Biosafety Policies and Food Security Issues in Africa: How Enhancing?


Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Biosafety Policies and Food Security Issues in Africa: How Enhancing?

  1. 1. Biosafety Policies and Food Security Issues in Africa: How Enhancing? Diran Makinde NEPAD Agency African Biosafety Network of Expertise, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso Presentation at the FARA Science Week Side Event on Sustainable Intensification: A New Paradigm for African Agriculture Accra. Tuesday, 16th July 2:30 – 3:45pm
  2. 2. Issues • Africa, spends btwn $30 billion to $50 billion/year to import food. (Funds needed for infrastructure, social & economic amenities) By 2030 could be up to $150 billion!!! • Prior to 2008 financial crisis, Africa grew faster than most world regions with more than 40 % of its countries with an av annual GDP growth rate of 2.3%-3.8%. • Agric productn increased to 12.3% of GDP in ’09 (Attributed to farm area expansion)
  3. 3. 33  Low soil fertility and poor nutritionLow soil fertility and poor nutrition  Poor varietiesPoor varieties  Poor crop managementPoor crop management  Inappropriate labour saving technologiesInappropriate labour saving technologies  Pests, diseases and weedsPests, diseases and weeds  Post harvest lossesPost harvest losses  Inadequate processing and utilizationInadequate processing and utilization  Shortage of seed and other planting materialsShortage of seed and other planting materials Threats to food security inThreats to food security in AfricaAfrica
  4. 4. And now global warming and climate change….. Models suggest that climate change are positive or neutral at high latitudes but negative at low latitudes Increased CO2 (from the current 385 ppm set to rise to 450ppm) raises some yields H20 limits others Spectrum of pests and disease change Carbon dioxide levels over the last 60,000 years
  5. 5. Transforming African Agriculture • Widespread use of quality farm inputs & technologies – Improved seed - conventional & biotechnology – Fertiliser – Crop protection chemicals – Irrigation – Equipment • Empowered farmers – Training – gain the knowledge, info & skills – Credit – Basic health, education & nutrition • Markets that work – Incentive to invest – Infrastructure that enables trade – Information to make good business decisions • Proactive Policy, Regulatory Reform – Political will and commitment to create and enabling environment51
  6. 6. GM crops approved in SA (AfricaBio, 2012) Crops Year first approved Year first produced Insect – resistant cotton 1997 1998 Insect – resistant maize 1997 1988/1999 Herbicide – tolerant cotton 2000 2001/2002 Herbicide – tolerant soybean 2001 2001/2002 Herbicide – tolerant maize 2002 2003/2004 Stacked cotton (Bt + HT) -Insect resistance -Herbicide resistance 2005 2005/2006 Stacked maize (Bt + HT) 2007 2007/08 Bollgard II cotton (2 Bt genes) 2010 2010 1st CFT was in 1989 and approved according to SAGENE guidelines
  7. 7. Crops Traits % crops planted in SA in 2011 % crops planted in the US in 2011 % crops planted in SA in 2012 Cotton Insect resistance, Herbicide tolerance Stacked traits 100% (1%) 94% 100% 95% Maize Insect resistance, Herbicide tolerance Stacked traits 72% (80%) 88% 86% Soybean Herbicide tolerance 85% (19%) 93% 90% 7 GMOs planted in South Africa (Source: AfricaBio, 2012) Total Area : 2,3M Ha in 2011 to 2,9M Ha in 2012 15 years of growing GM crops and increasing hectares South Africa is the fastest and early adopter of
  8. 8. Projected Economic Benefit Analyses of GM Technology for West Africa TYLCV = Tomato yellow leaf curl virus; DBM = Diamondback moth; SFB = Shoot & fruit borer Country Trait Benefit (US$ Million) Literature Mali Bt (IR) Cotton 7 – 67 Cabanillla et al. 2004 Burkina Faso Bt Cotton 4 – 41 “ Benin Bt Cotton 5 – 52 “ Cote d’Ivoire Bt Cotton 4 – 38 “ Senegal Bt Cotton 1 – 7 “ Benin Bt Cowpea 11 – 50 Gbegbelegbe et al. 2007 Ghana GM Tomato (TYLCV) US$ 920/ha Horna et al. 2008 GM Cabbage (DBM) US$ 1542/ha GM African eggplant (SFB) US$ 1542/ha “
  9. 9. Economic benefit from Bt cotton- B. Faso Source: INERA, 2012 Year Bt area cultivated (ha) Income cf conventionnal Bt/ha (US$) Total income/year (US$ million) 2009 129,000 62.0 7,998 2010 256,000 84.0 21,504 2011 251,000 95.0 23,845
  10. 10. Regulating Risk Assessment Activities of GE crops at the international level -The Convention on Biological Diversity and its Protocol on Biosafety -WTO Agreement on Sanitary & Phytosanitary Measures; - FAO-WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission a Joint FAO/WHO Consultation on Strategies for assessing the safety of foods produced by biotechnology -OECD UNEP International Technical Guidelines for Safety in Biotechnology NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency
  11. 11. Regulatory systems • AU model law widely adopted – Inspired by the Convention on Biodiversity – Poor understanding of the rational for certain provisions – Use as a tool to protect African against “greediness” of multinationals and western world – Vulnerabilities on LMO-FFPs and derived products that can impact trade and adoption of cultivation – UNEP-GEF activities endorsed it frequently Croplife Confidential 11
  12. 12. The Precautionary Principle (PP) in action • The PP has been distorted by activist groups andThe PP has been distorted by activist groups and certain governmentscertain governments • The PP is being used to block adoption of GMOs inThe PP is being used to block adoption of GMOs in the EU, and elsewhere, in a manner inconsistent withthe EU, and elsewhere, in a manner inconsistent with commonly accepted definitions and principles.commonly accepted definitions and principles. • The PP was never intended to be an excuse to doThe PP was never intended to be an excuse to do nothing or to not adopt a technologynothing or to not adopt a technology NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency
  13. 13. PP in action II • When applied correctly PP is an imp principle in assessing the risks arising from technology • Used to identify gaps in knowledge, issues that need further study & the scope for potential harm. • Application has to be contextualized & based on an analysis of data & evidence available, potential harm if the proposed measure is undertaken NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency
  14. 14. Enabling legislative and regulatory frameworks in 1st six biotech adopter nations in Africa (Okeno et al. New Biotechnol. 30, 2013) Country Regulatory Framework Biosafety act/bill Biosafety regulations/guidelines Biotech policy/strategy South Africa Biosafety Act No. 2 1997 GMO Regulations 1999 Draft GMO Regulations 2008 National Biotechnology Strategy 2001 Burkina Faso Biosafety Act 2006 GMO Regulations and guidelines 2004 No stand-alone Biotech Policy Egypt Draft Biosafety Bill 2006 Ministerial Decree No. 136 of 1995 Ministerial Decree No 1648 of 1998 No stand-alone Biotech Policy Kenya Biosafety Act No. 2 2009 Biosafety Regulations 2011 National Biotechnology Policy 2006 Uganda Draft National Biotechnology Safety Bill 2008 CFT Guidelines 2006 National Biotechnology and Biosafety Policy 2008 Nigeria Biosafety Act 2011 Biosafety Guidelines 2001 National Biosafety Policy 2006
  15. 15. The 4 Biosafety Constraints Policy • Too focused on risks; not reflect global experience. • Non-science elements- socio- economic considerations • Strict liability clauses- disincentive • RA requirements out of sync with product dev. • Regulations are typically unaffordable & unenforceable. • National vs regional conflicts Capacity • Poor critical mass of experts- opportunity for loud voices & influencers • Opposing views of development partners Process • Inter-ministerial turf-lack of harmonization. • Limited operational budget • Biosafety law not reconciled with existing laws Practice • Expensive infrastructure for CFTs Trade issues• NEPAD Planning and Coordinating
  16. 16. Constraints in developing Regulatory Framework • Limited institutional capacity- human, financial & institutional • Lack of domestic regulatory policy for testing, release and commercialisatn. • The complexity of the decisions required within a specific time-frame • The problems of public involvement in countries with high levels of illiteracy.
  17. 17. Africa 2012 On-going biotech/GM crops research activities by October 1st 2012
  18. 18. Challenges • Risk of backsliding • Recent govt. decisions not supportive: labeling regulations; GM import ban • No coherent position among govt. agencies; or within key govt. entities such as Public Health; • Elections: a challenge and an opportunity
  19. 19. Challenges to NEPAD Agency ABNE • ABNE is milestone-driven but circumstances are sometimes beyond ABNE’s control – Changing political climate – Policies and laws that are not implementable • Biotechnology is moving forward – demand for regulatory services is outpacing the resources.
  20. 20. Other Challenges • Training of producers • Technology fee • Seed production • Establishment of refugia zones • Co-existence between GM & non-GM • Building research capacity • New pests NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency
  21. 21. Quo vadis (Where do we go from here?) • Operational funding by governments for national biosafety functions; • Donors: funding for regulatory capacity, not just for R&D. • Strategic, coordinated approach to outreach & communication; • Reposition the Biosafety Protocol for what it was intended to be- not the “de facto” reg framework it has become. NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency
  22. 22. “Structural” issues • Capacity at all level (infrastructure, technical staff/ experts / lawyers / regulators / farmers… etc…) • Regional and global trade (free trade areas, access to food aid) • Trans-boundary movement (communities # countries) • Logistic (transportation, audits, monitoring) • Seed laws – certification (poor processes, exemptions…) Croplife Confidential 22
  23. 23. Focus on Africa 23
  24. 24. Situational Reports: Zambia and Malawi Policy Scenario • Zambia implemented 2 very successful input subsidy transfer progr in the 2000s, the Fertilizer Support Progr and the Food Security Pack. Success incurred huge budgetary & admin costs. • 2005/6 Malawi had a successful “smart” subsidy- cannot be sustained.
  25. 25. Implementation of APPROPRIATE REGULATION is a MUST to spur adoption of biotech crops in AFRICA Source :Compiled by Clive James, 2012 2011 (3 countries) South Africa, Burkina Faso and Egypt 2015 (up to 10 countries) South Africa, Burkina Faso, Egypt, Mali, Togo, Nigeria, Kenya, Uganda, Ghana and Malawi EGYPT BURKINA FASO SOUTH AFRICA MALAWIBURKINA FASO TOGO UGANDA SOUTH AFRICA EGYPT KENYA NIGERIA MALI KENYA UGANDA NIGERIA Ongoing Biotech Crop Field Testing GHANA
  26. 26. Conclusion • Effective communication between natural scientists and social scientists; • Questions on socio-economic relevance in biotech need to be answered; • Application of PP should meet policy objectives & help in the understanding of risks, benefits, uncertainties & gaps in knowledge. The opportunities to learn from experience rather than in theory NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency
  27. 27. Conclusion II Sustainability of GMOs in Africa will require: -policy direction; -leadership by govt. agencies to maintain & enforce biosafety compliance; -on-going research by agric. scientists to monitor & assess GMO performance and insect resistance development; -a strong extension network to deliver training & info to producers as appropriate; - Unfair trade issues & the European factor settled; - If Bt cotton success is sustained in Burkina it will serve as a gateway to the future introduction and dev’t of other biotech crops in Africa; having demonstrated the scientific, legal & business infrastructures for GMOs in Africa
  28. 28. Conclusion III • With proper planning African countries can adopt GM crops but not entirely on their own • Strategies for transforming African agric. are on going to address issues of low agric. (R&D) investment & productivity, poor infrastr., application of yield-enhancing technologies, unfavorable policy & regulatory environments & climate change. • When food security increased, nutrition & health improve to promote productivity AD Planning and Coordinating Agency