The Agricultural Biotechnology Status in SubSaharan Africa - Essay Example

To what extent can agricultural biotechnology hold the key to sustainable food security in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA)? Foundation Department Date ABSTRACT This essay shows the Agricultural Biotechnology status in Sub‐Saharan Africa. It highlights the possible and potential financial growth to Sub-Saharan Africa as well as biotechnology’ effect on food security. The degree at which agricultural biotechnology will mitigate or compound the constraints that smallholders/subsistence farmers face is as well discussed. The status and significance of research in crop biotechnology on Sub-Saharan Africa is assessed globally and the control of intellectual property rights (IPRs), as well as the concentration of the market on the expansion and dispersion of biotechnology in the Sub‐Saharan Africa, is investigated. This essay as well shows the prospective of public‐private joint ventures and gives recommendations of policy courses along with ventures that can centre more research in biotechnology on the issues of the poor and lessen some of the alarms concerning the biotechnology influences. Introduction The Biological Diversity conference describes biotechnology as: "use of living systems and organisms to develop or make products, or "any technological application that uses biological systems, living organisms or derivatives thereof, to make or modify products or processes for specific use". With this explanation, the definition of biotechnology covers various methods and tools that are common in production of food and agriculture. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety2 describes “modern biotechnology” more narrowly as the appliance of: a. In vitro nucleic acid methods, inclusive of recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) in addition to injecting nucleic acid directly into organelles or cells, or b. Cells fusion further than the taxonomic family, which surmount recombination barricades or natural physiological reproductive and which are not methods used in assortment and conventional breeding. A narrow interpretation which simply considers the innovative DNA methods, molecular biology along with application of reproductive technology, the description entails several diverse technologies like manipulation along with transfer of genes, cloning and typing and cloning the DNA of animals and plants. Even though the media has covered technology extensively in the last few years, this technology that has an extensive history that dates as far back as 6000 B.C. Progress in technology and science have altered conventional biotechnology methods, like hybridization, mutagenesis and selective breeding, into current ones, like tissue culture and recombinant DNA methods. This makeover has presented an opportunity extra applications in many areas like health care, forestry, industrial processes, the environment, and many others. The existing tendency includes an investigation into GM foods that are nutritionally improved as well as biochips, transgenic animals and protein drugs. Agriculture is among the most widespread biotechnology applications. Biotechnology techniques like recombinant DNA methods along with mutagenesis are employed to build up plants with new traits. The traits comprise pest and herbicides tolerance, resistance to insects and viruses. Biotechnology methods are employed to make bio‐pesticides that are poisonous to pests on target. Furthermore, research into the genetic adjustment of marine organisms like salmon, for such original traits as improved growth, have been done by means of recombinant DNA methods. Raising yield prospective and attractive characteristics in animal and plant products for food has been an objective of agricultural discipline for long remains the objective of biotechnology in agriculture. It can turn out to be a major development driver, food security, natural resource protection and poverty alleviation in the underdeveloped world when done sensibly (Spielman 2007). Increasing public attention in and biotechnology awareness have led to a range of intricate, interconnected policy issues that requires addressing. The Sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA) is among the areas with high food apprehensive around the globe. The obtainable FAO data shows a degenerating situation. Africa’s by and large production capability of food is claimed to be growing at 1.4% even as it has a population growth of almost 2.4% yearly (Kitch, Koch, Sithole-Niang 2002). The progressing decline in the production of food has to be overturned if enormous insecurity of food, scarcity, and societal along with political unsteadiness are to be prevented. Region development along with irrigation are approximated to take 45% of the growth projected even as the rest 55% have to emanate from reinforcement of land production in farming ( Speilman 2007). Most of biotech research and nearly every one of the genetically produced crops commercialization are completed by private corporations in developed states. The supremacy of the personal division of biotechnology study and expansion of the product has raised anxiety in underdeveloped nations that farmers in these nations are mostly poor hence may not gain from biotechnology because it is either not obtainable or is very costly. A number of these worries subsist, and bring questions to the solutions that actually should be adhered to in an intensive as well as combined way if it has to be guaranteed that the expertise gains and will not damage humanity along with the world. Among the questions we have are: Which bio safety regulating structures have to be set up? Which laws will be set up to ensure the GM crops production will profit poor farmers, as well as clients? Which information and pieces of research are required to develop structures and laws on these matters as well as other major ones? Increasing agricultural production could increase incomes of smallholders, increase food access, decrease poverty, and lessen malnutrition, in addition to improving the poor’s’ livelihoods. That consecutively will decrease crop security costs and profit both the public health and environment for farmers (Bodulovic, 2005). A valid dilemma is the mechanism offer sufficient motivation breeders of for crops to spotlight on stray crops along with adjustments to hard surroundings have greater attention to farmers that are poor. The public monetary support and the contribution of worldwide businesses will be critical to a study of this type. A STATUS OVERVIEW OF BIOTECHNOLOGY IN SUB‐SAHARAN AFRICA Africa as a continent is not just a hungry but the poorest. It is the part of the world that has the highest food insecurity. Africa’s unwelcoming views for recuperating security for food have been tackled by several research teams that highlight augmented production of GM food as an answer to the food disaster in Africa. Several studies confirm the valuable significance of agbiotech on poverty, food security, and agricultural growth, though most assume that agbiotech is not a solution for shortage (Pray 2002). Numerous researches have as well asserted that the degree of the private sector investment manipulates the impacts (Binenbaum, Nottenburg, Pardey 2000). The efficiency of biosafety in addition to other regulating governments and the effectiveness of plant genetic matter lie among researchers (Bodulovic 2005). Nonetheless, simple facts narrate the tale: Genetically modified, or transgenic crops commercialization was initially accepted for application by farmers in Mexico, the US along with Australia in 1995. But, subsequent to a quick development of GM plants, only South Africa of the nations in Africa that is at the moment commercializing the GM plants. Sub‐Saharan African nations are yet to take cognisant endeavours to appreciate biotechnology, get its prospective, and utilize it to deal with some of the essential agricultural issues. This is a powerful statement, but, an axiom, in spite of confirmation that the past twenty years have seen amplified venture in the study of biotechnology and development (R&D) by several nations in African. Undeniably, institutes of national agricultural research, international institutions, public universities, along with private corporations participate in a number of agricultural biotechnologies (James 2007). A deeper examination, on the other hand, shows that numerous African governments are disbelieving the GM foods. In addition there are many multipart obstacles to the growth along with trying of fresh GM products in Africa; together with inadequate capability –financial, individual, and infrastructural; imprecise or undefined institutional organization for biotechnology R&D; as well as or irresolution on or ambivalence biotechnology as outlined earlier (Falconi 1999). The genesis of ambivalence or indecisiveness of African representatives are partly Europe’s spill-overs concerning the environment, safety of food along with generalized public distrust of international seed corporations. The corporations are being controlling and dishonest (binenbaum, Parley 2001). Many of the existing biotechnology R&D practices in Africa are centred on advancing efficiency in the sector of agriculture. In Africa, the course of research in biotechnology is controlled by the conventional study program. Even as the SSA nations have a number of biotechnology practices running, they are at dissimilar development and research in biotechnology levels (Sankula 2005). The SSA nations can be classified into five categories with respect to biotechnology R&D capability: Nations that produce and commercialize biotechnology processes and products by means of methods of third‐generation genetic engineering (like Kenya) Nations taking part in biotechnology of the third‐generation R&D, however, they have no processes or products yet ( like Uganda) Nations that take part in biotechnology of the second‐generation biotechnology – mainly tissue culture (Nigeria along with Tanzania) Those that engages neither in biotechnology of second nor third generation but plant GM Crops (such as Burkina Faso) Those that do not utilize any type of biotechnology of second or third‐ generation, and do not plant GM crops (such as Botswana and the Gambia) The major participants in agricultural biotechnology R&D in African nations are not like nations in the industrialized countries in which personal companies are the major biotechnology R&D drivers, and, as a result, possess and manage biotechnology data. The majority of biotechnology study in Sub Saharan Africa still is in the public sphere. The key private segment biotechnology participants are international businesses. Institutional expression and partnership between varied actors is necessary. This will entail public‐public as well as public‐private institutional appearance to make sure synergistic connections exist between various biotechnology actors (James 2007). There is a disagreement that practical researches along with institutions of development are essential for attaining sustainable transformation in sectors of nationwide significance. Nevertheless, there is no established proof that the biotechnology R&D of the public segment has any influence. The existing R&D technologies operational in Sub Saharan Africa are due to spill‐ins, only South Africa has possible exemption (James 2007). The world’s economy globalization and the materialization of the massive transnational companies (having financial power larger than that of Sub Saharan African nations combined) are determine the progress of nations in Africa and somewhere else in the under developed world. The attentiveness of biotechnology R&D of agriculture in few corporations has inferences for admission to the expertise in addition to products, with the tendency toward stiffer management of intellectual property endorsed by the accord of the World Trade Organization on trade‐related features of intellectual property rights (TRIPS). The attention and the requirements of TRIPS have culminated into the privatization of advances in biotechnology that are a result of material supplied without restraint by societies of farmers all over the globe; this subject has an immense apprehension to many Africans. GLOBAL TRENDS IN BIOTECHNOLOGY Use of bioengineered crops has seen a great success in the agricultural world since 1996 as millions of hectares have been grown successfully. (Sankula 2005).For example, in 2006, majority of farmers,(90%) from the less developed countries in Brazil, India China ,South Africa and Argentina were involved in farming of biotech crops, (Sankula 2005).The advent Genetically engineered crops have come with diverse benefits by increasing the yields through reduced consumption of fuel, chemical, pesticides and emissions of greenhouse gases and through execution of conservation tillage which is an effective farming method, (Keriimsky & wruble 1996).Subsequent outcomes from biotech like the Swiss Golden rice will add more advantages especially in the food chain. There exist several components of global rules that guide investigations geared towards the use and trade of engineered crops. 1. The first regulation that is spearheaded by world trade organization aims at controlling difficulties encountered in global trade whereby some countries questioned and opposed the use of bioengineered crops. 2. Principles and directions provided by Codex Alimentarius that deal with food security 3. Cartagena protocol which deals with the control and prevention of movement of bioengineered crops that may be hazardous on biodiversity across the boundaries. 4. International treaty on plant genetic resources for food and agriculture that deals with ensuring appropriate genetic science of crops used in agriculture 5. Authority and rules on crop production and natural world protection by European Union. ECONOMICS AND POLICY ISSUES FOR AFRICA The impacts of the contemporary agricultural science and the worldwide flow of the modern variety of crops have been analyzed and their significance on the productivity, production and the human welfare empirically summarized. The has been an increase in the adoption of modern varieties during the twenty years of the Green Revolution, and even more swiftly in the following years, from 9% in 1970 to 29% in 1980, 46% in 1990 and 63% by 1998 (Evenson, Gollin 2003). The conventional wisdom that the there is no strive in the agricultural technology, since it is agro-climatically explicit, as in the biological technology case, or the sensitivity to relative factor prices, with mechanical technology has been resisted by the Green Movement, (Byerlee, Traxler 2002). The Green Revolution applied the principle that the overflows of technology across agro-climatic and political boundaries could be generated if given the acceptable institutions means. This would as a result lead to the growth of food productivity. Therefore, the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) was formed specifically to produce technology overflows, more so for nations that are not able to attain all their research investments benefits (Fransman 1991). The main question left now is whether this can be applied in the current Gene Revolution. The second important question is the reason why Africa did not gain from the Green Revolution. The first reason why the Green Revolution did not arrive in Africa is because Africans produce several crop varieties, yet the founder of the revolution had only seeds for just as a small number of rice and wheat varieties. The second reason was that Africa is not suitable for irrigation due to its dry landscape. The poor state of the African roads was the last reason that hindered Africa from benefiting from the Green movement .the distribution of fertilizer and seed was hard. Africans utilize the least fertilizer quantity in the world and pay the most for it. DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Public R&D Institutions in SSA: a number of constraints face the research institutions in the third world countries .the controversy that viable research and development institutes are need so as to obtain a sustainable change in specialties of national significance including biotechnology R&D is currently underway. The principle of integration amongst stakeholders concerned with the development as well as delivery of biotechnology R&D is necessary, as this allows the need for more action where suitable to add worth. The principle of how approaches, indicators, measures are developed and how responsibilities are assigned as well as how performance management is done should also be applied. There is a possibility that the Public sector biotechnology R&D in SSA does not have any important impact. After an identification that the research developmental impact is very difficult to gauge, I can therefore recommend the organizational uptake indicators to give trustworthy proxies, or the leading indicators in development. Impact assessment studies should not be the only ones used to conduct the lack of connection amongst development results and research outputs, but suitable systems that cater for organizational uptake and research outcomes should be used. These systems give a clearer proof of the expected developmental outcome. Intellectual property rights (IPRs): For many years, several Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) have been issued globally under a range of intellectual property laws of different nations .The IPRs have been issued for various reasons which include; to encourage innovators or inventors to reveal their innovation or invention to the public so as to promote the growth of science and the useful arts. This kind of plan is termed as a bargain or deal between an inventor and the government. The creator, in this case the innovator or inventor reveals the creation and the government in response gives the monopoly for some time. Providing genetically modified (GM) seeds and essential research technologies are firmly consolidated just few international companies. The development of patents in both the public and private sectors can have an inhibiting effect on research that is funded publicly is a concern in many states. The major challenge in the public sector especially where research is concentrated in agriculture in developing nations, is how to get access to GM technologies without breaching IPRs (Vitale, Boyer, Uaiene and Sanders 2005). Due to this, there emerges the need to have new initiatives that meet the potential of these limits to hinder research into crops appropriate to SSA countries. For there to be GM crops developments that favour the SSA country needs, the access to plant genetic resources is extremely crucial. Normally, Material Transfer Agreements (MTAs) govern access to such resources. Therefore, the view that the recent rise of MTAs is not necessarily in the public interest is extensive (Anderson & Jackson 2005). In SSA, the main importance in the crop development is the access to resources under the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture. However, the crop development must be suitable to SSA. I would therefore recommend all SSA countries to approve the agreement.. Users in developing nations should be exempted from paying, incases where material covered by MTA bring commercial applications. To effect this, provisions should be made. Where exemptions are not suitable, the development level of the country in question should be considered when effecting the payments differentiation. CONCLUSION Sub‐Saharan Africa experiences a great constrain in the adoption and the use of Agricultural biotechnology. One of the key strategies to handle the challenge is to stimulate the livelihoods of resource-poor farmers. This strategy should neither be a futile hope nor a sceptical energy to get support, as it will lose its reality, making it unable to realize its good intent. There exists a diverse of policies options in SSA.For African farmers to get GM crops at hand; progressively minded policy makers are needed. Policies outline the main concern areas in biotechnology that are of importance to Africa’s development. These areas are termed as; discovering critical capabilities required for the development, the safe use of biotechnology; establishment of regulatory strategies will help in the research advancement, the consumer protection, trade, commercialization and the setting tactical options that will create and build regional biotechnology. Read More