|
substitutability, etc., add to the complications of economic
evaluations. All these variables make economic valuation of medicinal
plants and plant based drugs more speculative rather than real. Pearce and
Moran (1994) suggest the following criteria for such valuation:
a)
the actual market value of the plants being traded;
b)
the market value of the drugs of which the plants are the source material;
and
c)
the value of the drugs in terms of their life-saving potential, and the
value of ‘statistical life’, which is
estimated to be US$ four million on 1990 prices.
Post-delivery
costs have to be taken into account along with the costs of screening and
pharmacological evaluation. Ruitenbeek (1989) opines that income realised
by inventors is considerably less than ultimate value to the society of a
product. A country’s ability to conduct research within its territory or
it depends upon other countries for this purpose, is also an important
factor.
MODELLING
THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF MEDICINAL PLANTS
Pearce and Moran (1994) discussed models for the determination of the
economic value of medicinal plants in a unit of land. These evaluations
should be seen as the costs of supporting biodiversity. Some important
criteria, in this regard, are considered here.
For
a given area, for example a hectare, the biodiversity supported by that
land has some probability of yielding a successful drug. The market value
of the drug is the total of a) the land use value, b) the cost of
production and marketing the drug and c) the value determined by the
number of lives that drug saves. The relative factor of quantities
available and quantities in demand is also important. Four more
considerations relating to the probability of success, the royalty, rent
capture and the value of drugs need to be critically assessed, as
discussed below:
a)
Probability of success: Principe
(1991) estimated that the probability of any given plant species giving
rise to a successful drug is between one in 10,000 to one in 1,000. The
number of species that are likely to be extinct in the next 50 years or
so, are variedly estimated, but a generally accepted figure is about
60,000 species (Raven, 1988). This means that between six and 60 species
of drug yielding species are likely to be lost during the next half
century. The economic value of these six to 60 species will be the
realisable benefit as medicinal plants, if this use is favoured over the
alternative land uses. Alternative land use values are generally near real
values whereas the plant drug values are only anticipated values.
b)
The royalty: The drug companies
need to pay royalties to the owners of the land and/or of raw material
(whether individuals or organisations or governments), the scientists who
developed the drug and may be a few others.
Basing on the existing agreements, the royalty values vary from five to 20
per cent, though a low figure of 0.05 per cent is considered as usual by
Pearce and Moran (1994).
c)
Rent capture: The annual value of
returns on a specified land area is its rental value, which is different
from its real (sale) value. Comparisons should be made on the rental value
of the same land under alternate uses to determine if using that land area
for medicinal plants is more profitable than the other uses. It is not
normally possible to estimate and recover full rent on the land in use.
Ruitenbeek (1989) considers that rent capture may be as low as 10 per cent
of the expected value.
d)
The value of drugs: Pearce et
al., (1992) suggested valuation of drugs based on their life saving
properties which give the highest values. They also used the value of
statistical life. This and the estimates of Principe (1989, 1991) place
the market value of annual trade in medicinal plants in the world at US$
24.4 billion, estimated on prices related to 1980 (Pearce and Moron,
1994). The 1985 relations of market value of plant based drugs on
prescription in the world are placed at US$ 49.8 billion and the value of
prescription and over-the-counter sales of plant based drugs at US$ 84.3
billion. The current costs are several times the earlier estimates.
Indications are to a continued escalation of costs with time. As far as
India is concerned, such estimates will only be guesstimates, in view of
the numerous variables and uncertainties. Nevertheless, the value of plant
based Indian drugs is far larger than what is currently realised.
VALUE
OF LAND FOR MEDICINAL PLANTS
Rent
capture relates to annual returns. The real value of an area of land is an
important consideration. A serious question that would arise in the
context of medicinal plants, whether they are collected from unused lands
and forests or from cultivation, is the real value of the land in use.
This is because, the owner of the land, whether an individual, a private
organisation or the government, would like to know which of all the
alternative uses of this land would result in a higher rent capture or
whether it is more profitable to dispose of the land altogether to some
interested parties.
Pearce
and Moran (1994) have provided a model for this purpose, taking the
following into consideration:
a)
probability of yield of a successful drug, b)
the amount of royalty, c)
the quantum of rent capture, d)
the market price of the drug (or its shadow value) and the statistical
value of life, e)
the number of species at risk of extinction, f)
the number of drugs based on the plant species in the area, and
g) the quantum (area) of
the land involved.
Taking
into consideration that the approximate area of tropical forests in the
world is a billion hectares, the value of the land ranges from US$ 0.1 to
US$ 21 per hectare. If the long time horizon amount is considered, this
value may go upto $420 in some cases (Pearce and Moran, 1994).
With
such huge financial implications, medicinal plants have naturally become a
globally contentious issue in recent times.
REFERENCES
Abelson, P.H. 1990. Medicine from plants.
Science, 247:513.
Evenson, R.E. 1991. Genetic
resources:assessing economic value. In Valuing environmental benefits
in developing economies. (eds.) Vincent, J., Crawford, E. and Hoehn,
J. Proceedings of Seminar, Michigan State University, special report no.
29.
Findeisen, C. 1991. Natural product
research and the potential role of the pharmaceutical industry in tropical
forest conservation. Rain Forest Alliance, New York.
Laird, S. 1993. Contracts for
biodiversity prospecting. In Biodiversity prospecting:using genetic
resources . (ed.) Reid, W. World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.
Pearce, D. and Moran, D. 1994. The
economic value of biodiversity. Earthscan Publications, London.
Pearce, D., Bann, C. and Georgiou, S.
1992. The social costs of fuel cycles. Centre for social and
economic research on the global environment. University College, London.
Principe, P. 1989. The economic
significance of plants and their constituents as drugs. In Economic and
medical plant research. (eds.) Wagner, H., Hakino, H. and Farnsworth,
N. Academic Press, London.
Principe, P. 1991. Monetising the
pharmacological benefits of plants. US Environmental protection
Agency, Washington, D.C.
Raven, P.H. 1988. Our diminishing
tropical forests. In Biodiversity. (ed.) Wilson, E.O. National
Academy, Washington, D.C.
Reid, W. 1993. Biodiversity
prospecting: using genetic resources for sustainable development.
World Resources Institute, Washingron, D.C.
Ruitenbeek, H.J. 1989. Social cost
benefit analysis of Komp project. Cameroon. WWF report, London.
Sharon, A. 1994. Database of plants
used in gastrointestinal disorders and effects of plant extracts on
pathogenic bacteria. Ph.D. thesis, two vols., Bangalore University,
India.
Shubharani, R. 1995. Plants used in
dental care in India. Ph.D. thesis, two vols., Bangalore University,
India.
|