Perspectives on intellectual property rights and regulation of agricultural biotechnologies

1. PerspectivesofIntellectualPropertyRightsand
RegulationofAgricultureBiotechnologies
• Barbara Ntambirweki
• Research Fellow
• Advocates Coalition for Development and Environment
• (ACODE)
• Uganda

2. Outline of the presentation
1.Intellectual Property Rights and Agricultural biotechnology
2.IPR and TRIPS Agreement
3.IPRs: Implications to farmers
4.Regulation of Agricultural Biotechnologies
5.Conclusions

3. Intellectual Property Rights and
Agricultural Biotechnology
Agriculture Biotechnology involves genetic modification with
potential benefits:
• improving agricultural yields,
• increasing resistance to crops and pests,
• improving productivity and reducing pesticide use.
To promote research and development Intellectual Property
Rights (IPR):
• IPRs are patents, plant variety protection, copyrights and trademarks are
monopoly rights for an innovation for a specified period of time.
• A tool used to stimulate research and a way of recouping investment
• Examples of IPRs granted on Agriculture biotechnology include; GM
traits, seed, germplasm, sequences and agrochemicals.

4. IPRs: TRIPS Agreement
TRIPS Agreement changed the importance of IPRs in
developing countries:
• by requiring all WTO members to introduce minimum level of
protection in national laws. (Article 27 3(b) of the TRIPS
Agreement.
TRIPS Agreement determines cases in which patents must be
granted obliging countries to grant patents for all forms of
technology including biotechnology provided patentability
criteria are met
Article 27.3(b) for the first time obliged WTO members to
provide patents on life and plant variety protection.
Least Developed Countries are however exempted.
The most contentious aspect of IPRs is it has negatively affected traditions
of farmers right to freely use, save, sell farm saved seed. It creates risks and
liabilities whether they choose GMO or not.

5. IPRs:Implicationsto Farmers
IPRs violate the spirit of farmers right to use, save, exchange and sell farm
saved seed and set a precedent for violation.
In countries that have adopted PVP laws seed companies mandate use of
grower agreements to prevent farmers from saving and sharing seed from
their harvest.
• IPR foster over dependence on foreign companies.
• Multinational companies can rapidly take control of the seed sector e.g 10
Companies own 65% of the worlds proprietary seed for major crops e.g
Monsanto, DuPont, Sygenta among others.
IPR threatens food security and agro-biodiversity

6. IPR: Implications to Farmers 2
 IPR impacts the right to food, livelihoods( because they are prevented from selling seed) and
access to seeds.
 Farmers will be unable to afford patented technology due to increased seed costs
• The difference in cotton seed prices in Burkina Faso for Bt Cotton seed is priced at USD 60 per hectare far
above conventional seed cost of USD2 per hectare (Based on prices in 2008/2009 growing season- Dowd
Tribe 2014
• The WEMA project for example will provide small scale farmers seeds royalty free however will be sold to
commercial farmers at a higher price as the “royalty free” aspect will not apply.
• Issues surrounding access to national germplasm and patenting germplasm that they develop. These aspects
are stipulated in the WEMA Intellectual Property Policy.

7. Regulation of Agricultural
Biotechnology
One of the key questions: Do African countries have effective
regulatory and monitoring regimes necessary to manage
potential, social, environmental risks?
In some East African Countries - Kenya, Uganda for example;
the development of biotechnologies and the development of
policies took place concurrently

8. Governance of Agricultural
biotechnology
To deal with risks associated with agricultural biotechnology,
key elements should are required for the basis of regulation of
agricultural biotechnologies:
• Precautionary Principle should be the guiding principle as enshrined in
Cartagena Protocol.
• Risk Assessment and Management is paramount in governance on
agricultural biotechnology.
• Risk Assessment should be mandatory to assess and determine the impacts
and risks posed by GMO to the environment, health and biological diversity.
• Principle of Prior informed Consent
The socioeconomic assessment should include:
• ethical and social impact of the process to the concerned local populations
• traditional market and export earnings
• actual and economic value of traditional species and how they will be
affected by the introduction of genetically modified crops

9. Governance of Agricultural
Biotechnologies
Adequate liability and redress mechanisms
Clear rehabilitation and compensation mechanisms
Strict liability principle should be embedded in the law
to operationalize the precautionary principle.
Consider other alternative approaches in responsible
governance of biotechnologies to attain sustainable food
systems and improve nutrition
Involvement, engage and acknowledge actors of a wide
range of actors in key including:
• different scientific disciplines,
• farmers,
• civil society and citizens.

10. Conclusions
 Balance the potential benefits of Agriculture biotechnologies and
deal with potential social, environmental and human health risks.
Biotechnology alone will not solve the problems.
Strengthen legal recognition of Farmers’ rights to ensure
conservation of biological diversity in Agriculture and food security
Promote farmers’ access to seeds in order to guarantee the right to
food. States must ensure obligation to protect and guarantee right
to food.
Develop consensus to strike a balance between interests of private
sector and interests of farmers.
Enact farmer protection laws to protect farmers from patent
holders.

11. Thank you!