To conserve unique and valuable biological resources -- such as a particular variety of Mexican corn -- and handle transactions ethically, bio-prospecting contracts have been developed. The contracts formalize the relationship and monetary exchange between indigneous peoples who have a particular resource, and private companies, who want samples of the material. But UC Davis community development professor Stephen Brush says that while the intent of such bio-contracting may be to equalize the relationship, the contracts actually provoke more inequities within regions with genetic resources, and fail to achieve the conservation needs. A better way, Brush says, might be to find public and institutional solutions rather than rely on private contracts. "The conservation of genetic resources requires long-term investments in institutions and human capital that are beyond the scope of contracts," Brush says. In the case of agricultural bio-resources, Brush says agricultural research agencies are the appropriate institutions to step in. Brush suggests that industrial countries provide financial assistance targeted toward crop conservation and development efforts, and that specific licensing agreements in commercializing patented genes recognize and compensate germplasm contributions from developing nations. Brush cites the example of the UC Davis-established Genetic Resources Recognition Fund that compensates developing countries that provide commercially valuable genetic resources. Brush's work on biological resources will be published in an upcoming edition of the journal World Development.