Views
5 years ago

plant genetic resources for food and agriculture - FAO

plant genetic resources for food and agriculture - FAO

THE STATE OF USE

THE STATE OF USE produced within ‘formal’ systems often pertains to modern varieties. The ‘informal’ system, on the other hand, is that often practiced by farmers themselves who produce, select, use and market their own seed through local, generally less regulated channels. Of course, a given farmer will generally resort to either or both of these approaches for different crops or in different seasons and they generally do not make a big distinction between the two. Several countries in Africa, including Benin, Madagascar and Mali reported that the farmer seed sector is dominant nationally, although there is crop specificity; 100 percent of Mali’s cottonseed, for example, is supplied by the private sector. ‘Formal’ systems are developing in many emerging economies and the international seed trade is expanding with increasing globalization. Often ‘formal’ and ‘informal’ systems co-exist and sometimes ‘informal’ seed production becomes ‘formalized’ as it becomes more regulated. India, for example, indicated that the two systems operate through different, but complementary mechanisms. In its country report, Kenya acknowledged that the ‘informal’ seed trade, despite being illegal, was responsible for the maintenance of rare crop varieties. Uzbekistan commented similarly and Peru noted the importance of informal exchange of seed of underutilized crop species. Several multinational companies have recently increased their market share through takeovers and mergers. The top five are now responsible for more than 30 percent of the global commercial seed market and much more for crops such as sugar beet, maize and vegetables. 34 The private sector tends to target large markets that offer high profit margins. Five of the top ten seed companies listed in the first SoW report have ceased to exist as independent companies and the current top company is the size of the former top six combined. Companies in several developing countries, including the Philippines and Thailand, are now able to supply many of the vegetable seeds formerly supplied by American, European and Japanese multinationals. Other countries, including Chile, Hungary and Kenya, have greatly increased their certified seed production. Egypt, Japan and Jordan all mentioned their reliance on the private sector for the supply of hybrid vegetable seed. The global seed market, worth USD 30 billion in 1996 is now valued in excess of USD 36 billion. In developed countries, the tendency has been to encourage the private sector to produce seed, with public funding moving further upstream into research and germplasm development. In developing countries, substantial investments were made to develop public seed production in the 1980s and 1990s; however, this proved to be very costly, resulting in donors curtailing their support and encouraging states to disengage from the sector. Some countries, such as India, consider seed production to be of strategic importance for food security and have maintained a strong public seed production system. In other countries and for crops like hybrid maize, the state has withdrawn from seed production and the private sector has taken over. For crops with less market opportunities, such as self-pollinated crops, seed production systems have essentially collapsed in many countries. In spite of the overall decline in public sector involvement in the seed sector, there are indications that this situation may now be reversing in some parts of the world. The country reports of Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Jordan and Yemen, for example, all mentioned that community-based production and supply systems and village-based seed enterprises have been promoted in an effort to increase the production of quality seed. Investment by the private seed sector has mainly been targeted at the most profitable crops (hybrid cereals and vegetables), and mostly in countries with market-oriented agriculture. Some governments in countries such as India, have therefore tried to find an optimal way forward, with the public sector investing in areas that are of relatively little commercial interest such as pre-breeding, developing varieties for resource poor farmers and focusing on crops of limited market potential. With increasing professionalism in the ecological farming sector, there is a small but increasing demand for high quality organic seed. In spite of problems related to compliance with seed certification requirements, especially regarding seed-borne diseases, seed production for organic and low-input agriculture is expanding. Lebanon, for example, indicated that it has a small organic seed market. Likewise there is a growing organic seed market in the Netherlands, but there are difficulties in adapting current conventional 109

CHAPTER 4 seed legislation to meet the needs and concerns of this sector. There is also an expanding market for old, ‘heritage’ varieties. While the United States of America allows the marketing of local varieties without restriction, the European Union has a strict seed regulatory framework, although it is currently developing mechanisms that would permit the legal marketing of the seed of ‘conservation varieties’ of vegetables that would not meet normal uniformity requirements (see Section 5.4.2). Norway reported that its government outlaws the marketing of seed of old varieties in harmony with European Union legislation. However, it has instituted a heritage system for historical gardens and museums. It is possible to market uncertified landrace seeds in Finland with the intention of conserving and promoting diversity and Greece permits the use of heritage seed in ecological farming systems. In France, it is possible to market seeds of old vegetable varieties for home gardening and in Hungary the production of seed of old varieties and landraces is considered a priority. Ghana and Jamaica both also reported interest in heritage seed programmes. Transgenic seed production has increased over the past ten years and the seed market has grown in value from USD 280 million in 1996 to over USD 7 billion in 2007. 35 In the latter year, a total of 114.3 million hectares was planted with GM-crops, mainly soybean, maize, cotton and oilseed rape. While the rate of increase in the area under GM-crops is slowing in developed countries, it continues to rise steadily in the developing world. However, even though the number of countries where GM-crops are being tested is rising fast, the number of countries where significant acreages of GM-crops are commercially planted is still limited, mainly in Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, India, South Africa and the United States of America. GM-varieties have met with strong opposition from the general public and civil society in many European and other countries in relation to concerns about their potential impact on human health and the environment. This has resulted in the prohibition or restricted adoption of this technology in many countries. However, there are signs that, in recent years, GM-varieties are starting to be adopted in Africa, for example, GM cotton in Burkina Faso. 110 THE SECOND REPORT ON THE STATE OF THE WORLD’S PGRFA Philanthropic foundations are also funding the development of transgenic crops such as cassava for Africa. The expansion of the seed trade over the last several decades has been accompanied by the development of increasingly sophisticated seed regulatory frameworks. These are generally aimed at supporting the seed sector and improving the quality of seed sold to farmers. However, more recently, questions have been raised about many of these regulatory systems. In some cases, regulations can lead to more restricted markets and reduced cross-border trade. This can limit farmers’ access to genetic diversity, or lead to long delays in variety release. Seed regulations can be complex and costly and there are even cases in which seed regulations have outlawed ‘informal’ seed systems even though they are responsible for supplying most of the seed. In recognition of these concerns, there has been an evolution in seed regulations in many countries over the last decade. Several regions, e.g. Europe, Southern Africa and West Africa have simplified procedures, facilitated cross-border trade and harmonized seed regulatory frameworks. Such harmonization started at the end of the 1960s in Europe and at the beginning of this century in some African countries. Furthermore, PBR legislation has played an important role in making new varieties more accessible to farmers in many member countries of the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV). Biosafety regulatory systems have been developed in order to manage any potentially negative effects that might arise from the exchange and use of GM-crops. The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety which entered into force in 2001, represents a new dimension to seed production and trade and underpins the current development of national biosafety regulations in many countries. In spite of concerns over the capacity of some developing countries to fully implement such regulations, it is likely that they will lead, in the near future, to a wider adoption of GM-varieties. (see Section 5.4.5). Emergency seed aid is an area that has received increased attention in recent years. Following natural disasters and civil conflicts, in order to quickly restart crop production, local and international agencies have

  • Page 1 and 2:

    The Second Report on THE STATE OF T

  • Page 3 and 4:

    The designations employed and the p

  • Page 5 and 6:

    I hope and trust that the informati

  • Page 7 and 8:

    2.4 Global challenges to in situ co

  • Page 9 and 10:

    5.5 Changes since the first State o

  • Page 11 and 12:

    Appendix 2 Major germplasm collecti

  • Page 13 and 14:

    3.2 Holders of the six largest ex s

  • Page 15 and 16:

    The CGRFA requested that the SoWPGR

  • Page 17 and 18:

    Chapter 7 - Access to plant genetic

  • Page 20 and 21:

    Executive summary �his report des

  • Page 22 and 23:

    documentation and characterization

  • Page 24 and 25:

    Given the high level of interdepend

  • Page 28:

    Chapter 1 The state of diversity CH

  • Page 31 and 32:

    CHAPTER 1 1.2.1 Changes in the stat

  • Page 33 and 34:

    TABLE 1.2 Comparison between the co

  • Page 35 and 36:

    CHAPTER 1 in national agricultural

  • Page 37 and 38:

    FIGURE 1.1 Global priority genetic

  • Page 39 and 40:

    12 CHAPTER 1 AFRICA • Benin Molec

  • Page 41 and 42:

    14 CHAPTER 1 NEAR EAST effective at

  • Page 43 and 44:

    CHAPTER 1 comparisons, or use the i

  • Page 45 and 46:

    18 CHAPTER 1 FIGURE 1.3 Interdepend

  • Page 47 and 48:

    TABLE 1.4 (continued) Indicators of

  • Page 49 and 50:

    CHAPTER 1 even national, germplasm

  • Page 51 and 52:

    24 CHAPTER 1 9 Hammer, K. 2003. A p

  • Page 53:

    26 CHAPTER 1 X. & Li, Z. 2006. Gene

  • Page 58 and 59:

    THE STATE OF IN SITU MANAGEMENT 2.1

  • Page 60 and 61:

    THE STATE OF IN SITU MANAGEMENT (ba

  • Page 62 and 63:

    THE STATE OF IN SITU MANAGEMENT the

  • Page 64 and 65:

    THE STATE OF IN SITU MANAGEMENT TAB

  • Page 66 and 67:

    THE STATE OF IN SITU MANAGEMENT TAB

  • Page 68 and 69:

    THE STATE OF IN SITU MANAGEMENT com

  • Page 70 and 71:

    THE STATE OF IN SITU MANAGEMENT on

  • Page 72 and 73:

    THE STATE OF IN SITU MANAGEMENT has

  • Page 74 and 75:

    THE STATE OF IN SITU MANAGEMENT 12

  • Page 76 and 77:

    THE STATE OF IN SITU MANAGEMENT 53

  • Page 78:

    THE STATE OF IN SITU MANAGEMENT Max

  • Page 82 and 83:

    THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION 3

  • Page 84 and 85:

    THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION F

  • Page 86 and 87: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION A
  • Page 88 and 89: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION t
  • Page 90 and 91: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION T
  • Page 92 and 93: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION T
  • Page 94 and 95: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION U
  • Page 96 and 97: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION T
  • Page 98 and 99: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION u
  • Page 100 and 101: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION A
  • Page 102 and 103: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION l
  • Page 104 and 105: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION A
  • Page 106 and 107: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION p
  • Page 108 and 109: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION T
  • Page 110 and 111: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION C
  • Page 112 and 113: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION N
  • Page 114 and 115: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION t
  • Page 116 and 117: THE STATE OF EX SITU CONSERVATION 1
  • Page 120: Chapter 4 The state of use CHAPTER
  • Page 123 and 124: 96 CHAPTER 4 very similar (approxim
  • Page 125 and 126: 98 CHAPTER 4 including rice, maize
  • Page 127 and 128: CHAPTER 4 In the United States of A
  • Page 129 and 130: CHAPTER 4 biosafety monitoring and
  • Page 131 and 132: CHAPTER 4 improvement. While the fi
  • Page 133 and 134: CHAPTER 4 exchange of material and
  • Page 135: CHAPTER 4 4.7.4 Cooperation and lin
  • Page 139 and 140: CHAPTER 4 A number of countries 36
  • Page 141 and 142: CHAPTER 4 Different plants are rich
  • Page 143 and 144: CHAPTER 4 breeding activities over
  • Page 145 and 146: 118 CHAPTER 4 16 Op cit. Endnote 8.
  • Page 148: Chapter 5 The state of national pro
  • Page 151 and 152: CHAPTER 5 national system based on
  • Page 153 and 154: CHAPTER 5 involvement vary from the
  • Page 155 and 156: CHAPTER 5 of Bolivia, for example,
  • Page 157 and 158: CHAPTER 5 In some countries includi
  • Page 159 and 160: CHAPTER 5 Africa, Burkina Faso, Cam
  • Page 161 and 162: CHAPTER 5 Box 5.2 India’s Protect
  • Page 163 and 164: CHAPTER 5 the adoption of national
  • Page 165 and 166: 138 CHAPTER 5 10 Available at: http
  • Page 168: Chapter 6 The state of regional and
  • Page 171 and 172: CHAPTER 6 a) those that focus on co
  • Page 173 and 174: 146 CHAPTER 6 PGRN has continued to
  • Page 175 and 176: CHAPTER 6 • the Regional Cooperat
  • Page 177 and 178: CHAPTER 6 and African countries for
  • Page 179 and 180: CHAPTER 6 few years, the CGIAR Syst
  • Page 181 and 182: CHAPTER 6 • ICBA: 64 ICBA was est
  • Page 183 and 184: CHAPTER 6 Varieties. Central Americ
  • Page 185 and 186: CHAPTER 6 the first SoW report was
  • Page 187 and 188:

    160 CHAPTER 6 12 Available at: www.

  • Page 190:

    Chapter 7 Access to Plant Genetic R

  • Page 193 and 194:

    CHAPTER 7 Box 7.1 Benefit-sharing u

  • Page 195 and 196:

    CHAPTER 7 laws, regulations and con

  • Page 197 and 198:

    170 CHAPTER 7 THE SECOND REPORT ON

  • Page 199 and 200:

    CHAPTER 7 has been adapted to incor

  • Page 201 and 202:

    CHAPTER 7 changes after the initial

  • Page 203 and 204:

    CHAPTER 7 regional workshops on Far

  • Page 205:

    178 CHAPTER 7 20 Experience of the

  • Page 210 and 211:

    THE CONTRIBUTION OF PGRFA TO FOOD S

  • Page 212 and 213:

    THE CONTRIBUTION OF PGRFA TO FOOD S

  • Page 214 and 215:

    THE CONTRIBUTION OF PGRFA TO FOOD S

  • Page 216 and 217:

    THE CONTRIBUTION OF PGRFA TO FOOD S

  • Page 218 and 219:

    THE CONTRIBUTION OF PGRFA TO FOOD S

  • Page 220 and 221:

    THE CONTRIBUTION OF PGRFA TO FOOD S

  • Page 222 and 223:

    THE CONTRIBUTION OF PGRFA TO FOOD S

  • Page 224 and 225:

    THE CONTRIBUTION OF PGRFA TO FOOD S

  • Page 226 and 227:

    THE CONTRIBUTION OF PGRFA TO FOOD S

  • Page 228:

    THE CONTRIBUTION OF PGRFA TO FOOD S

  • Page 232 and 233:

    LIST OF COUNTRIES THAT PROVIDED INF

  • Page 234 and 235:

    LIST OF COUNTRIES THAT PROVIDED INF

  • Page 238:

    Annex 2 Regional distribution of co

  • Page 241:

    EUROPE 214 ANNEX 2 ASIA AND THE PAC

  • Page 246 and 247:

    STATUS BY COUNTRY OF NATIONAL LEGIS

  • Page 248 and 249:

    STATUS BY COUNTRY OF NATIONAL LEGIS

  • Page 250 and 251:

    STATUS BY COUNTRY OF NATIONAL LEGIS

  • Page 252 and 253:

    STATUS BY COUNTRY OF NATIONAL LEGIS

  • Page 254 and 255:

    STATUS BY COUNTRY OF NATIONAL LEGIS

  • Page 256 and 257:

    STATUS BY COUNTRY OF NATIONAL LEGIS

  • Page 258 and 259:

    STATUS BY COUNTRY OF NATIONAL LEGIS

  • Page 260 and 261:

    STATUS BY COUNTRY OF NATIONAL LEGIS

  • Page 262 and 263:

    STATUS BY COUNTRY OF NATIONAL LEGIS

  • Page 264 and 265:

    STATUS BY COUNTRY OF NATIONAL LEGIS

  • Page 266:

    STATUS BY COUNTRY OF NATIONAL LEGIS

  • Page 270 and 271:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 272 and 273:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 274 and 275:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 276 and 277:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 278 and 279:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 280 and 281:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 282 and 283:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 284 and 285:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 286 and 287:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 288 and 289:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 290 and 291:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 292 and 293:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 294 and 295:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 296 and 297:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 298 and 299:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 300 and 301:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 302 and 303:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 304 and 305:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 306 and 307:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 308 and 309:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 310:

    MAJOR GERMPLASM COLLECTIONS BY CROP

  • Page 314 and 315:

    THE STATE-OF-THE-ART: METHODOLOGIES

  • Page 316 and 317:

    THE STATE-OF-THE-ART: METHODOLOGIES

  • Page 318 and 319:

    THE STATE-OF-THE-ART: METHODOLOGIES

  • Page 320 and 321:

    THE STATE-OF-THE-ART: METHODOLOGIES

  • Page 322 and 323:

    THE STATE-OF-THE-ART: METHODOLOGIES

  • Page 324 and 325:

    THE STATE-OF-THE-ART: METHODOLOGIES

  • Page 326 and 327:

    THE STATE-OF-THE-ART: METHODOLOGIES

  • Page 328 and 329:

    THE STATE-OF-THE-ART: METHODOLOGIES

  • Page 332:

    Appendix 4 State of diversity of ma

  • Page 335 and 336:

    APPENDIX 4 some country reports. 6

  • Page 337 and 338:

    APPENDIX 4 option for perennial tax

  • Page 339 and 340:

    APPENDIX 4 (wild one-grain wheat, T

  • Page 341 and 342:

    APPENDIX 4 regeneration of existing

  • Page 343 and 344:

    APPENDIX 4 An operational comprehen

  • Page 345 and 346:

    APPENDIX 4 FIGURE A4.2 Global yield

  • Page 347 and 348:

    APPENDIX 4 actively contribute to t

  • Page 349 and 350:

    APPENDIX 4 Role of crop in sustaina

  • Page 351 and 352:

    APPENDIX 4 and Myanmar (3 percent).

  • Page 353 and 354:

    APPENDIX 4 progenitor is the wild s

  • Page 355 and 356:

    appendiX 4 Ex situ conservation sta

  • Page 357 and 358:

    APPENDIX 4 Documentation, character

  • Page 359 and 360:

    APPENDIX 4 The two global chickpea

  • Page 361 and 362:

    APPENDIX 4 in collections, absence

  • Page 363 and 364:

    APPENDIX 4 FIGURE A4.5 Global yield

  • Page 365 and 366:

    338 APPENDIX 4 are also conserved.

  • Page 367 and 368:

    340 APPENDIX 4 WebPDF/Crop percent2

  • Page 369 and 370:

    342 APPENDIX 4 90 Op cit. Endnote 2

  • Page 371 and 372:

    344 APPENDIX 4 159 GCDT. 2007. Glob

  • Page 373 and 374:

    346 APPENDIX 4 217 Op cit. Endnote

  • Page 375 and 376:

    348 APPENDIX 4 291 Op cit. Endnote

  • Page 377 and 378:

    350 APPENDIX 4 366 Ibid. Endnote 35

  • Page 379 and 380:

    BAAFS Beijing Academy of Agricultur

  • Page 381 and 382:

    CN Centre Néerlandais (Côte d’I

  • Page 383 and 384:

    DTRUFC División of Tropical Resear

  • Page 385 and 386:

    HRIGRU Horticultural Research Inter

  • Page 387 and 388:

    INIA CARI Centro Regional de Invest

  • Page 389 and 390:

    IVM Institute of Grape and Wine «M

  • Page 391 and 392:

    NISM National Information Sharing M

  • Page 393 and 394:

    REHOVOT Department of Field and Veg

  • Page 395 and 396:

    SRI Sugar Crop Research Institute,

  • Page 397:

    WCMC World Conservation Monitoring

Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture - FAO
IN SITU - FAO
The State of Food and Agriculture - FAO
ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCES RESSOURCES ... - FAO
The State of Food and Agriculture 2013 - FAO
THE NATIONAL ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCES CENTRE ... - FAO
Germany - FAO
The state of food and agriculture, 1968 - FAO
New Genetics, Food and Agriculture - International Council for Science
The Right to Food and Access to Natural Resources - FAO
Food Security and Agricultural Mitigation in Developing ... - FAO
Genetically Modified Plants for Food Use and Human ... - Guardian
The State of the World's Land and Water Resources for Food ... - FAO
ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCES RESSOURCES ... - FAO
GROWING FOOD - FAO
varieties creation and conservation of plant genetic resources
Conservation Agriculture and Sustainable Crop Intensification ... - FAO
Food wastage footprint: Impacts on natural resources ... - FAO
Conservation agriculture as practised in Kenya: two case ... - FAO
New Genetics, Food and Agriculture: Scientific ... - ArgenBio
Land tenure and international investments in agriculture - FAO
Portugal - FAO
food insecurity in the world - FAO
BIODIPLOMACY -- Genetic Resources and International Relations
Climate change, water and food security - FAO
Agriculture Sector Bulletin Summer 2011 [pdf] - FAO
Global food losses and food waste - FAO