FAO's Role in Agricultural Biotechnology by Amgalan Ariunbold, FAORAP, Thailand

1. FAO’s Role in Agricultural
Biotechnology
Amgalan Ariunbold
Plant Production Specialist
FAO Regional Office for
Asia and the Pacific

2. Content
 Background – FAO
 FAO’s Role in Biotechnology
 Brief info on Asia-Pacific Regional Study on
Agricultural Biotechnologies
 Further actions

3. Who is FAO
The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
is specialized agency of the United Nations that
leads international efforts to defeat hunger.
Our goal is to achieve food security for all and
make sure that people have regular access to
enough high-quality food to lead active, healthy
lives.

4. What we do
To meet the demands posed by major global trends in
agricultural development and challenges faced by
member nations, FAO has identified key priorities on
which it is best placed to intervene:
1.Help eliminate hunger, food insecurity and malnutrition
2.Make agriculture, forestry and fisheries more productive
and sustainable
3.Reduce rural poverty
4.Enable inclusive and efficient agricultural and food systems
5.Increase the resilience of livelihoods to threats and crises

5. How we work
FAO's activities comprise five main areas:
1.Putting information within reach and supporting the
transition to sustainable agriculture
2.Strengthening political will and sharing policy
expertise
3.Bolstering public-private collaboration to improve
smallholder agriculture
4.Bringing knowledge to the field
5.Supporting countries prevent and mitigate risks

6. FAO and Biotechnology
FAO uses a broad definition for biotechnology,
based on Article 2 of the Convention on
Biological Diversity, - "any technological
application that uses biological systems,
living organisms, or derivatives thereof,
to make or modify products or processes
for specific use".

7. Genomics
Genetic engineering
Increasing complexity
Traditional biotechnology
Modern biotechnology
New food and industrial items
Bioinformatics
R-DNA technology
Cell culture
Monoclonal/polyclonal antibodies
Embryo transfer
Plant tissue culture
Microbial fermentation
Biotechnology crops,
microbes and animals
Detection and diagnostic kits
New plant varieties

8. FAO and Biotechnology
FAO considers that the application of science
and technology, including agricultural
biotechnologies, is one essential option that
can play a substantial role in providing
solutions to the unprecedented challenges of
feeding an expanding world population in the
face of climate change.

9. FAO and Biotechnology
 FAO is an intergovernmental organization and has
194 Member Nations, present in over 130 countries.

10. FAO and Biotechnology
Therefore, regarding agricultural biotechnology, FAO
assists its member countries and their institutions by:
Offering them a neutral forum to discuss policy and
technical issues related to biotechnology
Providing them with legal and technical advice
Assisting them to develop their capacities in
agricultural biotechnologies and related issues
Providing them with access to high quality, balanced
and science-based information

11. Offering them a neutral forum to discuss
policy and technical issues related to biotechnology
The FAO International Symposium on “The Role of Agricultural
Biotechnologies in Sustainable Food Systems and Nutrition” was held in
February 2016 at FAO Headquarters, Rome.
Slide: 11
The objective of the Symposium
was to explore the application of
biotechnologies for the benefit of
family farmers in developing
sustainable food systems and
improving nutrition in the context of
unprecedented challenges.

12. Offering them a neutral forum to discuss
policy and technical issues related to biotechnology
As a follow-up to the International Symposium, FAO organized 2 Regional
Meetings in the Asia-Pacific and Sub –Saharan Africa, in September &
November 2017
Slide: 12

13. Providing them with legal and
technical advice
 FAO assists Member countries in
establishing priorities for biotechnology within
the broad context of their agricultural
research needs and policies or in identifying
appropriate biotechnologies
 FAO assisted a number of countries to
develop their national biotechnology policies
and strategies at their request.

14. Providing them with legal and
technical advice

15. Providing them with legal and
technical advice
 At the request of governments, FAO also
advises on project development. For
example: projects on disease prevention and
diagnosis in Southeast Asia in the fishery
sector.

16. Assisting them to develop their capacities in
agricultural biotechnologies and related issues
 Upon request, FAO provides technical assistance in
building or strengthening national biotechnology and
biosafety capacities,
– development and implementation of regulations,
– training of scientists and personnel of regulatory bodies,
– communication and public participation in biosafety-related
decision making,
– upgrading of laboratory capacities, and
– establishing effective linkages among all relevant
stakeholders

17. Providing with access to high quality,
balanced and science-based information
 The internet, e-mail conferences and
newsletters
 Access to articles, books, glossaries,
proceedings and studies published by FAO
concerning biotechnologies in food and
agriculture

18. Providing with access to high quality,
balanced and science-based information
For example: Produced 4 short videos with real
examples of biotechnologies being applied to meet the
needs of smallholders in Asia-Pacific in 2017.
-artificial insemination and semen sexing in dairy cows for milk
production in Nepal;
-DNA-based diagnostics and probiotics for disease management
in shrimp populations in Thailand;
-DNA marker-assisted selection to develop Swarna-Sub1, a rice
variety tolerant to floods in India; and
-tissue culture for propagating tree planting stock for agroforestry
in Thailand. Videos were uploaded on FAO website.

19. 4 short videos with real examples
of biotechnologies

20. Providing with access to high quality,
balanced and science-based information
 The FAO carried out a study on “The State of
Application, Capacities and the Enabling
Environment for Agricultural Biotechnologies
in the Asia-Pacific Region” in 2017.
 The study covered 43 countries in Asia and
the Pacific.

21. Study on “The State of Application, Capacities and
the Enabling Environment for Agricultural
Biotechnologies in the Asia-Pacific Region”
 The study indicates that there is significant
divergence among the countries and within
the sub-regions of Asia-Pacific in the levels
of application of agricultural biotechnologies
as well as in their capacities to develop them
and in their existing enabling environments.

22. Categorization of countries in the Asia-Pacific
region in terms of application of biotechnologies
Category Crop Livestock
Very low use Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, Cook
Islands, Kiribati, Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea, Maldives, Mongolia,
Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated
States of), Nauru, Niue, Palau, Samoa,
Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tonga,
Tuvalu, Vanuatu (18)
Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea, Maldives,
Marshal Islands, Micronesia (Federated
States of), Mongolia, Myanmar, Nauru,
Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea,
Samoa, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste,
Tonga, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu
(20)
Low use Bhutan, Cambodia, Lao People’s
Democratic Republic, Uzbekistan (4)
Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam,
Bhutan, Cambodia, Kazakhstan, Lao
People’s Democratic Republic,
Philippines (7)
Medium use Fiji, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Myanmar,
Nepal, Sri Lanka, (6)
Indonesia, Nepal, Singapore, Sri Lanka
(4)
High use Bangladesh, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic
Republic of), Malaysia, Pakistan,
Philippines, Thailand, Viet Nam (8)
Bangladesh, Iran (Islamic Republic of),
Malaysia, New Zealand, Pakistan,
Thailand, Viet Nam (7)
Very high use Australia, China, India, Japan, Republic
of Korea, New Zealand, Singapore (7)
Australia, China, India, Japan, Republic
of Korea, New Zealand (6)

23. Categorization of countries in the Asia-Pacific
region in terms of application of biotechnologies
Category Forestry Fisheries/Aquaculture
Very low use Afghanistan, Cook Islands, Bhutan,
Maldives, Marshall Islands, Micronesia
(Federated States of), Nauru, Niue, Palau,
Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon
Islands, Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu,
Uzbekistan, Vanuatu (17)
Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Cook Islands,
Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea, Lao People’s
Democratic Republic, Marshal Islands,
Maldives, Micronesia (Federated States
of), Mongolia, Myanmar, Nauru, Niue,
Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa,
Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tonga,
Tuvalu, Uzbekistan, Vanautu (23)
Low use Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Kiribati, Lao
People’s Democratic Republic, Mongolia (5)
Afghanistan, Fiji
Medium use Bangladesh, Fiji, Iran (Islamic Republic of),
Kazakhstan, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan,
Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Viet Nam
Bangladesh, Cambodia, Indonesia, Iran
(Islamic Republic of), Nepal, Pakistan,
Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand
High use Australia, India, Indonesia, Republic of
Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Thailand
Malaysia, New Zealand, Viet Nam
Very high use China, Japan (2) Australia, China, India, Japan, Republic of
Korea (5)

24. State of application of agricultural
biotechnologies- Main gaps identified
 Uneven adoption of technologies across countries and across sectors.
This is a cause for concern as this indicates that the technologies
might not have been adopted by those who need them most.
 Underutilization of the potential in some technologies such as tissue
culture and MAS indicates that issues such as technical difficulties,
lack of extension and lack of capacity have to be addressed. In
livestock, fisheries and aquaculture a main gap is lack of capacity to
adopt medium- and high-level technologies. An important issue is
whether the public sector and extension services are well-enough
equipped to harness the potential of technologies.
 Lack of collaborations and issues in technology absorption appear to
be important gaps, although these aspects were not studied in detail.

25. Categorization of countries in the Asia-Pacific region in
terms of capacity to develop and apply biotechnology
Category Crop Livestock
Very low
capacity
Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, Cook
Islands, Kiribati, Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea, Maldives. Mongolia,
Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated
States of), Nauru, Niue, Palau, Samoa,
Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tonga,
Tuvalu ,Vanatu (18)
Cook Islands, Kiribati, Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea, Maldives,
Mongolia, Myanmar, Timor-Leste,
Marshal Islands, Micronesia
(Federated States of), Nauru, Niue,
Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa,
Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu,
Vanuatu (18)
Low capacity Bhutan, Cambodia, Lao People’s
Democratic Republic, Uzbekistan
Afghanistan, Bhutan, Brunei
Darussalam, Cambodia, Fiji,
Kazakhstan, Lao People’s Democratic
Republic, Philippines, Uzbekistan,
Medium
capacity
Fiji, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Myanmar,
Nepal, Sri Lanka
Bangladesh, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic
Republic of), Nepal, Pakistan,
Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand
High capacity Bangladesh, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic
Republic of), Malaysia, Pakistan,
Philippines, ThailandViet Nam,
Malaysia, New Zealand, Viet Nam,
Very high
capacity
Australia, China, India, Japan, Republic
of Korea, New Zealand, Singapore (7)
Australia, China, India, Japan,
Republic of Korea (5)

26. Categorization of countries in the Asia-Pacific region in
terms of capacity to develop and apply biotechnology
Category Forestry Fisheries/Aquaculture
Very low capacity Afghanistan, Cook Islands, Marshall
Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of),
Nauru, Niue, Palau, Samoa, Tonga,
Tuvalu, Uzbekistan (11)
Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Cook
Islands, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea, Lao People’s
Democratic Republic, Maldives, Marshal
Islands, Micronesia (Federated States
of), Mongolia, Myanmar, Nauru, Niue,
Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa,
Singapore, Solomon Islands, Tonga,
Timor-Leste, Tuvalu, Uzbekistan,
Vanuatu (24)
Low capacity Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia,
Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Maldives, Mongolia,
Nepal, Papua New Guinea, Solomon
Islands, Timor-Leste, Vanuatu
Afghanistan, Cambodia, Fiji, Nepal
Medium capacity Bangladesh, Fiji, Iran (Islamic Republic of),
Lao People’s Democratic Republic,
Myanmar, Pakistan, Philippines,
Singapor,e Sri Lanka, Viet Nam
Bangladesh, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic
Republic of), Pakistan, Philippines, Sri
Lanka, Thailand
High capacity Indonesia, Republic of Korea, Malaysia,
New Zealand, Thailand
Malaysia, New Zealand, Viet Nam
Very high
capacity
Australia, China, India, Japan (4) Australia, China, India, Japan, Republic
of Korea (5)

27. State of capacities for developing and applying
agricultural biotechnologies- Main gaps identified
 Lack of institutional capacity and lack of human resources in
terms of both numbers and expertise and skills are the major
gaps that constrain overall capacity in biotechnologies in the
region.
 Although there are international collaborative programmes in
the region, they alone are not sufficient to address all
weaknesses in capacity in the region and have to be expanded
in scope and coverage.
 Capacity is lacking in both the public sector and the private
sector. Public-sector capacity has to be enhanced through
public investment, while development of the private sector’s
capacity can be encouraged through policy interventions.

28. Categorization of countries in terms of enabling
environment
Category Crop Livestock
Low Afghanistan, Brunei Darussalam, Cook
Islands, Kiribati, Democratic People’s
Republic of Korea, Maldives. Marshall
Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of),
Mongolia, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Samoa,
Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tonga,
Tuvalu, Vanatu (18)
Cook Islands, Kiribati, Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea, Maldives,
Marshal Islands, Micronesia (Federated
States of), Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua
New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands,
Timor-Leste, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu (15)
Very low Bhutan, Cambodia, Kazakhstan, Lao
People’s Democratic Republic, Uzbekistan
Afghanistan, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam,
Cambodia, Fiji, Lao People’s Democratic
Republic, Mongolia, Myanmar,
Kazakhstan, Singapore, Uzbekistan
Medium Fiji, Indonesia, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic
Republic of), Nepal, Philippines,
Singapore, Thailand
High Bangladesh, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic
Republic of), Malaysia, Pakistan,
Philippines, Thailand, Viet Nam
Malaysia, New Zealand, Viet Nam
Very high Australia, China, India, Japan, Republic of
Korea, New Zealand, Singapore (7)
Australia, China, India, Japan, Republic of
Korea (5)

29. Categorization of countries in terms of enabling
environment
Category Forestry Livestock
Low Nauru, Tonga, Tuvalu (3) Democratic People’s Republic of Korea,
Lao People’s Democratic Republic,
Myanmar Timor-Leste (4)
Very low Afghanistan, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam,
Cook Islands, Kazakhstan, Kiribati, Maldives,
Marshall Islands, Micronesia (Federated
States of), Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea,
Samoa, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste,
Uzbekistan, Vanuatu (17)
Afghanistan, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam,
Cook Islands, Cambodia, Fiji, Kazakhstan,
Kiribati, Maldives, Mongolia, Marshal
Islands, Micronesia (Federated States of),
Nauru, Nepal, New Guinea, Niue, Palau,
Papua, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga,
Tuvalu, Vanuatu, Uzbekistan
Medium Bangladesh, Cambodia, Fiji ,Iran (Islamic
Republic of), Lao People’s Democratic
Republic, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal,
Pakistan, Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka,
Viet Nam
Bangladesh, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic
Republic of), Malaysia, Pakistan,
Philippines, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Thailand
High China, India, Indonesia, Republic of Korea,
Malaysia, New Zealand, Thailand
New Zealand, Viet Nam
Very high Australia, Japan (2) Australia, China, India, Japan, Republic of
Korea (5)

30. State of the enabling environment for developing
and applying agricultural biotechnologies- Main
gaps identified
 Lack of policy measures to promote
biotechnology in different sectors
 Lack of sector-specific strategies.
 Insufficient human resources and other core
capacities
 Reliance on collaborations to compensate for
lack of internal capacities

31. Key points from the study
 Agricultural biotechnologies are well entrenched in the Asia-
Pacific region
 Significant differences among countries in their application of
biotechnology in all four agricultural sectors: crops, livestock,
fisheries and forestry. their use is expanding
 The state plays a key role in promoting agricultural
biotechnologies in many countries, with the public sector
leading in agricultural R&D. The private sector is a key player
in some countries where market forces are very active.
 Capacity building and collaboration are necessary for many
LDCs and island states so that they are able to harness
agricultural biotechnologies.

32. Providing with access to high quality,
balanced and science-based information
 Same study on the State of Application,
Capacities and the Enabling Environment for
Agricultural Biotechnologies was carried out
in Sub-Saharan African (SSA) Region in
2017. The study covered all 39 SSA
countries

33. Possible further actions
 Creation of a knowledge platform on
agricultural biotechnologies
 Promote public-private partnership and
South-South Cooperation for agricultural
biotechnologies
 Improve technology transfer in the Pacific
countries