Literature on the effects of national seed and agriculture policies on the realization of Farmers' Rights
Vernooy, R., Adokorach, J., Kimani, D., Marwa, A., Mayoyo, A., & Nyadanu, D. (2023). Policies, laws and regulations in support of farmer-managed seed systems: still a long way to go. A review of 14 countries in Africa
Download the pdf here (PDF, 2MB).
Estimates suggest that 60-80 percent of the seeds on which smallholder farmers in developing countries depend is saved on farm or obtained through informal distribution channels (rather than through formal channels that are regulated, monitored and sanctioned by government and produced and sold by the private seed sector). This seed is obtained through seed exchanges between farmers in the same or neighboring communities or other community sharing systems (e.g., labor for seed), through community seed bank seed donation and return practices, and at the local fresh food markets (where often both grains and seeds are sold). Farmers manage and control the flows of this seed, through on-farm activities such as sowing, planting, selecting (in the field, pre- or post-harvest), storing, and regenerating. Women farmers play key roles in farmer seed systems, although they are often overlooked by researchers and development personnel, policies, and programs.
This high level of seed autonomy among farmers does not mean there are no challenges. Almost everywhere, local seed systems are under stress (Subedi and Vernooy, 2019). Many farming households have become more individualized in terms of decision-making and deployment of knowledge, labor, capital, and seeds. Traditional seed exchange relationships have become weaker in many areas. Farming production practices are becoming more market oriented, which has both benefits and costs depending on the local context. Large-scale rural-to-urban migration is contributing to a decline in farming in many countries or transforming small-scale family farming into contract farming. It is also leading to the feminization of agriculture, increasing women’s workload and responsibilities in many regions (Chhetri et al., 2020).
These trends are affecting local seed production, selection, storage, distribution, and exchange practices, for example, through substituting local varieties with hybrids that can be easily purchased at local markets or from agrodealers. In this way, formal and informal become intertwined (Kuhlmann and Dey, 2021). Climate change is placing additional pressure on farmers’ seed and food production systems and on the multiple functions that they fulfill. Future impacts of climate change are expected to become more pronounced in many parts of the world, forcing farmers to change their practices and causing them to search for information about crops and varieties that are better adapted to new weather dynamics.
Otieno, G., Sikinyi, E., Vernooy, R., Fadda, C., & Halewood, M. (2023). How policies influence smallholder farmers´ access to and use of genetic resources in three East African countries.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 1MB).
Executive Summary
Crop genetic resources and diversity for food and agriculture are the biological cornerstones of global food and nutrition security. They are critical in maintaining current food production and in addressing future challenges. Improving the productivity of major food crops in the face of climate change will depend on harnessing genetic diversity and genetic traits from a wide range of origins, including wild species.
Climate change negatively affects farmers’ production systems and leads to loss of genetic diversity. Successful climate-change adaptation requires farmers to sustainably use a broader range of crops and varieties to thrive during unpredictable climate events and resultant pest outbreaks. Accessing a wider range of genetic diversity from different sources is also important, especially for developing new traits for climate-change adaptation. Genebanks are one of the main sources of this diversity. Accessing genetic resources from these genebanks is usually through the Multilateral System (MLS) of Access and Benefit Sharing of the International Treaty for Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA). Through this system, genetic resources are accessed for research and breeding purposes using the Standard Material Transfer Agreement (SMTA).
Through several research projects in Eastern Africa, the Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT has carried out participatory research with farmers in Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda using durum wheat, sorghum, finger millet and beans provided by the national genebanks. Farmers and breeders selected the best performing varieties with important traits for climate-change adaptation. Some of these varieties are potential candidates for breeding programs, while others were so good that farmers prefer to use them directly. However, the SMTA does not provide for the direct use and commercialization of materials exchanged through the MLS. Similarly, most regional and national access and benefit-sharing (ABS) mechanisms, seed policies and regulations also have provisions that hinder farmers from producing and distributing such varieties commercially.
This report addresses key policy issues around the access and use of genetic resources and their up-scaling for direct use and commercialization. It analyzes the current policy environment in Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania and identifies key policy related gaps and challenges related to the utilization of genetic resources, and further proposes a strategy/roadmap for policy and institutional reformsto address these gaps and challenges.
For the three countries the study reveals three key policy and regulatory issues that limit genetic resource diversity use among smallholder farmers: i) a differential implementation of Treaty SMTAs and related ABS policy in each country; ii) seed regulations that limit commercialization and sustainable use of genetic resources; and iii) a lack of seed policy harmonization in the region.
Based on the study findings the authors offer four broad recommendations for seed sector policy and regulatory reforms to enhance famers’ access to seeds: i) resolve and review ABS legislation in line with Treaty and Nagoya requirements and in a mutually supportive manner; ii) register farmer varieties to support broader crops and varieties diversity available in the market, at the same time asserting farmers’ rights to save, use and exchange seeds of their choice in accordance with article 9 of the Treaty; iii) Support the production of farmer varieties through alternative quality assurance schemes, and iv) Promote the recognition of community seedbanks and seed-producer associations as critical and innovative institutional avenues for enhancing seed-system access to seeds.
Munyi, P. (2022). Current Developments in Seed Laws Harmonisation in Africa. Report to the European Commission. DeSIRA-LIFT.
Download the pdf here (PDF, 2MB).
This report reviews the current status of seed laws internationally, at the continental level in Africa, in the EU, in the US as well as international programmes of relevance to seed laws in Africa. The review of EU laws is based on the fact that the EU is a key trading partner with African countries and regional economic blocs and that policy developments in the EU such as the European Green Deal (EGD) are likely to have an impact on seed laws in the EU and beyond. The brief review of US seed laws and US seed programmes in Africa are highlighted with a view to demonstrate other external parties’ actions in influencing seed laws in Africa. This report also reviews the debates informing the status of these laws. These debates revolve around the rights of farmers to save, reuse, and exchange or sell farm-saved seed. Saving, re-using, exchanging or selling farm-saved seed is not only a practice that farmers especially in Africa have been engaging for a long time as a strategy to overcome the challenge of accessing seed, but is also recognized as a farmer right internationally. This practice has contributed immensely towards the conservation of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. Further, the report examines the extent to which African farmers participate in the processes for the formulation of seed policies, noting that participation is necessary if seed laws, policies and programmes are to be relevant, effective and sustainable. Promotion of agroecological, healthy and affordable food systems in Africa cannot be achieved without farmers participating in seed policy making processes. These policies include those concerning maintaining the rights of farmers to save, use and exchange farms-saved seeds and harvests of protected as well as indigenous varieties. There is a wide range of treaties, instruments and policies that regulate seed laws at the international level, continental level, regionally in Africa as well as at the national level. The report examines international, continental and regional-level treaties, instruments and policies and attempts to identify activities that DG INTPA F3 could support to maintain and promote farmers’ rights. Indeed, some of the treaties already in existence recognize farmers’ rights or are crafted in a manner that allow for these rights, while others do not at all.
Kuhlmann, K., & Dey, B. (2021). Using regulatory flexibility to address market informality in seed systems: A global study.
Seed rules and regulations determine who can produce and sell seeds, which varieties will be available in the market, the quality of seed for sale, and where seed can be bought and sold. The legal and regulatory environment for seed impacts all stakeholders, including those in the informal sector, through shaping who can participate in the market and the quality and diversity of seed available. This paper addresses a gap in the current literature regarding the role of law and regulation in linking the informal and formal seed sectors and creating more inclusive and better governed seed systems. Drawing upon insights from the literature, global case studies, key expert consultations, and a methodology on the design and implementation of law and regulation, we present a framework that evaluates how regulatory flexibility can be built into seed systems to address farmers’ needs and engage stakeholders of all sizes. Our study focuses on two key dimensions: extending market frontiers and liberalizing seed quality control mechanisms. We find that flexible regulatory approaches and practices play a central role in building bridges between formal and informal seed systems, guaranteeing quality seed in the market, and encouraging market entry for high-quality traditional and farmer-preferred varieties.
Sievers-Glotzbach, S., Tschersich, J., Gmeiner, N., Kliem, L., & Ficiciyan, A. (2020). Diverse seeds–shared practices: Conceptualizing seed commons.
Commons approaches in the seed sector are multi-faceted: They span from traditional seed systems, i.e. seed sharing networks, to recent anti-enclosure movements that resist intellectual property rights on varieties, like organic breeding initiatives. This paper derives a conceptualization of ‘Seed Commons’ at the local and regional level, based on a comprehensive transdisciplinary research process that integrates diverse types of knowledge, both from practitioners (German and Philippine seed initiatives, companies and NGOs), and the scientific community. As a result, we identify four core criteria that characterize diverse Seed Commons arrangements at local and regional scales: (1) collective responsibility, (2) protection from private enclosure, (3) collective, polycentric management, and (4) sharing of formal and practical knowledge. Discussing these Seed Commons criteria in the context of different Commons approaches, we find that Seed Commons transcend the distinction between traditional (natural resource) Commons and New Commons approaches, by integrating biophysical, informational and cultural elements in their collective governance. Reaching beyond resource characteristics, the Seed Commons criteria reflect practices of Commoning, which aim to fulfill social functions such as farmer empowerment and food sovereignty.
Singh, R. P., & Agrawal, R. C. (2018). Improving efficiency of seed system by appropriating farmer’s rights in India through adoption and implementation of policy of quality declared seed schemes in parallel.
Indian agriculture is dominated by the marginal and small farmers with very small average land holding size which is further fragmented and scattered into tiny pieces. Contemporary challenges being faced by Indian agriculture are increasing population pressure, diminishing natural resources (land, water and agro-biodiversity), increasing demand of diversified diets, increased frequencies of extreme climate change and increasing cost of production are keep on haunting. To increase production and productivity and to mitigate the adverse effect due to climate change, the regular and timely supply of quality seed of all crops and varieties at affordable prices at local level is prerequisite. The formal seed sector, although contributes in significant manner to make available the quality seed but is not in position to cater the demand of farmers at local level and therefore necessitates the quality seed production and distribution locally by involving farmers. In the present commentary issues have been discussed with regard to the adoption and implementation of quality declared seed policy of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in parallel. The QDS policy can easily accommodate and integrate the registered farmers varieties as per PPV&FR Act (2001) into seed chain effectively and efficiently.
Herpers, S., Vodouhe, R. S., Halewood, M., & Jonge, B. D. (2017). The support for farmer-led seed systems in African seed laws
The objective of this report is to compare regional and national seed laws in Africa, and analyse the extent to which they support (or undermine) farmers’ participation in seed systems. The paper pays particular attention to how or whether these laws recognize farmers as conservers and breeders of crop varieties, and as potential multipliers and providers of seed, through a range of potential means, from traditional exchanges at local levels to commercial sales at a national or even regional scale. The study is intended to encompass all African countries. The report also identifies and analyses combinations of national policies, legislation, regulations and executive decrees regulating the seed sector in 35 African countries: Algeria, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cote d’Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Ethiopia, Egypt, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Madagascar, Mali, Morocco, Mauritania, Malawi, Mauritius, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, South Africa, Senegal, South Sudan, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
Peschard., K. (2017). Seed wars and farmers’ rights: comparative perspective from Brazil and India.
Peschard., K. (2017). Seed wars and farmers’ rights: comparative perspective from Brazil and India.
Drawing on interviews with Indian and Brazilian farmers’ rights activists, lawyers, agronomists and plant breeders, this article aims at better understanding how farmers’ rights are protected on paper and implemented on the ground in these two countries. Brazil and India offer important case studies because they are biologically megadiverse countries, and because small farmers represent an important segment of the rural economy. In this article, I show that India has adopted an ownership approach to farmers’ rights, while Brazil leans towards a stewardship approach. Based on an examination of the progress made in enforcing these rights, I further argue that the stewardship model adopted by Brazil is more conducive to the realization of farmers’ rights, and I explore why this is the case. Finally, I show how farmers’ rights provisions in the Brazilian and Indian legislations represent fragile gains that could be curtailed by several bills currently under discussion in the field of seed and plant variety protection.
Wattnem, T. (2016). Seed laws, certification and standardization: outlawing informal seed systems in the Global South.
A series of relatively new seed laws are becoming novel mechanisms of accumulation by dispossession in agriculture. Many researchers have argued that intellectual property rights (IPR) laws that apply to living materials dispossess people of seeds by privatizing germplasm. What these authors have not addressed is the role that non-IPR-related seed laws play in the seed enclosure. I argue that we should pay more attention to the implications of seed laws and regulations that do not deal directly with IPR issues, because they are also being used to outlaw practices that are necessary for the functioning of informal seed systems. As a result, they are setting the stage for the further erosion of seed sovereignty and are becoming an additional threat to an already waning agro-biodiversity, with direct consequences for farmers’ livelihoods. These seed laws establish certification requirements and quality standards for the marketing and/or exchange of seeds. I use the example of contemporary Colombian seed politics to illustrate how and why certification requirements and quality standards are currently being introduced throughout the Global South. I draw on insights from the standards literature in order to explain the power, limitations and consequences of these laws.
Anvar, S. L. (2008). Semences et Droit - L'emprise d'un modèle économique dominant sur une réglementation sectorielle / Seeds and the Law - Sectoral regulation governed by one business model
Download the pdf here (PDF, 3MB).
The seed supply chain is governed by a variety of business models. Seed regulation, however, is informed by just one single model. Current regulation, in France, is technical and market directing; geared to the specific needs of commercial high-yield agriculture varieties. Such regulation stands in the way of practices typical of other business models.
The aim of this study is to shed light on these relatively unknown regulations. To clarify the legal framework governing the seed supply chain from its draft through to its implementation, while considering its constraints and its consequences. Moreover, this study will show that all regulation planned or developed by regulatory bodies is shaped by the economic and institutional actors of the dominant model in line with their own interests and against the interests of other models. However, alternative regulation can be developed that guarantees the multiplicity, viability and specificity of each of the competing models.