The Use of GM Crops in Developing Countries
Conclusion
6.12 We observed in the 1999 Report that the agrochemical and seed industries were tightly consolidated around a small number of multinational companies. We noted that further consolidation might not be in the public interest and we recommended that the relevant competition authorities keep the sector under close review. Since then, AstraZeneca and Novartis have merged to form Syngenta and Aventis CropScience has merged with Bayer to form Bayer CropScience. With regard to markets in developing countries, Monsanto has, for example, increased its share of the Brazilian maize market from zero to 60% in just two years. Only one Brazilian company remains, which has a 5% share of the market.12 In anticipation of such developments, we emphasised in our 1999 Report that farmers in developing countries should retain the capacity to choose between growing either new improved seed from the companies or improved seed from national breeding programmes or the CGIAR centres.
6.13 It has been argued that the growth of patent claims in both the public and private sectors could have an inhibiting effect on research. The challenge for the public sector, especially where research is directed at agriculture in developing countries, is how to access GM technologies without infringing IPRs. In addition, they must decide on the way in which their own technologies will be made available.
6.14 New initiatives which recognise the potential of these constraints to inhibit research into crops relevant to developing countries are therefore particularly welcome. Several US universities are now finding that the exclusive licensing of their technologies has deprived them of access to their own inventions. The Public Intellectual Property Resource for Agriculture (PIPRA) is a recent initiative which aims to promote licensing strategies in US universities that encourage retention of rights to their own technologies.13 These rights can be exercised for non-profit purposes or for the development of crops especially suited to the needs of developing countries.
6.15 The recent establishment of the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF) also seeks to address IP issues in agriculture, relevant to the needs of developing countries.14 Together with similar activities organised by the ISAAA, the AATF will create partnerships with existing organisations. It will transfer materials and knowledge associated with advanced agricultural technologies that are privately owned by companies and other research institutions, on a royalty-free basis.15 The AATF will focus on improvements that can be achieved by genetic modification of crops relevant to small-scale African farmers. These include cowpeas, chickpeas, cassava, sweet potatoes, bananas and maize. It has secured support from four of the leading multinational agrochemical companies which have agreed to share patent rights, seed varieties and expertise with African researchers.16 The AATF also intends to negotiate with other companies for support as well as for licences to important patents.17
6.16 As we have noted, the majority of successful applications of GM crops have been developed by industry for commercial agriculture in developed countries (see paragraphs 3.21-3.25 and 3.27). In contrast, most research on GM crops that may have potential for developing countries continues to be undertaken by publicly-funded organisations. A major concern which we expressed in our 1999 Report was the neglect of a serious issue: the risk that gains from GM crops will not be brought to bear on the needs of poor people in developing countries. We also concluded that GM crop technology was unduly concentrated on the crops and farm systems of industrialised countries. The role of the CGIAR in research on GM crops is strategically important. But funding for the CGIAR has fallen in real terms since 1990. Although it spends about US$360 million per year, less than 10% is directed to research on the genetic modification of crops. We therefore affirm the recommendation made in our 1999 Report that genuinely additional resources be committed by governments, the European Commission and others, to fund a major expansion of GMrelated research into tropical and sub-tropical staple foods.
6.17 Furthermore, as one respondent to our Consultation observed: ‘The priorities for the development of GM crops seem to be set by institution and/or organisations outside of Africa that may not necessarily address on-farm constraints of major importance. And currently very few countries outside of South Africa have the capacity to develop GM crops. Africa at least needs to develop an inventory of intractable constraints of major food and commercial crops that need urgent attention. Regional bodies such as FARA, CORAF, ASARECA and SADC/FANR18 might best draw up a list of such constraints and seek funding to develop the capacity necessary for the evaluation of GM crops in Africa.’ Dr Kanayo F Nwanze, Director General, WARDA - The Africa Rice Centre
We endorse this suggestion and recommend that those sponsoring research, in determining which traits in which crops should be developed, be proactive in consulting with national and regional bodies in developing countries to determine priorities for research.
Footnotes12 Commission on Intellectual Property Rights (2002) Integrating Intellectual Property Rights and Development Policy (London: CIPR).
13 See http://www.pipra.org/.
14 See http://www.aftechfound.org/index.php.
15 Conway G (2003) From the Green Revolution to the Biotechnology Revolution: Food for Poor People in the 21st Century. Speech at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Director’s Forum. 12 March 2003. Available: http://www.rockfound.org/documents/566/Conway.pdf. Accessed on: 10 Oct 2003; see also: ISAAA The Papaya Biotechnology Network of Southeast Asia, http://www.isaaa.org/Projects/SEAsia/transfer.htm. Accessed on: 31 Oct 2003.
16 Monsanto, DuPont, Syngenta and Dow AgroSciences.
17 Gillis J (2003) To feed hungry Africans, firms plant seeds of science, Washington Post 11 March 2003.
18 FARA – Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa, CORAF – West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development, ASARECA – Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa, SADC – South African Development Community and FANR – Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Development Unit in Harare, Zimbabwe.