RESISTING CORPORATE TAKEOVER OF AFRICAN SEED SYSTEMS AND BUILDING FARMER MANAGED SEED SYSTEMS FOR FOOD SOVEREIGNTY IN AFRICA 2017 - AFSA
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Resisting corporate takeover of
African seed systems and building
farmer managed seed systems
for food sovereignty in Africa
2017
Resisting corporate takeover of
African seed systems and building
farmer managed seed systems for
food sovereignty in Africa
Citation: AFSA. (2017). Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building
farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa. Kampala, Uganda.
This report was prepared by Haidee Swanby and Sasha Lagrange-Mentz on behalf of AFSA.
It is part of an AFSA series of three continental policy studies, focusing on Land Rights,
Agroecology, and Seed Sovereignty. These reports were published with the financial support
of Bread for the World, The Tudor Trust, The AgroEcology Fund, and The Swift Foundation.
The Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa brings together small-scale food producers,
pastoralists, fisherfolk, indigenous peoples, farmers’ networks, faith groups, consumer
associations, youth associations, civil societies and activists from across the continent of
Africa to create a united and louder voice for food sovereignty.
www.afsafrica.org
Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa 3
4 Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Seed is an important entry point for development are deemed to be unproductive and unreliable, thereby
interventions that can potentially deliver an array of causing hunger. An array of stakeholders with vested
benefits for smallholders, including improved nutrition interests are pushing these policy processes at national
and food security, livelihoods, environmental benefits and levels, as well as implementing projects to harmonise
resilience to climate change. Seed and agriculture also play policies through regional bodies in order to create larger
an important role in community cohesion and culture in markets to operate in and to reduce the regulatory
many African societies. The way that seed is considered hurdles and costs involved in registering, certifying and
through policy, funding and project implementation has diffusing seed.
a profound impact on the shape of agro-food systems,
nutrition, socio-economic systems, social justice and The implementation of these policies and laws are
environment. One of the most striking findings of this designed to profoundly transform African agricultural
research is the prevalence and power of a particular systems right from the roots and create what the
narrative that runs through international policy, through International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food (IPES-
national governments and development agencies and all Food) call a “path dependency” to lock the continent into
the way to the grassroots, that asserts that it is crucial to industrial agriculture. These seed-related laws privilege
replace farmers’ varieties with improved varieties, and seed bred to yield in industrial agriculture systems while
to ‘modernise’ African agriculture in order to deal with eroding Farmer Managed Seed Systems (FMSS) through
hunger on the continent. This approach is embedded a number of means, such as criminalising the trade of
within a ‘Green Revolution’ logic that assumes that access farmers’ varieties and reshaping public funding and
to and use of improved varieties and related inputs will research agendas to suit the needs of the seed industry.
lead to greater yields, which will lead to increased income Ill-conceived seed aid interventions and other agricultural
and food security. However, the narrow focus on yield development programmes, such as Farmer Input Subsidy
and productivity and the lack of acknowledgement of the Programmes (FISPs), go hand in hand with this approach,
multifunctional nature of seed and agriculture in Africa has displacing FMSS and eroding farmers’ autonomy, skills and
resulted in blindness to the potential impacts of this model agricultural diversity.
on socio-economic systems, food security, health, social
justice, environment and culture. Three regional bodies – the African Regional Intellectual
Property Association (ARIPO), its French counterpart
Two seed related policy processes are being advanced OAPI, and the Southern African Development Community
under the guise of this ‘feed the world’ narrative: (SADC), have implemented harmonised PVP laws, which
taken together represent 42 African countries. The East
1) the implementation of plant variety protection (PVP) African Community (EAC) has signalled its commitment
regimes that are strongly skewed in favour of breeders’ to beginning a similar process. Pressure is also exerted
rights over farmers’ rights to attract investment from the at national level for countries to implement local PVP
private seed industry - based on the International Union frameworks based on UPOV 1991.
for Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) 1991
Convention; There has already been substantial work carried out
by AFSA members and others players in resisting
2) tightening or development of seed trade laws that UPOV-style PVP regimes at national and regional levels.
privilege ‘improved varieties’ on the market and severely This work has included analysis of the laws, capacity
restrict the trade and exchange of farmers’ varieties, which building and the development of campaigning materials,
Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa 5
national and regional advocacy including substantial use of plant genetic resources for agriculture (PGRFA). The
submission on policies, attendance at relevant decision- ITPGRFA’s implementing programme, the Second Plan of
making fora and media work. A key focus at the moment Action, aims to provide support at national level for a wide
is lobbying member states of ARIPO not to sign or ratify range of activities that could support the strengthening of
ARIPO’s Arusha Protocol for the Protection of New Varieties FMSS, including work on in-situ and ex-situ conservation,
of Plants, which was adopted in July 2015. The Protocol will sustainable use of PGFRA including support for plant breed-
come into force once four countries ratify. In December ing and diversification of crop varieties for sustainable agri-
2016 the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, Dr culture and support for seed production and distribution,
Hilal Elver, gave her support for this campaign when she and building human and institutional capacity. Unfortunate-
wrote an open letter to ARIPO member states warning of ly, despite the fact that the majority of African governments
the potential impact the Arusha Protocol and similar PVP are signatories to the ITPGRFA, there is a lack of political will
regimes modelled on UPOV 91 will have on the right to food. to domesticate Farmers’ Rights legislation at national level
or to engage with programmes focussed on promoting the
In terms of harmonisation of seed trade laws, three West sustainable use of plant genetic resources.
African regional economic communities (RECs) have
harmonised their regulations – the Economic Community of Many organisations are working intensely at grassroots lev-
West African States (ECOWAS), West African Economic and el supporting and building FMSS, for example through com-
Monetary Union (WAEMU) and the Economic Community munity and household seed banks, seed caravans and fairs.
of West African States (CLISS). In addition, SADC and This work is currently being carried out in a policy vacuum
COMESA and have each implemented harmonised seed and within the ‘grey areas’ of the law because while policy
trade regulations. All have developed regional variety to promote and support the formal seed industry is advanc-
catalogues for the regional trade of certified seed. However, ing across the continent apace, the policy environment to
the regulations of these RECs are not in harmony with support and build FMSS is largely absent at national and re-
one another or necessarily with the national laws of
gional levels. It is therefore important role to bringing actors
their members. For each of the mentioned RECs, the
together, with farmers at the forefront, along with relevant
harmonisation process may in many instances require
experts to share information, best practices, challenges and
amendments to national seed laws to ensure compliance
critiques to inform and formulate policy in this regard and
and these processes could further threaten FMSS. But at the
advocate at all levels for implementation and financial sup-
same time, reviewing national seed laws could also open
port.
opportunities to lobby for greater acknowledgement and
support for FMSS, if civil society is vigilant and prepared.
Recommendations:
SAn alternative and ignored narrative on how to approach
AFSA has already identified the need to implement a two-
the problem of hunger in Africa is based on the reality of
pronged approach to the problem – on the one hand build-
African farmers’ experience, as well as on cultural norms
ing capacity and solidarity to resist those laws and policies
and values that embrace seed and agriculture beyond
that seek to replace or undermine FMSS, namely plant
commodification. African smallholders produce 80% of
breeders’ rights laws and seed trade laws, and on the other,
the food in Africa on just 14.7% of the agricultural land
and control 80% of the seeds produced and exchanged. to work at strengthening FMSS. This research has identified
The majority of these smallholders are women. Farmer a gap in policy to support FMSS.
managed seed systems are complex, multifunctional and
resilient and these systems, not the formal seed industry, At international level there is a clear role to formally engage
form the backbone of African agriculture. However, FMSS with the ITPGRFA and to play a role in exerting pressure
are neglected in policy, funding, research and extension on pan-African, regional and national bodies to implement
support, leaving them exposed to genetic erosion and their obligations on Farmers’ Rights and the promotion of
impeding their ability to adapt to the vagaries of climate sustainable use of plant genetic resources. There is also a
change, new pests and the array of other challenges role to play in accessing opportunities for funding, technical
encountered in agricultural production. support and pilot projects in terms of the Second Plan of
Action, to support on-going work on strengthening FMSS at
The United Nation’s Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) national level.
and the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources in
Agriculture (ITPGRFA) both acknowledge the contribution At the pan-African level farmers, support organisations, ex-
of farmers in the development and conservation of agricul- perts and a wider range of social movements and stakehold-
tural diversity and set up mechanisms to facilitate the flow ers must come together in a long-term consultative process
of genetic materials that are important for agriculture. The to critically discuss the state of FMSS on the continent, elab-
ITPGRFA is the only international legally binding instrument orate a shared vision and the potential policy frameworks
that recognises Farmers’ Rights. Forty-three African coun- or mechanisms to effectively support and develop resilient
tries are party to the ITPGRFA and therefore have a clear ob- FMSS. It is recommended that FMSS is placed on the Afri-
ligation to take steps to domesticate measures on Farmers’ can nutrition agenda, possibly through engaging with the
Rights and to develop policies that promote the sustainable AU’s Africa Regional Nutrition Strategy (ARNS) and the Africa
6 Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa
Renewed Initiative on Stunting Elimination (ARISE), and the At national level, vigilance is need with regard to the revi-
Scaling up Nutrition (SUN). In terms of resisting industrial sion/development of national seed and PVP laws to comply
style seed policy, pan-African platforms are needed for ac- with harmonisation efforts. Work may include building ca-
tors resisting seed harmonisation laws to share their re- pacity on these issues and using the pan-African voice to
search, to debate and clarify positions, build solidarity and strengthen key national campaigns at crucial moments, for
prepare joint plans and proposals. It is crucial for farmers
example through media statements, petitions or open let-
to be involved and well capacitated on these issues. Civil so-
ters to key institutions, etc.
ciety should also engage with the AU’s AfricaSeeds project
to counter the strong industry element that is defining the
In terms of building a positive narrative around FMMS and
African policy and programme agenda on seed.
building evidence-based campaigns for the support of
Important regional work includes supporting work to stop FMSS, case studies of best practice and challenges should
ARIPO member states from ratifying the Arusha PVP Proto- be compiled, to raise awareness and strengthen FMSS prac-
col and monitor activities in the RECs on seed harmonisa- tice and inform policy.
tion. SADC, COMESA and ECOWAS are all underway; EAC is
about to initiate activities.
Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa 7
CONTENTS
11 List of Abbreviations
15
1. Background
15 1.1 Seed Systems
19 1.2 A brief history of seed systems policy development
in Africa
21
2. S e e d P o l i c y E n v i ro n m e n t
21 2.1 International Seed Treaty and Convention on
Biological Diversity
25 2.2 WTO’s Trips
27 2.3. The African Model Law
27 2.4. Seed issues in the African Union - CAADP, ASBP
and ISSD
29 2.5. Nutrition
30 2.6. Policy to support FMSS is lacking
31
3. The Regional Harmonisation
of PVP and Seed Law
31 3.1 Continental overview of national seed laws
34 3.2. Regional harmonisation of seed and PVP laws
38 3.3. Summary: Advocacy threats and challenges
with regard to seed
39 3.4. Resistance: harmonisation processes that have
already come under scrutiny and by whom.
43 Recommendations
45
Annex 1: Case Studies
45 Zimbabwe
48 Mali
51
References
10 Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa
List of Abbreviations
ABS Access and benefit sharing
AFSTA African Seed Trade Association
AGRA Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa
ARIPO African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation
ARNS Africa Regional Nutrition Strategy
ASARECA Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central
Africa
ASBP African Seed and Biotechnology Programme
ASN African Seed Network
ASTA American Seed Trade Association
BMGF Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
CAADP Comprehensive African Agricultural Development Programme
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity
CEN-SAD Community of Sahel-Saharan States
CLISS Permanent Inter-State Committee for Drought Control in the Sahel
CNOP National Coordination of Farmer organisations
COASP West African Committee for Farmer Seeds
COMSHIP COMESA Seed Harmonisation Implementation Plan
DUS Distinct Uniform and Stable
ECCAS Economic Community of Central African States
ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States
FANRPAN Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources Policy Analysis Network
FAO UN Food and Agriculture Organisation
FIAN Food First Information and Action Network
FISP Farmer Input Subsidy Programme
FMSS Farmer managed seed systems
Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa 11ISSD Integrated Seed Sector Development ISTA International Seed Testing Association ITPGRFA International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture NAFSN New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition OAPI African Intellectual Property Organization PBR Plant Breeders’ Rights PVP Plant Variety Protection QDS Quality Declared Seed REC Regional Economic Communities TRIPS Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights TWN Third World Network UPOV International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants USAID United States Agency for International Development WTO World Trade Organisation ZIMSOFF Zimbabwe Small-scale Organic Farmers’ Forum 12 Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa
Introduction
Farmers’ Rights are recognised as methods to industrial agriculture has resulted in
genetic erosion (FAO, undated) - it is estimated
‘rights arising from the past, present
that the narrow focus on just a few commercially
and future contributions of farmers viable crops, breeding of genetically uniform
in conserving, improving and making varieties and the aggressive imposition of this
available plant genetic resources for system on our agricultural practices, has resulted
in the loss of 75% of our global agrodiversity in
food and agriculture’. (FAO, Resolution
just 100 years (UN General Assembly A/64/170).
5/89). The recognition of farmers’ rights
is due to the undeniable reality that the African farmers have steadfastly chosen their
own varieties over so-called improved varieties,
vast agricultural diversity that sustains despite attempts since the 1960s to introduce
humankind, and will continue to do so in ‘improved varieties’ to Africa. A recent study drawn
a rapidly changing future that needs to from observations across six African countries
and covering 40 crops, found that farmers still
adapt to climate change, is the result of
access an astonishing 90% of their seed from the
the innovation and effort of farmers over so-called informal system. (McGuire, S. & Sperling,
countless generations. L. 2016). In another analysis on the impact of seed
aid on farmer managed seed systems (FMSS), it
It is not only the resources that are precious was found that these systems are exceptionally
and in need of protection, but also the cultures, resilient under stress but can be undermined by
worldviews and ecologies in which these resources ill-conceived seed-aid (McGuire and Sperling,
are embedded. Smallholder farmers currently 2013) and other programmes focused on the
provide as much as 70% of the sustenance for our distribution of improved varieties such as Farmer
global population (FAO, 2013). It is testament to Input Subsidy Programmes (FISPs).
their knowledge, innovation and labour that they
continue to do so, very often in harsh conditions However, the seed industry has concocted a
and largely in the absence of support. narrative that places hunger squarely at the
door of African smallholders and their “backward
By stark contrast, industrial agriculture – propped practices” and “low yielding, diseased seed” (e.g.
up by vast subsidies, preferential policy and see AFSTA, 2017). This narrative has found traction
institutional support, and jaw-dropping research amongst many African governments, which are
and development budgets – only provides acquiescing to industry demands for enabling
some 30% of our global food. In addition, it legal and policy environments to attract the
does this in a highly inefficient and damaging formal seed industry. They propose nothing less
manner – grabbing and clearing vast lands for than the wholesale replacement of FMSS (which
monocropping, accounting for more than 80% are based on community cohesion and a diversity
of fossil fuel emissions (ETC, 2014), and using as of locally adapted farm saved seed) with a small
much as 70% of the world’s fresh water (OECD, portfolio of ‘improved varieties’ bred to produce
2017). Furthermore, the shift from traditional high yields in industrial agricultural systems.
Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa 13To support the expansion of the private seed (NAFSN); and African research institutions such
industry on the continent, a raft of new policy and as the Association for Strengthening Agricultural
legal changes are on the table. Two distinct areas Research in Eastern and Central Africa (ASARECA)
are targeted, namely the establishment of Plant and the Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources
Breeders’ Rights (PBR) regimes and the revision or Policy Analysis Network (FANRPAN)1 (ACB. 2012).
implementation of seed trade laws that regulate
standards and procedures to place seed on the This wholesale onslaught against FMSS is in
market. Strict PBR regimes that are designed to direct conflict with obligations to give effect to
benefit the seed industry are being imposed Farmers’ Rights under the International Treaty on
on multiple countries simultaneously through Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture
regional organisations such as the African (ITPGRFA), of which 43 African countries are
Regional Intellectual Property Organisation
currently contracting parties. These efforts also
(ARIPO) and its francophone counterpart OAPI, as
infringe on human rights, particularly the right
well as through Regional Economic Communities
to food and in many instances on Indigenous
(RECs) such as the Southern African Development
Peoples’ Rights. (Christinck, A. & Walle Tvedt, M.,
Community (SADC) and the Economic Community
of West African States (ECOWAS) (ACB, 2012). 2015)
At the same time programmes are underway to
AFSA has engaged in fierce resistance against
tighten national seed trade laws which govern
the imposition of these unjust laws through
seed certification and phytosanitary standards
to privilege ‘improved varieties’ on the market its membership and through submissions and
and to criminalise and vilify FMSS. Programmes statements to key regulatory bodies such as
to harmonise these laws are similarly underway ARIPO and COMESA. In a complimentary manner,
through the RECs, most notably COMESA, SADC AFSA members have continued to work at grass
and ECOWAS. roots level to celebrate, revitalise and strengthen
FMSS and the cultures in which these systems
According to the ACB the powerful players are embedded. However, this grassroots work is
behind this lobby are numerous and include: being done largely in a policy vacuum and within
African regional trade blocs already mentioned; the ‘grey areas’ of the law, because while policy to
ARIPO; the World Bank; the United States Agency
promote and support the formal seed industry
for International Development (USAID); Citizens
is advancing across the continent apace, the
Action for Foreign Affairs; the US patent and
policy environment to support and build FMSS
trademark office; the Seed Science Centre at Iowa
State University; agrochemical/seed companies is largely absent at national and regional levels. It
such as Monsanto, Syngenta, Pioneer Hi-Bred; is therefore to bring together civil society actors,
seed associations such as the African Seed Trade with farmers at the forefront, along with relevant
Association (AFSTA); the Food and Agriculture experts, to share information, best practices,
Organisation (FAO); public sector research challenges and critiques to inform and formulate
institutions such as the CGIAR; Grow Africa; the policy in this regard and advocate at all levels for
G8 New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition implementation and financial support.
1
The African Centre for Biodiversity has a wealth of research on these players, available at www.acbio.org.za. AFSA and GRAIN have also produced an indepth look
at key players in their 2015 publication, Land and seed laws under attack. https://www.grain.org/article/entries/5121-land-and-seed-laws-under-attack-who-is-
pushing-changes-in-africa
14 Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa1. Background
1.1 Seed Systems Farmer managed seed systems (FMSS) better
describes the agency of farmers and the social
systems and norms that regulate FMSS, and
Seed is an important entry point for points to the value that these systems hold in
development, opening up possibilities their own right.
for the delivery of multiple benefits for
FMSS is not only about seed, but also the social
smallholder farmers, including improved and institutional context in which they are
nutrition, productivity and resilience in deployed. Issues that need to be addressed may
the face of climate change. Seed also include for example, the role of farmers in plant
plays an important role in the social breeding; sources of public sector germplasm and
farmer access; seed selection, enhancement and
fabric and cultural or spiritual life of many production in the field; seed storage, seed banks,
African communities. and in situ conservation; culture, indigenous
knowledge, women’s knowledge; nutrition;
“There are many varied and opposing philosophies
revitalisation and repatriation of indigenous
that shape seed sector development, depending
varieties and building of seed diversity; social
on what the actors see as the starting point for
networks and protocols around seed exchange
system entry” (McGuire, S. & Sperling, L., 2016). In
and management; intersections with formal seed
most instances, two seed systems are recognised
systems and possible benefits and threats to
– formal and informal and there is now a growing
farmer seed systems; and the role of extension
recognition of a third – what is becoming known
services and farmer organisations in supporting
as integrated seed systems. Another important
and strengthening farmer seed practices (ACB,
mechanism for the distribution of seed is through
2016). There is a recognition that these systems,
seed aid and development programmes of
like industrial systems, will benefit from support,
governments or development agencies. Seed for
research and development. However, the
development and aid is usually strongly tied to
multifaceted nature of FMSS described above
the formal sector.
needs to be acknowledged if support is to be
Farmer Managed Seed Systems (FMSS) appropriate and beneficial.
Farm-saved seed and community-based seed “Farm saved seed” may refer to any seed that
systems form the bedrock of African agriculture, farmers have saved and reused for more than one
and are the source of more than 90% of most season and may include seed that was previously
farmers’ seed. These seeds are from the informal certified but was not purchased or distributed
sector, i.e. not certified and regulated according through registered seed agents in the past
to industry standards. The Food Sovereignty season (ACB, 2016). Protected seed enters into
Movement rejects the use of the term ‘informal FMSS in a variety of ways, including occasional
sector’, as it may imply a sector that is somewhat purchase and distribution by government and
disorganised and inferior to the formal sector. development agencies.
Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa 15The Formal Seed System such as dry beans, soybeans, sorghum and wheat
as well as locally sought after ‘neglected’ crops
The formal system is a highly regulated linear chain (Access to Seeds Foundation, 2016). Ultimately,
of seed production, marketing and distribution. the formal industry has neither the will nor the
Regulations maintain varietal identity and purity, capacity to service the diverse seed needs of
physical, physiological and sanitary quality. There African farmers and their portfolio is dwarfed by
is a clear distinction between what is called “seed” the sheer scale and diversity of FMSS.
and what is called “grain”. This distinction has
come to posit only certified seed as “seed”, while Quality Declared Seed (QDS)
farmers varieties are categorised as grain, thereby
in many cases being exempt from laws regulating The Quality Declared Seed (QDS) system is an
“seed”. aspect of the formal system. It is a seed quality
control mechanism developed by the FAO to
Improved varieties are marketed and distributed relax seed certification criteria in areas where
through official outlets, with significant flows to seed markets are not functional and government
and from the informal sector (ACB, 2015). Strong resources are too limited to effectively manage
protection over plant breeders’ rights (PBRs) is comprehensive certification systems (Grain,
considered vital to stimulate innovation and 2005). Under QDS, seed producers are responsible
recoup the costs of research and development, as for quality control, while government agents
well as protect industry players from each other check limited portions of seed lots and seed
in a highly competitive system. The International multiplication fields. QDS is geared towards the
Union for the Protection of New Varieties of production and distribution of ‘improved’ formal
Plants (UPOV) is one of the major international sector seed and for the most part still requires
bodies dedicated to ensuring the rights of seed to conform to DUS requirements, effectively
plant breeders. Seed testing for certification excluding farmers’ varieties.
purposes generally follow standards set by the
International Seed Testing Association (ISTA). For Integrated Seed Sector Development
the most part, seed in the formal system must be (ISSD)
Distinct, Uniform and Stable (DUS) to be certified
or registered for PBRs. Farmers’ varieties do not Initiatives have emerged in the last decade or so that
conform to these standards, in fact their genetic recognise the value of both FMSS and the formal
diversity, as opposed to uniformity, is a treasured sector, the ways in which they interact, and how
characteristic that gives rise to immense diversity farmers draw on both. Most notable is Integrated
and resilience. The genetic uniformity required by Seed Sector Development (ISSD) promoted by
DUS standards contributes to the erosion of both the Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs and
genetic and nutritional diversity. the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF).
This programme aims to facilitate connections
The formal seed industry is only able to provide between these two systems. However the focus
a narrow portfolio of seed – with global seed remains primarily on the formal sector and the
companies specialising in field crops and market, while acknowledging FMSS. The AU’s
particularly maize, which is the main ‘engine of Agriculture Biotechnology Seed Programme
growth’ for the formal sector on the continent and (ABSP) has endorsed the ISSD methodology.
the centre piece of most of the continent’s FISPs
(ACB, 2015). For the most part, vegetable seeds Seed for aid and development
are imported due to lack of specialised facilities,
with a few exceptions such Kenya Seed Company Seed security is seen as important for food
and Victoria Seed. Regional (as opposed to global) security, and hence in times of food crises a
seed companies may offer additional field crops common response is to provide seed aid. For
16 Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa48 countries (McGuire, S. and Sperling, L., 2013). need to begin with more thorough understanding
Seed aid is a pillar of the seed system in a number of the context in which they are deployed, ensure
of countries, including Burundi, the Democratic feedback loops, recognise the multifaceted utility
Republic of Congo (DRC), the Republic of Congo, of agriculture and plan toward context specific
Kenya, South Sudan and Zimbabwe (ACB, goals – e.g. nutrition, resilience, livelihoods etc.,
2014). The promotion of improved varieties instead of the current standard goal of increased
through subsidy is also generally seen as key to productivity through improved varieties.
modernising African agriculture, thereby creating
food security. The FISPs, which channel large Women and seed
portions of national agricultural budgets into the
purchase and distribution of particularly maize Women, who constitute the majority of Africa’s
seed and fertilizer, are a prime example2. As the farmers, are the ones most affected by loss
ACB points out, these are actually corporate of land and seeds (ABN & Gaia Foundation,
subsidies, not farmer subsidies (ACB, 2016). 2015). In the Green Revolution logic, when
any attention is given to women, it usually
In many instances seed aid and development aims to assist them to participate in the formal
interventions destroy the natural resilience of economy. Viewed through this narrow lens,
farmer managed seed systems, leaving them seed is simply a commodity. Regassa Feyissa,
worse off than before. According to McGuire veteran in Farmers’ Rights and FMSS is of the
and Sperling, “poorly designed seed aid can opinion that the conflation of production-for-
actually undermine resilience by: providing mal- food and production-for-commerce in our global
adapted or untested new varieties; narrowing and national policymaking is the fundamental
the diversity of crops/varieties in key supply misunderstanding that persists and creates
channels; ‘crowding out’ local seed enterprises; deep injustice, and impacts negatively on our
or weakening farmers’ adaptive behaviours biodiversity3.
through dependency on repeated aid” (McGuire,
S. & Sperling, L., 2013). Evidence drawn from four African small-scale farmers are mainly women
Seed System Security Assessments (SSSAs) in and produce 80% of the food in Africa on just
Zimbabwe, South Sudan, Kenya and Haiti, found 14.7% of the agricultural land, and control 80%
that “even immediately after a crisis, farmers’ own of the seeds produced and exchanged. Although
stocks and local markets supply the majority of in some instances men are involved in managing
seed (57–92% across sites), with gifts via social seed, women have traditionally played a central
networks also important in some setting. In role in selection, storing and the enhancement of
contrast, agro-dealers and government projects seed diversity. They are the ultimate custodians
provide only modest amounts of seed, and mostly of our biodiversity, resilience, and medicinal
of maize” (McGuire, S. & Sperling, L., 2013: 648). and nutritional base. “The complexity of this
knowledge system, the intimate relationship that
Supply driven seed aid interventions are what rural women tend to have with land and seed,
the International Panel of Experts on Sustainable and their understanding of the range of needs
Food Systems (IPES-Food) refer to as a “lock-in” of the family and the community cannot be
to industrial agriculture through the creation of underestimated. It has evolved over generations.
“path dependency” (IPES-Food, 2016). McGuire This knowledge lies at the heart of women’s
and Sperling recommend that seed aid initiatives continuing role in building resilience and in their
2
For a detailed description of the mechanisms and impacts of the FISPs in Southern Africa, see Farm Input Subsidy Programmes (FISPs): A Benefit for, or the
Betrayal of, SADC’s Small-Scale Farmers? https://acbio.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Input-Subsidies-Report-ACBio.pdf
3
” the policies set in many countries are meant for the commodity producing sector but applied to the food producing sector… both sectors are important but
need to be treated separately. This is where the confusion in policy setting persists due to external pressure in particular and also at home and globally due to
improper perception of the two sectors. This goes up to the Treaty’s Farmers’ Rights issues that have not been resolved for the past thirty or more years.” Regassa
Feyissa, personal communication 21 July 2017
Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa 17status in the community” (ABN & Gaia Foundation, farming instead, is urgently needed” (ABN & Gaia
2015). However, aggressive corporate agendas Foundation, 2015). At the same time efforts need
and a one-tracked focus on commodification are to be made to ensure that women pass on their
threatening this knowledge. seed-related knowledge and skills, to engage
women farmers in policy making and to support
Hence, “a profound and radical policy shift that and link women through Food Sovereignty and
stops the corporate handover of Africa’s land other social movements (ABN & Gaia Foundation,
and seeds, and focuses on supporting small scale 2015).
Resilient seed systems 3. Diversity is key in the face of unpredictability
and change; including diversity in terms of
A key characteristic of industrial agriculture crop and variety, but also in other aspects, e.g.
and associated seed systems is the tendency supply channels.
to measure success in terms of increased yield,
which should translate into increased profit. This 4. Short and long term strategies are necessary
narrow focus has resulted in blindness to impacts to ensure that the right seed is available and
on socio-economic systems, health, environment accessible for imminent planting as well as
and culture. It is vital that engagement with FMSS several subsequent seasons. Strategies that
encompasses the complexity and multifaceted accommodate learning and flexibility are
functions of seed in African agriculture. McGuire preferable to setting fixed outcomes.
and Sperling have developed some useful
5. Technology provision must be strategic and
concepts and tools to better engage with FMSS
informed by relevant information.
with the goal of supporting and building resilient
seed systems and hopefully informing more 6. Feedback loops must be fostered between
appropriate interventions with regard to seed. different parts of the system, e.g. between
They define resilient seed systems as having farmer-clients and suppliers, traders and
“the capacity to absorb shocks and stress, and formal institutions.
reorganize so as to maintain and strengthen seed
security over time.” The following principles of 7. A repertoire of flexible responses should be
resilience may provide a basis for discussion about available to maintain current seed security
new indicators of successful seed systems: features (availability, access and utilisation),
while allowing farmers to evolve their systems
1. Perspective of the whole system is important, in light of new positive possibilities.
beyond just the material seed, for example
including social systems embedded in 8. Trade-offs between multiple stresses and risks
particular environments, the various must be considered in light of smallholders’
institutions that are active. vulnerability and small margin for risk, e.g.
introducing cash crops for income generation
2. Resilient seed systems have the capacity to prior to the development of real market
absorb shocks and adapt, while retaining demand. (Adapted from McGuire and Sperling
their essential structure, function and identity. 2013).
Therefore, it is more important to focus on
retaining the way a seed system functions than
on maintaining discreet elements, such as a
crop profile.
18 Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa1.2 A brief history of seed the agricultural input industry, governments,
philanthropic capitalists such as Gates and
systems policy development AGRA and big NGOs. Over the past year, there
have also been several mergers in the pipeline
in Africa in ‘Big Agriculture’, which has resulted in the
most unprecedented consolidation in the global
The first projects aimed at modernising African seed (and agrochemical sector). The ‘Big Six’
agriculture and replacing farmers varieties with (Monsanto, Syngenta, Du Pont, Dow, Bayer and
so-called “improved varieties” began as early as BASF) will potentially become the ‘Big Three’, as
the 1960s and ‘70s, when simultaneous processes plans go ahead for mergers between Monsanto/
were happening in Asia and Latin America. Bayer (already approved with conditions in
During this period many African countries South Africa), Dow/ DuPont and ChemChina’s
developed national seed systems through acquisition of Syngenta (ACB 2017). These ever-
their colonial agricultural research foundations growing behemoths must find new markets
with backing from the FAO and the World as they grow in a context where industrialised
Bank. Elements of these programmes included markets of the global north are fairly stagnant
breeding, multiplication programmes, state seed and for them to find those markets in Africa, they
companies, seed regulations and subsidies and require an enabling policy environment and large
loans to tempt farmers into the system (Grain harmonised markets to operate in.
2005). The next phase of the plan was to privatise
the breeding programmes and seed companies AFSA, through its membership, has been
with accompanying legal frameworks to remove engaging in and resisting against two major
trade barriers and attract foreign investment, policy processes that are designed to lock Africa
ultimately shifting control of seed from farmers into industrial agriculture and create perennial
to the private sector (GRAIN 2005). However the dependence on the private sector for agricultural
plan stalled partly because farmers steadfastly inputs and further down the line, machinery.
preferred their own seed because the seeds These are intellectual property laws, which grant
produced through these programmes did not state-sanctioned monopolies to plant breeders
correspond with or fulfil their diverse needs. (at the expense of farmers’ rights), and seed
marketing laws, which regulate trade in seeds
The whole process was given new impetus in –often making it illegal to exchange or market
the late 1990s following structural adjustment farmers’ seeds (AFSA & Grain, 2015).
processes, trade liberalisation and consolidation
in the global seed industry. Various initiatives to • Plant variety protection (PVP) or Plant
harmonise seed–related law and policy began in Breeders’ Rights (PBRs) are an offshoot of
earnest, backed by USAID and certain European the patent system that creates intellectual
governments, CGIAR and the largely USAID property rules to establish and protect
founded organisation ASARECA. In 1999 the monopoly rights over newly developed plant
American Seed Trade Association (ASTA) set up varieties (AFSA & Grain, 2015). All members
the African Seed Trade Association (AFSTA) to of the WTO are obliged to adopt some form
advance the harmonisation agenda to facilitate of PVP law, according to Article 27.3.b of the
easy trade in large markets. An explicit mark was WTO’s Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of
set to secure a 5% increase in US seed exports to Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). The global
the region within its first five years (Grain 2005). seed industry has used TRIPS as a catalyst to
impose their preferred PVP system – UPOV
In recent years there has been a renewed 1991 - on African governments and through
interest in ‘modernising’ African agriculture regional bodies such as the RECs, OAPI and
and funds for this project are being invested by ARIPO. UPOV 1991 is widely criticized as
Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa 19and as posing a threat to human rights, farmers’ varieties, which are vilified as unproductive
rights and the right to food. and diseases, with ‘improved varieties’.
Farmers’ varieties are generally excluded from
• Seed laws governing the certification, certification on the basis that they do not
phytosanitary requirements and trade of seed conform to the requirements of distinctness,
are being tightened and harmonized through uniformity and stability (DUS).
the RECs and revised at national level. These
laws limit farmers’ rights to exchange and These laws will have the effect of rippling
trade their own seed, while limiting the role throughout African agro-food systems, mimicking
of the public sector in seed development the trend of industrialised countries where small
and creating space for the entrance of the bands of elites grab and concentrate power at
private sector (AFSA & Grain, 2015). These every node from the land and seed through to
laws deliberately intend to replace farmers’ production, distribution and retail.
20 Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa2. Seed Policy Environment
This section gives an overview of policy acknowledging the past, present and future
spaces related to seed, although it is contributions of farmers in all regions of the
world, particularly those in centres of origin and
by no means exhaustive. The following diversity, in conserving, improving and making
policies and institutions are considered: available these resources (Chaves Posada, J.,
2015).
• ITPGRFA (Seed Treaty)
• Convention on Biological Diversity and the The Treaty missions are as follows:
Nagoya Protocol
• To facilitate access4 to all seeds in a “global
• WTO’s TRIPS and UPOV pool of genetic resources“ (FAO, 2017) (fields
• The African Model Law for the Protection of and in gene banks) through what is called
the Rights of the Local Communities, Farmers the Multilateral System (MLS) for research,
and Breeders and for the Regulation of Access breeding and training for food and agriculture;
to Biological Resources • To ensure the sustainable use of these seeds;
• The AU’s Comprehensive African Agriculture and
Development Program (CAADP), related seed • To ensure that farmers’ traditional knowledge
body AfricaSeeds and Integrated Seed Sector and farmers’ rights (Article 9 of the Treaty)
Development (ISSD), as well as to keep, use, share and sell farmer seeds
• Potential entry points for putting FMSS on are protected, and that they benefit from
Africa’s nutrition agenda. the equitable sharing of benefits over the
resources and that they take part in decision
making relating to seed systems at the
national level.
2.1 International Seed The Seed Treaty plays a pivotal role in enabling
Treaty and Convention on the flow of genetic resources across countries,
potentially contributing to vibrant and resilient
Biological Diversity farmer managed seed systems, which have
been historically neglected, and which evolve
2.1.1. ITPGRFA slowly and cannot keep up with the fast-paced
disturbances and mutations engendered by
The International Treaty on Plant Genetic climate change, ecological unbalances triggered
Resources for Agriculture (ITPGRFA or The Seed by biodiversity losses and the flow of pathogens
Treaty) under the FAO and its implementing precipitated by global trade. Hence, access to
project, the Second Global Plan of Action, is a farmer seeds from other parts of the world plays a
natural home for protecting and revitalising FMSS. big part in accelerating local adaptation of peasant
seeds and in contributing to the transition from
The Seed Treaty was adopted in 2001 after many subsistence farming to agro-ecology. But this
years of negotiation and came into force in cannot happen overnight; the “newcomers” need
2004. It is the only international legally binding to be introduced progressively, in small amounts,
instrument that recognises Farmers’ Rights, observed, selected, bred and multiplied locally
Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa 21so that they can adapt to local agro-ecological • Promote cost efficient and effective global
systems (Kastler, 2015). efforts to conserve and sustainably use plant
genetic resources for food and agriculture
The vast majority of African governments (PGRFA);
have signed up to the International Treaty and
now have a clear obligation to take steps to • Link conservation with a greater use of plant
domesticate measures on Farmers’ Rights and to germplasm;
develop policies that promote the sustainable • Strengthen crop improvement and seed
use of plant genetic resources. This explicitly systems to foster economic development;
includes revising existing policies, e.g. relating
to seed diffusion and PVP (Christinck, A. & Walle • Create capacities, strengthen national
Tvedt, M., 2015). However it must be said that programmes and widen partnerships for
the interpretation of farmers’ rights is extremely PGRFA management; and
narrow and does not challenge the domination of
• Strengthen implementation of the ITPGRFA.
industrial agriculture as the norm in global policy
or the intellectual property regimes that drive it. These aims are achieved through a wide range
Instead, small-scale farmers are given a limited of activities, including work on in-situ and ex-situ
space to operate within the dominant system conservation, sustainable use of PGFRA including
where they may be exempt from laws prohibiting support for plant breeding and diversification
the recycling, exchange and trade of seed, under of crop varieties for sustainable agriculture and
very particular conditions. What is still lacking is support for seed production and distribution,
acknowledgement of FMSS as a separate, highly and building human and institutional capacity.
valuable system that is underpinned by different These activities are deployed at national level.
science, values and measures of success that One example of this work is a project called
should be explicitly supported in policy and “Promoting open source seed systems for beans,
practice. Indeed, FMSS – not the formal system – sorghum, finger millet and forages for climate
is the norm in Africa. change adaptation in Kenya, Tanzania, and
Uganda”, funded by the FAO’s Benefit Sharing
Currently, 43 African countries are contracting Fund of the ITPGRFA (CGIAR, 2017). Bioversity
parties to the Seed Treaty while a further two International is contributing technical support
have signed but not yet acceded (Cape Verde and to the programme5, which includes amongst
Nigeria). Only eight African countries have not other things, hosting farmer and seed exchanges,
signed to date - Botswana, Comoros, Equatorial building farmer capacity on managing seed and
Guinea, Gambia, Mozambique, Somalia, South setting up community seed banks. (A red flag in
Africa and South Sudan. (FAO, 2017a) The South the publicity material is the mention of “Climate
African government has signalled their intention Smart Agriculture”, which in some cases has
to sign. proven to be a deceptive vehicle for the industry
lobby to promote industrial agriculture as a
Implementing activities
solution to adapt to climate change. These are
challenges that come with opportunities that
The Commission on Genetic Resources for Food
civil society will need to navigate and clarify when
and Agriculture is currently implemented by the
working with international institutions such as
Second Global Plan of Action for Plant Genetic
the FAO.)
Resources for Food and Agriculture. The aims of
the Plan of Action are to:
4 Access to seeds is on condition that it is used for research and selection for food and agriculture. It also forbids patents and binds the receiver to appropriately
share resultant benefits
22 Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in AfricaIn 2010 the Commission published the Second arising from the use of plant genetic resources
Report on the State of the World’s Plant for food and agriculture6;
Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture – • Participate in making decisions, at the national
SoWPGR-2 – based on information gathered level, on matters related to the conservation
from more than 100 countries, as well as from and sustainable use of plant genetic resources
regional and international research and support for food and agriculture; and
organisations and academic programmes. The
report documents the current status of plant • Save, use, exchange and sell seeds and
genetic resources diversity, conservation and propagating material saved in farms.
use, as well as the extent and role of national, The responsibility for the implementation of
regional and international efforts that underpin farmers’ rights is left up to national governments.
the contributions of PGRFA to food security (FAO Despite this being a legal obligation, progress to
2017a). In short, the report found that there is date has been negligible. Some of the reasons
urgent need to: cited for lack of progress included lack of political
will, lack of resources and outright obstruction
• Adopt clear policies and regulations to from powerful seed lobbies at national and
promote in situ and on-farm management regional levels (Mushita, A. 2017). In some cases
of PGRFA and increase consumer demand for focal points have simply not been appointed
local produce; (Ndiaye, 2017) or are located across different
• Expand inventories of PGRFA to cover more ministries creating stagnation and confusion
crops and species; (TABIO, undated).
• Develop better indicators and methodologies During interviews with AFSA members and other
to assess conservation status and threats; experts there has been a strong consensus that
• Increase efforts to stop widespread advocacy on the implementation of Farmers
degradation of rangelands in establishing Rights at national level is a priority and that AFSA
protected areas that cover important PGRFA; also has a clear role to play in exerting pressure
and at international and regional levels. AFSA is also
well placed to support governments and regional
• Enhance coordination between agencies bodies with information and best practices and
dealing with agriculture and the environment co-ordinate evidence-based lobbying on the
to ensure conservation of PGRFA. issue. There are also numerous calls for more and
better participation of farmers and indigenous
peoples in all levels of decision-making, which
The Seed Treaty and Farmers Rights requires awareness making and capacity building.
Additionally, participating in further deliberations
Article 9 of the Seed Treaty deals with farmers’
of the Treaty could create opportunities for pilot
rights and includes the following elements as
projects and evidence collection at a practical
necessary for the implementation of those rights:
field level, access to financial and institutional
• Protect traditional knowledge relevant to support, as well as opportunities for global
plant genetic resources for food and solidarity with other like-minded networks and
agriculture; social movements.
• Equitably participate in sharing benefits
5 Bioversity’s Community Seed Bank Concept and Practice: Facilitators Handbook is available here http://cgspace.cgiar.org/handle/10568/81286
Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in Africa 232.1.2. Convention on Biological best promote the implementation of the African
Diversity Model Law for the protection of the rights of
local communities, farmers and breeders, and for
In the 1980s the deep environmental impact the regulation of access to biological resources
of a global pursuit of infinite economic growth (Munye, P. et al, 2017). (This model law is briefly
based on exploitation of finite environmental discussed in section 2.3.)
resources began emerging at the international From the commons to controlled
level as urgent. Global leaders came together access
at the historic Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in
1992 where the Convention on Biological Diversity The objectives of the CBD and the ITPGRFA are
(CBD) was signed and entered into force the basically identical: the conservation and sustainable
following year. use of genetic resources, and the equitable sharing
The CBD had three main objectives, namely of benefits derived from their use. However, the
- the conservation of biological diversity, the access and benefit sharing (ABS) systems that they
sustainable use of its components and the fair require member states to implement are different
and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from in orientation. The ITPGRFA creates a multilateral
the utilisation of genetic resources, including by system (MLS) whereby countries agree to pool and
appropriate access to genetic resources and by share the plant genetic resources of 64 crops and
appropriate transfer of relevant technologies and forages for food and agriculture related purposes.
funding (Munye, P. et al, 2017). The CBD recognises The CBD and its Nagoya Protocol tend to favour
the sovereign rights of national governments over the negotiation of bilateral access and benefit-
their biological diversity and promotes bilateral sharing agreements between providers and users
approaches to access genetic resources. There of genetic resources and traditional knowledge
is also emphasis on the need to maintain the (Munye, P. et al., 2012:2).
knowledge and practices of indigenous and local Hence the CBD and the Seed Treaty ushered
communities and protect these in accordance in a new era with regard to access to genetic
with customary norms and practices. These last resources; whereas the precursor to the ITPGRFA,
two issues should also be guided by indigenous the 1983 International Undertaking, considered
and human rights law (e.g. the UN Declaration on our genetic resources to be our common heritage
Human Rights and ILO Convention 169) (IIED & with unrestricted access for public research and
IDRC, 2004). not connected to intellectual property rights,
In October 2010 an instrument to implement the CBD recognises national sovereignty over
the third objective of the CBD was adopted - the genetic resources and sets in place mechanisms
Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources for controlled access, private breeding, and
and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits. The intellectual property rights (FAO 2017c). By
aim is to create incentives for the preservation recognising national sovereignty over genetic
and sustainable use of biodiversity. The Protocol resources, the CBD also separates rights between
creates predictability of conditions for access to national governments and local communities.
genetic resources and benefit sharing based on In a framework that focused on the commons
mutually agreed terms. The AU has proclaimed that rather than the controlled access frameworks we
the Nagoya Protocol is a significant international now have, the right to self-determination was
development that must be taken into account implicit and there was an emphasis on protecting
by the AU in its exploration of avenues that can the totality of indigenous systems – resources,
6 The right to participate in decision-making is also in consonance with international instruments such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights (ICESCR), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the ILO Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in
Independent Countries (ILO 169). (Munye, P. et al., 2012)
7 Officially United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED)
24 Resisting corporate takeover of African seed systems and building farmer managed seed systems for food sovereignty in AfricaYou can also read
