"A holistic view of the universe, people, institutions and nature"
Published: June 12, 2026 · Türkiye Teknik Bilimler ve İnovasyon Dergisi, Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 14–22 · Review Article
An endemic flower that grows nowhere else on Earth. A sack of bulbs traded for the price of a lamb. And those bulbs crossing a border to be patented in another country's laboratory. It may sound distant — but for Türkiye it is a very real threat.
Two terms matter. Biological smuggling is the illegal physical removal of a country's plants, animals and genetic resources across its borders. Biopiracy is the unauthorised patenting and commercial appropriation of genetic resources or traditional knowledge. The first is an act of taking; the second, an act of claiming.
In my review article published in the Türkiye Teknik Bilimler ve İnovasyon Dergisi, I analyse these activities targeting Türkiye's biodiversity through national and international cases between 2014 and 2026 — documented seizures, the chronological rise of penalties, and comparisons with Kenya, Peru and Ethiopia.
Vascular plant taxa in Türkiye (incl. subspecies and varieties; Güner et al., 2012).
Endemism rate: over 3,400 of ~10,500 vascular plant species occur only in Türkiye.
The 2026 fine for picking an endemic species — about 16× the 42,479 TL of 2017.
The period of cases, penalty trends and international examples examined.
Why is Türkiye such a target? Sitting at the intersection of three phytogeographical regions, it is one of the world's most important genetic-resource centres — and that wealth attracts not only scientific interest but illegal activity.
Are the penalties deterrent? The fine for picking an endemic species rose from 42,479 TL (2017) to 699,245 TL (2026) — roughly a 16-fold increase, with habitat-destruction fines reaching 3.4 million TL. Yet Türkiye still relies on administrative fines: there is no biological-smuggling offence in the Penal Code and no ratification of the Nagoya Protocol — unlike New Zealand, Australia or South Africa, where prison sentences of 2 to 10 years apply.
The conclusion is clear: penalties alone are not enough. Deterrent penalties, international cooperation and public awareness must come together.
Çetin, A. (2026). Biopiracy and Biological Smuggling in Türkiye: Case Analysis, Penalty Trends and Conservation Strategies (2014–2026). Türkiye Teknik Bilimler ve İnovasyon Dergisi, 2(1), 14–22.
Review Article · Permanent link: https://izlik.org/JA65GJ49NC
This page is a summary of the author's peer-reviewed article (published in English). The full Turkish text and the original article are available via the links above.
Researcher and consultant in botany, ecology and holistic education. Conducts field and academic work on combating biological smuggling and on endemic flora.
About me →📌 How to cite this article:
Çetin, A. (2026). Biopiracy and Biological Smuggling in Türkiye: Case Analysis, Penalty Trends and Conservation Strategies (2014–2026). Türkiye Teknik Bilimler ve İnovasyon Dergisi, 2(1), 14–22. https://izlik.org/JA65GJ49NC
📚 More from Abdullah Çetin:
Stay informed about new blog posts and services.
🍪 This site uses Google Analytics cookies to improve your experience. See our Privacy Policy for details.