, there is a high level of adaptation and association in between memes and memetic structures that are encoded into the structure of the brain. Therefore, not every meme can find its place in each mind; likewise, not every brain can accommodate and propagate all meme forms. This relation explains both why humans have different interests and respond differently to the same stimulant. In the meantime, it sheds light on the role of memes in the development of different mentalities, perceptions, and opinions.

Just as genes affect memes, memes also affect genes. Memes that form in the mind play a role in the expression, regulation, and control of genes. Memes such as emotions and ideas lead to alterations in the electrical activities of the brain. Furthermore, this triggers the excretion of neurotransmitter materials and the synthesis of transcription factors that switch gene activity on and off. Some of these memes can be pleasant, or they may be unwanted and disturbing. Thus, there is also a need for anti-memes, in order to neutralize unwanted and disturbing ones.

Belief systems, and conversely non-belief, produce different memes and this difference causes variations in a person’s neural gene activity. The mental processes of a person possessing right or wrong memes shaped by religious faith will not be the same compared to a person who does not have these memes. This is similar to the way a person with positive and joyful memes sees life in a different light than someone who has negative and harmful memes.

The task that antivirus programs have in the computer world is similar to the tasks of anti-memes in our mind. Of course, a person can influence this process through willpower. Good things represent nice and pleasant memes and wrong ones symbolize unwanted and harmful memes. Of course, each country or culture has different definitions of what is good and what is wrong. From this perspective, so-called “culture wars” are actually wars of memes and memetics. It is only possible to understand civilizations through analyzing the algorithms and memetic maps which were used to erect them.

Memes are investigated under three main groups according to the anatomical and functional structure of the brain. The first is memes that are stored and populated in the neocortex, which is associated with advanced mental functions such as willpower, consciousness, and intangible thinking. These memes are also defined as a cognate (a unit that represents the information generated and stored in the cortex) in cognitive sciences.

The second one is memes that surface, stay, and diversify in the mezolymbic region, which houses the centers for reward and pleasure, fight or flight, and which generates simple and complex emotions.

The third type is memes that are associated with the back region of the brain that is in charge of activities pertaining to physical necessities, such as eating and drinking. Due to the make-up of our brains, personal memes for desire, fear, and other habits are significantly different from each other. But these three different types of memes play a role in shaping brain chemistry and culture. The way we think originates from these different memetic maps via different memes of subconscious content. Due to the differing makeup in personalities, because of memes and genes, people have different degrees of willpower. In summary, if there is not a problem regarding the foundation of genetic and memetic interaction, we develop and mature with the capacity to separate the good, right, and decent memes from the wrong, harmful, and disturbing ones. In this process, emotions and behaviors that are inside and outside of our will are subject to regulation and the control of psychological and spiritual states, and genetic-memetic systems. We should not forget that our ideas, emotions and behaviors are determined under the control of our intelligence, conscience, and willpower, which are the dynamics of our soul.

Almost all of us are familiar with the fact that our bodily organs are composed of tissues, which are made of cells. The perfect machinery of the cells is controlled by our genes; i.e. DNA and RNA. Therefore, a minor defect or mutation in the genetic code may affect either partial or entire systems within the body. Some of these genetic diseases are inherited from our parents or relatives. Others may be introduced into our body through environmental mutagens, such as ionizing radiation, ultraviolet rays, or different chemicals within our food and drink; these can result in cancer or cardiovascular diseases. We can protect ourselves from the latter by using appropriate outfits, taking care with our diet, etc. However, inherited genetic disorders are usually unavoidable and sometimes have fatal consequences. Modern medicine is striving to find a way to treat these diseases. Although there are some medical procedures that may lessen the pain of patients or extend their life expectancy, there is no available comprehensive curative therapy for genetic disorders.

Gene therapy has become one of the rising stars in the field of molecular medicine during the last decade, with more than 1500 proposed or ongoing clinical trials worldwide. Gene therapy promises to provide curative therapies for a large number of inherited or acquired diseases, such as monogenic disorders, cancer, or cardiovascular disease. Gene therapy is universally defined as the replacement of an abnormal/dysfunctional gene in the cells of an individual with its correct and functional version. Mechanics use a number of tools to fix our cars for us when they give us trouble; in the same way, gene therapy can be used by doctors to alleviate or completely eradicate some diseases from our bodies.

Gene therapy is classified into two categories based on the target cells that are to be treated. The transduction of the differentiated cells of an individual, i.e. the somatic cells, is known as somatic gene therapy; the transduction of reproductive cells, i.e. gametes (sperm or ova), is known as germ-line gene therapy. Currently, there are many regulations in place that limit the likelihood of the modification of the germline in any gene therapy approach. This is because fear exists that the ability to alter the germline will result in the widespread application of gene therapy to achieve eugenic genetic enhancements, such as improvement of intelligence or physical characteristics. On the other hand, transgenic animals, which are used to detect the function of the genes within an organism, can be generated by modifying the germ-line. Furthermore, gene therapy is also classified into two groups: adult and fetal (in utero) gene therapy, according to the individual to be treated. There are several advantages and disadvantages to these methods, such as immune response, the pooling of mitotic cells, the amount of vector that is required, etc.; however, these are matters for a different article.

Gene therapy is achieved by using special exogenous genetic material transfer agents which are called vectors; these can be compared to the special tools used by auto mechanics. Over the years, a number of gene transfer vehicles, i.e. vectors, have been developed and these can be divided into two principal categories: non-viral (synthetic) and viral (virus-based) gene delivery systems.

Non-viral gene transfer can be achieved by using both physical and chemical methods. The physical methods include: i) Electroporation, in which areas of the cell membrane break down as result of an applied electric pulse, thus allowing DNA to enter the cell, ii) Ballistic gene transfer (the Gene Gun), which bombards particles coated with DNA into the cells, and iii) Microinjection, in which DNA is transferred through microcapillaries into the cells [1]. In terms of chemical gene transfer, lipofection is the most promising method; in this method negatively-charged DNA molecules bind to cationic lipid particles through electrostatic interaction and the DNA–lipid complex enters the cell through endocytosis/pinocytosis. Although these non-viral delivery systems exhibit low toxicity and can be easily produced in high concentrations on a commercial scale, in general, gene transfer using these agents is inefficient and often transient. Therefore, as a result of the viral vectors’ ability to efficiently deliver and integrate genes into the host genome, they are being engineered extensively to achieve a sustained and high-level expression of the gene of interest (transgene).

Viral vectors

Have you ever thought that one of the major pathological agents that cause catastrophic and even fatal diseases could be used to treat the same or a similar disease?

Viruses are equipped with specialized molecular mechanisms that allow them to efficiently transport the genomes into the cells they infect and use the cell’s machinery for their own reproduction. Molecular biologists first harnessed this machinery of transduction in the 1970s. Paul Berg used a modified SV40 virus containing DNA from the bacteriophage lambda to infect monkey kidney cells that were being maintained in culture. Viral delivery systems are based on replicating viruses that have the ability to deliver genetic information into the host cell, a process known as transduction [2]. Due to the fact that there are several advantages to viral vectors, these are the vehicles being employed in approximately 75% of all ongoing clinical trials worldwide. Numerous viruses are being used as the basis for the vectors, including, but not limited to, adenovirus (24%, n=377), retrovirus (20.9%, n=329), adeno-associated virus (4.3%, n=67), herpes simplex virus (3.2%, n=51), vaccinia virus (7.9%, n=124), poxvirus (5.8%, n=91), and baculovirus (more detailed information is available at www.wiley.co.uk/genmed/clinical). The first step to construct a viral vector for transferring the gene of interest involves the identification of the viral sequences that are necessary for replication and pathogenesis. Then some of the genes are removed to make room for the transgene and to render the viral vector replication-incompetent. Consequently, the vector is unable to replicate within the host, and therefore is safe for delivering genes to human cells or tissues (Figure 1).

There are advantages and disadvantages to all of the currently available vectors; the suitability of the vector, therefore, actually depends on the disease or condition that is being treated. For instance, if the goal of the gene therapy is to increase bone marrow engraftment with the transient expression of a growth factor, the use of chemical transfection or naked DNA transfer methods would suffice. However, if the objective is to provide long-term treatment for an inherited disease, then the use of an integrating viral vector is more desirable. Thus, a vector that might be ideal for treating one defect may not be ideal for another. Driven by the desire to develop the “perfect” vector, scientists are continually striving for novel forms of gene delivery that might become the “magic bullet.” Somia and Verma [3] have proposed that the ideal gene therapy vector should include all of the following properties: 1) easy production at a high titer on a commercial scale with a reasonable shelf-life for transport and distribution 2) sustained or regulated expression of the transgene product that is adjustable to the nature of the disease, 3) absence of immune response against the vector and the transgene product, 4) ability to target specific tissues and/or cell types while avoiding professional antigen-presenting cells, 5) absence of size limitations for the genetic material to be delivered by the vector, 6) site-specific integration of the transgene into the chromosome of the target cell to avoid insertional mutagenesis, or faithful division and segregation if it is to reside in the nucleus as an episome independent of local chromatin environments, and 7) an ability to infect dividing and post-mitotic cells. Unfortunately, none of the currently available gene delivery vectors carry all of these features; however, many vectors have enough of the attributes to make them promising for clinical use.

Candidate diseases

During the last 4 decades, gene therapy for many diseases has progressed from preclinical to clinical studies; these range from monogenic recessive disorders such as hemophilia and cystic fibrosis to more complex diseases such as cancer, cardiovascular disorders, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), neurological and ocular pathologies. The prevalence of diseases that fall under the scope of gene therapy is enormous and most of them have catastrophic or fatal outcomes. Therefore, gene therapy approach for almost any of the diseases mentioned above has an obvious appeal and rationale. To date, more than 1,540 gene therapy clinical trials have been initiated, and these are continuing or have been completed in 28 countries, using more than 100 genes, including antigens, cytokines, tumor suppressors, growth factors, and deficiency genes [4].

Candidate monogenic disorders that are considered to be good candidates for treatment by gene therapy include the hemoglobinopathies, X-linked genetic disorders, amino acid metabolism disorders, and lysosomal and other storage diseases. Currently, there are more than 4000 monogenic diseases registered in the OMIM database. The ultimate aim in treating monogenic diseases with gene therapy is the correction of the disorder by the stable transfer of the functioning gene into dividing cells (stem/progenitor cells), which will ensure the permanence of the correction [5]. The first recognized successful clinical gene therapy trial involved the treatment of 11 children who suffered from SCID-X1 (Severe Combined Immunodeficiency), an X-linked inherited monogenic disorder caused due to a mutation in the common cytokine receptor gamma chain (γc). In these patients, immunity was not fully developed due to the blocking of T-cell and natural killer cell development as a result of mutation. Unfortunately, the trial in SCID-X1 also exemplified one of the potentially serious side effects of gene therapy. Three of the children developed uncontrolled clonal T-cell proliferation, that is, leukemia, almost 3 years after treatment. This case was associated with the integration of the retroviral vector close to the promoter of the LMO-2 proto-oncogene. As a result, LMO-2 protein expression was up-regulated in an abnormal way and resulted in leukemia [7]. Another candidate monogenic disorder for gene therapy is cystic fibrosis (CF), in which abnormally thick mucus is produced in the lungs of the patients, causing difficulty in breathing and increasing the frequency of serious lung infections. CF is known as the most common inherited genetic disease in Europe and USA, especially within the Ashkenazi Jewish population. The average life expectancy of patients with CF is less than 40 years; hence the treatment of this disease has become one of the prime targets of gene therapy research.

In addition to its use in the treatment of monogenic diseases, gene therapy is also becoming a therapeutic alternative for the treatment of various forms of cancer. Indeed, almost 65% of ongoing clinical trials are related to cancer (more detailed information is available at www.wiley.co.uk/genmed/clinical), an area in which much more promise can be seen; this is also a reflection of the urgent need for new therapies to tackle the escalating incidence of this disease. Several different principles are used to treat cancer, including gene therapy that is targeted at tumor suppressor genes, such as p53, or central signaling molecules, as well as “suicide gene” therapy, in which the transgene is capable of converting pro-drugs (selectively less active drugs) into drugs that are toxic for tumor cells. Furthermore, various gene therapy protocols have been developed to strengthen the host’s anti-tumor immune responses by immunotherapy. Most of these studies have been early clinical trials designed primarily as studies of the safety, applicability, and toxicity of gene therapy. Several of these phase I and II studies have, however, shown partial remission of tumors and, in rare cases, complete remission. However, complete cure of the tumor has not yet been achieved. In some trials, including TP53 gene therapy trials, regression in tumor size has been observed in up to 50% of patients. China has become the first country to license gene therapy as a regular treatment for neck and head cancer; here Gendicine, a replication-defective Ad5 vector expressing p53 from a Rous sarcoma virus (RSV) promoter, is used for therapy [6].

In addition to its applications for cancer and monogenic diseases, gene therapy has become one of the favorite methods in cardiovascular research field. This is in step with the rise in clinical trials for cardiovascular gene therapy from 8.3% to 9.1% during the last few years, becoming the second most popular application for gene therapy. In accordance with the variety and occurrence of cardiovascular diseases, different gene therapy strategies have been developed to tackle each disease on its own terms. The expectation is that gene therapy will provide a new avenue for therapeutic applications in the growth of blood vessels, as well as the protection, regeneration, and repair of heart tissue, the prevention of the reoccurrence of constricted or narrowed arteries following cardiovascular intervention, the prevention of the rejection of a bypass, and risk-factor management [4]. Long-term therapeutic gene expression is required in some diseases, such as hypertension research, where reversal and prevention are the key targets. On the other hand, for some other types of cardiovascular diseases, such as ischemia, atherosclerosis, and restenosis, shorter-term gene control will be sufficient to prevent further progress of the symptoms. Therefore, different gene-therapy vectors have to be considered for the treatment of each specific cardiovascular disorder.

Consequently, gene therapy offers new avenues of treatment for diseases including monogenic disorders, cancer, cardiovascular diseases, infectious pathologies and many more. As we follow the tradition, “God did not send down any illness for which He did not also send a cure (Bukhari)”, gene therapy using either viral, non-viral, or any other novel methods may pave the way for the cure of many diseases that are highly prevalent in the world and which for decades have been perceived as untreatable.

Dr. Ferhat Ozturk is a postdoctoral research associate at University of Nebraska Medical Center.

References

1. Wells DJ. “Gene therapy progress and prospects: electroporation and other physical methods.” Gene Ther. 2004 Sep;11(18):1363-9.
2. Kootstra, N.A. and I.M. Verma, “Gene therapy with viral vectors.” Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol, 2003. 43: p. 413-39.
3. Somia, N. and I.M. Verma, “Gene therapy: trials and tribulations.” Nat Rev Genet, 2000. 1(2): p. 91-9.
4. Edelstein, M.L., M.R. Abedi, and J. Wixon, “Gene therapy clinical trials worldwide to 2007–an update. J Gene Med, 2007. 9(10): p. 833-42.
5. http://www.biomedisch.nl/en/gene_therapy_targeted_diseases.php
6. Peng, Z., “Current status of gendicine in China: recombinant human Ad-p53 agent for treatment of cancers.” Hum Gene Ther, 2005. 16(9): p. 1016-27.
7. Cavazzana-Calvo M, Fischer A, Gene therapy for severe combined immunodeficiency: are we there yet? J Clin Invest. 2007 June. 117(6):1456-65

ATM is currently one of the most attractive technologies in the digital data communications field. In ATM, information is transmitted in short fixed-length blocks that are called cells (Figure 1). An ATM cell consists of a header and a data field that carries the actual information-either video, voice or data. The cell header contains a label denoting the routing address.

Not only was ATM created to overcome the difficulties in existing transfer methods but also to allow the creation of a Broadband Integrated Service Digital Network (B-ISDN).

Transmission speeds up to the physical limits (e.g., 622.05 Mbps signaling rate nowadays) are achievable with ATM. By contrast, there are limitations to the upgrading possible, with the most popular traditional Local Area Network (LAN) topologies (e.g., Ethernet and Token Ring), to higher bandwidth, which means incapacity to support current and of course future real-time applications.

Although the connection-oriented ATM was initially designed for Wide Area Networks (WANs), its unique features including flexibility, scalability, high transfer capacity and support for multimedia applications, also fired the imagination of the LAN vendors in the early 1990s. Since ATM is suitable for both LANs and WANs, historical separation of traditional LANs that are connectionless and WANs that are connection-oriented will eventually disappear. This will form a universal platform for data communications as well as replace the conventional LAN topologies. With full deployment of ATM in design, manufacturing and maintenance of the future networks, the overall costs will be relatively smaller.

The traditional LANs use a shared media-access (e.g. bus) method. That means all stations of the network have to share one transmission medium and have to contend for access. The limitations of shared media-access method are overcome by the ATM’s new approach of switching systems based on central media-access management (Figure 2). Since each user has a dedicated connection to one of the ATM switch ports, users no longer need to contend for access as opposed to the legacy LANs. Moreover ATM LAN users are provided WAN services through another port on the LAN switch. On the other side, the traditional LANs have no direct wide-area capabilities-they must depend on a separate piece of equipment to convert the LAN rates and protocols into WAN-compatible format.

Problems that arise in transmission through the current networks of voice, video and data simultaneously (or in real-time) could well be prevented by using ATM.

With its low-cost networking and technology ATM will soon provide scientist and engineers greater global freedom to exchange data, images (e.g., medical imaging applications) and models in real-time. Beyond the physical boundaries of classrooms, students (especially disabled) will be able to be part of a class and interact with others just as though they were there using high-speed and reliable ATM networks.

GLOSSARY

B-ISDN: A high-speed (above 1.544 Mbps signaling rate) network standard that grew from traditional narrowband ISDN.

Connection-oriented: A network (e.g., WANs) that establishes, either permanently or on a call-by-call basis, a specific circuit path for transmission.

Connectionless: A network (e.g., legacy LANs) in which no particular path is established for the transfer of information.

Ethernet: A LAN using 10 Mbps signaling rate.

LAN: High-speed network connecting personal computers, printers, and other data equipment within an office or campus.

Mbps: Mega bit per second

Token Ring: A LAN using 4 or 16 Mbps signaling rate.

WAN: High-speed network connecting communications equipment nationally and internationally.

References

• PARULKAR G. M.: ‘Local ATM Networks’, IEEE Network March 1993, p.S-9.
• VENIERIS I. S., ANGELOPOULOS J. D. & STASSINOPOULOS G. I.:
• ‘Efficient Use of Protocol Stacks for LAN/MAN-ATM Interworking’, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications October 1993, 11(8) p.1160-1170,.
• KIM B.G. & WANG P.: ‘ATM Network: Goals and Challenges’, Communications of the ACM February 199538 (2), pp. 39-44.
• The ATM Forum: http:/ /www.atmforum.com/

Plant breeding has several other serious limitations for use as a tool to increase disease resistance. There are only a limited number of plant species which are able to cross-fertilize, thus restricting the transfer of potentially useful traits. Moreover, having found useful traits, it is impossible to prevent the co-transfer of undesirable ones, which can take many years to breed out again by back-crossing.

How can genetic engineering be of use in the quest for new answers to the problems of providing plants with the ability to resist disease? The aim of crop plant genetic engineering is to insert a gene (or genes) which improve an existing plant variety whilst retaining the desirable genetic make up of the original plant.

The main tool at the disposal of the scientist is the use of nature’s own genetic engineer, Agro-bacterium tumefaciens. The manipulation of this bacterium’s natural functions has allowed the biologist to transfer many foreign genes into plants. The bacterium is soil-borne and infects plants at the crown, usually through a wound site, causing cancerous growths of proliferating plant cells known as crown gall tumors. This disease in itself is ergonomically important and effects most dicotyledonous plants causing millions of dollars’ worth of damage to plants. In the 1940s, from experimental observations, it was concluded that a factor is transmitted from the invading bacteria to the host plant cell. Further studies demonstrated that the disease is actually the direct result of the transfer of a particular DNA fragment (genes) from the bacterium to the plant cell. In addition to its chromosomal DNA, Agro-bacterium contains a much smaller circular DNA molecule called a Ti (tumor-inducing) plasmodia, of which a small piece, called the T-DNA (Transferred-DNA), is the factor transferred into plant cells (see Figure 1). The T-DNA becomes stably integrated into the plant’s chromosomes, from where it is able to perturb the natural functions of the plant. The T-DNA encodes genes, which, when expressed, bring about the production of new enzymes that are able to alter the hormone balance within the infected cell. This brings about de-differentiation and cell division, leading to proliferation of cells and the formation of tumors. This appears to be of little benefit to the bacterium. However, other genes are also present in the T-DNA which, when expressed, are able to synthesize novel compounds from naturally occurring plant precursors. These novel compounds cannot be metabolized by the plant but are a good source of nutrients for the bacterium.

Mutation analysis of the T-DNA revealed two regions, the left and right borders, which were essential for integration into the chromosome. It was also found that any piece of DNA inserted between these borders was stably inserted into the host chromosome on transformation. Deletion of the genes for tumor formation (Disarmed Ti-Plasmid) were found to have no effect on the transfer efficiency from bacterium to plants. Availability of disarmed Ti-plasmids, tissue culture methods for the regeneration of whole fertile plants from single cells, and marker genes (such as antibiotic resistance) for the selection of transformed cells, have allowed for the production of a whole new range of plants containing foreign genes. Several genes responsible for pathogen and herbicide resistance proteins have been isolated from the bacteria and viruses. These genes have then been inserted into the T-DNA region of Agro-bacterium and introduced into plants, giving rise to insect, virus or herbicide resistant plants.

By using Agro-bacterium as a plant genetic engineer, many crop plants such as the tomato, potato and cucumber have now been engineered for virus resistance. Field tests showed that these genetically modified plants appeared to be highly resistant to viral infections. Similarly genetically-engineered cotton plants have proved to be resistant to insect attack and many herbicides (weed killers).

Another powerful new genetic engineering technique is ‘antigens’ technology, whereby specific gene transcripts are prevented from being translated into proteins. By using antigens technology, it has been possible to produce genetically engineered tomato plants that have a much increased shelf-life. Although many aspects of gene transfer from Agro-bacterium to plants are not fully understood, the use of Agro-bacterium for gene transfer will continue to increase; and it is likely that genetically engineered crops carrying traits for resistance to herbicides, insects and viral diseases will soon reach the market-place.

Technology can be referred to as the systematic knowledge for manufacture of a product, for the application of a process or for the interpretation of a service and the capacity to use such knowledge.1 Today, knowledge or technology is not freely accessible or distributed among nation-states. It is predominantly concentrated in the Western world which is therefore called ‘technologically advanced’. In the industrialized states the majority of knowledge is subject to proprietary rights to prevent the free transfer of technology and sold commercially as ‘intellectual property’.2 Thus, whoever controls technology as an expensive commodity is in a privileged position to influence the international accumulation of wealth. Since the West controls technology, as a solidified form of science, they hold that technology as their most valuable industrial resource and a means to influence other nations’ attempts on the way of development.

For the developing world, technology is an indispensable condition of ecologically sound economic development to catch up with the industrialized world:3 The Third World countries’ backwardness in technology is therefore one of the biggest problems of our time in view of the ongoing ecological destruction. The World Commission on Environment and Development has stated that the promotion of sustainable development requires international exchange of technology – to increase agricultural production, to encourage use of renewable energy systems, and to control pollution.4

Developing countries paid some $ 2 billion in 1980 by way of royalties and fees to industrialized countries who hold 65 per cent of the world patents granted.5 As years pass, the gap in scientific and technological capabilities in, among other things, biotechnology and genetic engineering, new energy sources, new materials and substitutes, and in ecosound technologies, is gradually increasing. Even though the developing countries need the help of the industrialized countries to overcome the economic and ecological problems they face, the latter do not intend to share with the Third World ‘their’ intellectual resources; in other words, they refuse to transfer technology and know-how, however great the need for it.6

What is yours is ours and what’s ours is ours. That would appear to be the philosophy of the technologically advanced states in dealing with the less-developed countries.7 However, as we shall briefly argue below, technology cannot be confined within state boundaries; it is the expression of mankind’s solidarity. It cannot, historically speaking, be the property of a few states; rather, it is the heritage of all mankind which was inherited by our ancestors, regardless of their nationalities.

HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

A look at the past shows that technology is a blend of knowledge acquired and transmitted by various peoples and scholars of different eras and nationalities. A brief account of the contribution of Islamic scientists will clarify this point about human knowledge as a common inheritance.

In the first part of this millennium, Arab Muslims attained the highest levels in pure and applied science, such as medicine, chemistry, astronomy, geography, history, literature, mathematics, engineering, architecture etc. They educated many great scholars, jurists, philosophers in Cordoba, the capital city of the Arab Andalusian state, from the early eighth century on. In Cordoba, the Arabs built the first university of Europe at that time.8 In those days, the Europeans were ignorant of scientific knowledge. The great Christian clergymen of the time learned with the Arabs – for example, Pope Sylvester, who studied in the University of Andalusia.9 They then carried to Europe and spread more widely the knowledge they had obtained. Technical terms such as chemistry geometry, algebra, among many others, as well as the names of particular products (cotton, sugar, coffee, for example) lacked equivalents in the then European languages and had to be adopted directly from the Arabic. Thus, the names of many constellations are of Arabic origin because the relevant knowledge was introduced to the world by the Arab Muslims.

While the Europeans considered the world flat, the Muslims measured the lengths of longitudinal circles in the Sinjar desert near Mosul, and calculated (with results astoundingly similar to the present estimate) the length of the equator.10 Moreover, Western philosophy owes a profound debt to the Arab Muslims who translated the books of ancient Greek and Roman philosophers which the Church authorities of the Middle Ages proscribed. Even books of medicine passed on by the ancient Greek and Roman scientists were burned by the uneducated Christians of the time; the few that survived did so because they were protected and translated into Arabic by Huseyn ibn Johaq of Baghdad, who also translated the works of Aristotle and Plato.11 In sum, Western philosophy and science came into existence as a result of the efforts of the Arab scholars. As even some Western scholars and historians now have the courage to admit, the Renaissance in fact started in the Muslim world of the Middle Ages.

The Frenchman, Jean Ferrera, is an example.12 He confirms in his article that the works of Ptolemy, Euclid and Archimedes were translated from Greek or Latin into Arabic. He adds that the Muslims also transmitted to Europe the concept, initially discovered in India, of zero (the word cipher in many modern European languages is from the Arabic). It was also the Arabs who taught Europe the science of trigonometry. And how many Europeans know that the logarithms they struggled with through school were the invention of Al-Khwarizmi? Only in Islamic universities was every aspect of scientific or technical development freely taught from the ninth to the twelfth century.

Unfortunately, the Ancient and the Muslim scientific and technological heritage was further developed almost exclusively by Europeans who had a different attitude to knowledge, which therefore became their exclusive property. While the Muslim scholars passed on what they inherited, the Western world takes for granted the real roots of its success. Nevertheless, in the last two decades or so, the developing world is seriously demanding that the West share its accumulated scientific and technological know-how with the technologically less-endowed countries which account for three-quarters of the world population. We shall now survey briefly some of the legal efforts of the Third World to achieve this aim.

LEGAL PERSPECTIVE

By the advent of the New International Economic Order in the mid-1970s, the developing countries had started to project their demands through non-binding international documents. Article 13 of the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States, adopted on 12 December 1974 by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 3281 (XXIX), is an instance of such an attempt. By the provisions of Article 13: ‘Every State has the right to benefit from the advances and developments in science and technology for the acceleration of its economic and social development’ (para.1). Succeeding paragraphs fully endorse the promotion of international scientific and technological co-operation and the transfer of technology in order to assist the developing countries to accelerate their economic development. Similarly, Article 9 of the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Peoples adopted in Algeria states: ‘Scientific and technical progress being part of the common heritage of mankind, every people has the right to participate in it.’

Another proposal was recently put forward in Germany. According to its Article 1, ‘unprotected knowledge of normal human intellectual activity belongs to the common heritage of mankind’.13 Article 2 states that ‘this free flow is in the interest of the human, scientific, technological and economic development of the entire international community.’ Article 8 accepts ‘the legitimacy of fair access by developing states to modern technology.’ All in all, the key question is how such proposals could be made into binding legal norms in the near future.

Prof. I Seidl-Hohenveldern, on behalf of developed countries, argues that the common heritage approach ‘cannot be extended to assets which, like patent rights, are the property of an inventor or of his successors in title’.14-15 He rejects the idea that the present-day inventor alone should carry the cost of compensating the inequalities between the rich and the poor states; instead, such inequalities should, he says, be borne by states.

As a matter of fact, the developing countries are not demanding that every bit of technology that the West possesses be made freely available to them. They ask that three kinds of technology in particular be given to them at reasonable cost. These are, first, the transfer of adequate technology to exploit the living and non-living resources of the oceans;16 second, the use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes;17 and finally, protection and preservation of the environment.18

In the face of continuing global environmental crises, that last demand of the developing countries should be taken on board with some urgency in order to protect the life and dignity of the present and future generations. Under-developed countries need expert assistance and transfer of specific technologies to, for example, prevent tropical forest from becoming deserts; to reduce CFC production and emission to the atmosphere; to decrease CO2 emissions by using alternative environmentally-friendly technologies.

CONCLUSION

We have almost entered the post-industrial era in which knowledge has become the most highly valued commodity. Knowledge, alas is kept only in the industrialized world, only a small minority of the world population have access to it, while the majority suffer from ecological and economic problems because of lack of development. The starvation, environmental pollution and low productivity-which we are accustomed to seeing in the developing world – can only be alleviated by mass technology transfer from the rich countries to the poor. The poor cannot get access to the know-how they need because it is over-priced. Therefore, in practice, the West uses technology as a new way of continuing colonialism. The transfer of technology is carried out in an unequal milieu, in which the receiver of technology pays an unnecessarily high price for technology which is often unsuitable or obsolete.19

If the prevailing norms of international protection of intellectual property continue, the gap between North and South will deepen. As confrontation rather than co-operation between the two hemispheres intensifies, there will be widespread starvation. Drought, deforestation, regional conflicts, etc. To prevent these, intellectual property could (and should) be used as a means to bridge the dangerously growing gap, and do so in a relatively short time.20 In the long run, such a policy will benefit the developed industrialized states as well. Technological colonialism can only result in a politically, economically and environmentally more vulnerable and unstable world. For these reasons, the application of the concept of knowledge as the common heritage of mankind. which demands easy access for all to the intellectual properties of the industrialized world, is very timely and necessary. Allowing easy and sometimes cost-free access to mankind’s technological heritage is also a debt owed by the West to the developing countries: not only because the West inherited the intellectual wealth of others in the past, but also because it attracts millions of intellectuals of the developing world, who represent a brain-drain of enormous scale to the great material advantage of the West.21

References

1. YUSUF, Abdulqawi Ahmed, ‘Transfer of Technology’ in BEDJAOUI, Muhammed (ed.), International law: Achievements and Prospects, Martinus Nijhoff Publ., UNESCO, Paris, 1991, p.691.

2. YUSUF, pp.691-2.

3. ibid.

4. World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1987, p.87.

5. ibid.

6. BEDJAOUI, M., Towards A New International Economic Order, UNESCO, Paris, 1979, p.230.

7. ibid.

8. The second university was established in Oxford, England, in 1215, some four centuries later. See, for the Arab civilization, WAQF IKHLAS, Islam and Christianity, Hakikat Kitabevi, Istanbul, 1989, p.192.

9. WAQF IKHLAS, p.213.

10. It was Muhammed bin Musa Harazmi who calculated the attitude of the sun and the length of equator.

11. WAQF IKHLAS, p.216.

12. FERRERA, Jean, ‘Les Universites du Petrole’ (Jan. 1978), p.724. ‘Science et Vie’ (quoted in WAQF IKHLAS, p.215.)

13. The German ILA NIEO proposal, in BULAJIC, M., ‘International Protection of Intellectual Property in the context of the Right to Development: Comment on the German Proposal’ in CHOWDHURY, S.R; ERIK, M.G.D., PAUL, J.I.M., The Right to Development in International Law, Martinus Nijhoff, 1992, p.298.

14. Quoted in BULAJIC, M. International Development Law, Martinus Nijhoff, London, 1986, p.326.

15. However, he also accepts that modern Western technology ‘owes a great debt to medieval Arab thought transmitting and developing the heritage of Ancient Greece’, ibid.

16. See for example Nyhart, J.D., ‘International Law, Technology, and the Implications for Deep Seabed Mining’ in JOYNER, C.C. (ed.) International Law of the Sea and the Future of Seabed Mining, Accent Publ., Virginia, 1975, p.13.

17. YUSUF, p. 702.

18. See Our Common Future, pp. 4-5, 29, 76.

19. BEJAOUI, p.232.

20. BULAJIC, International Protection of Intellectual Property…, p.297.

21. cf. BULAJIC, p.297.