Views
5 years ago

plant genetic resources for food and agriculture - FAO

plant genetic resources for food and agriculture - FAO

THE STATE OF NATIONAL

THE STATE OF NATIONAL PROGRAMMES, TRAINING NEEDS AND LEGISLATION appropriate. However, several countries in the region are now considering how they might best support the realization of Farmers’ Rights in developing countries. 5.4.5 Biosafety Biosafety has been defined as the “the avoidance of risk to human health and safety and to the conservation of the environment, as a result of the use for research and commerce of infectious or genetically modified organisms (GMOs)”. 23 Concerns over biosafety have grown substantially over the last decade, in parallel with the expanding use of GMOs and the impact of infectious agents. Factors that have contributed to this increasing concern have included outbreaks of transboundary diseases affecting animals, plants and people; heightened awareness of the potential impact of GMOs on biological diversity; increased concern over general food safety issues; and greater attention to the impact of agriculture on environmental sustainability. Since the first SoW report was published, biosafety has emerged as an important issue and many countries in all regions have now either adopted national biosafety regulations or frameworks, or are currently developing them. At the international level, the adoption of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety of the CBD 24 in 2000 marked a milestone in cooperation on the safe transfer, handling and use of GMOs. The Cartagena Protocol entered into force in 2001 and as of February 2010, had been ratified by 157 countries. It now provides the international legal framework that 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. Over the past decade many countries have adopted national regulations and biosafety frameworks that aim to reduce risks to the environment and human health. The United States of America has adopted an incremental approach to the regulation of biotechnology, based on the regulation of the characteristics of a product, rather than on the assumption that products of biotechnology automatically need special regulations. In Europe, the application of the ‘precautionary principle’ can block use of a GMO until evidence is presented that the transgenic organism is safe. This has limited the number of approvals that have been granted for the commercial use of GMOs and even fewer approvals for their deliberate release into the environment. At the European Union level, Directive 2001/18/EC on the release of GMOs was adopted in 2001. At the national level, all 27 European Union Member States have enacted biosafety or biotechnology-related laws and among non-European Union European countries, eight 25 have done so as well. Albania, Armenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Georgia are currently drafting biosafety legislation. The development and adoption of biosafety frameworks and regulations in developing countries is increasing rapidly, supported in many cases by foreign donors or regional intergovernmental agencies. Many African countries 26 have adopted formal biosafety measures while 33 other African countries 27 are in the process of developing or adopting such regulations. In the Americas, all Central and South American countries have adopted some form of regulation or guidelines on biosafety, with the exception of Ecuador and Nicaragua and these are both currently drafting such regulations. Of the Caribbean nations, only Belize and Cuba have enacted biosafety laws, although in 12 other countries, 28 legislation is being formulated. In Asia and the Pacific, legislation or guidelines on biosafety are in place in eleven countries 29 and draft regulations are under development in fifteen, 30 while in the Near East, Cyprus, Egypt, Israel, Kazakhstan, Malta, Pakistan, the Syrian Arab Republic and Tajikistan have adopted biosafety legislation and it is under development in twelve other countries. 31 5.5 Changes since the first State of the World report was published Although it has been patchy, progress has been made overall since the publication of the first SoW report in the strengthening of national programmes, the development of training capacity and particularly, in 135

CHAPTER 5 the adoption of national policies, laws and regulations relevant to the conservation and use of PGRFA. Nevertheless, as indicated above, there is still a way to go in each of these areas: • although the first SoW report classified national programmes into three categories, since then it has become clear that such a typology is too simplistic and that there is huge heterogeneity among national programmes in terms of their goals, functions, organization and structure; • there has been considerable progress in establishing national programmes, at least in part as a consequence of the adoption of the ITPGRFA and GPA. Of the 113 countries that provided information for both the first and second SoW reports, 54 percent had a national programme in 1996 whereas 71 percent currently have one; • even in countries with active and well-coordinated national programmes, certain elements are still often missing. National, publicly accessible databases, for example are still comparatively rare as are coordinated systems for safety duplication and collaborative public awareness; • the new NISM on the implementation of the GPA was mentioned by many country reports as a valuable tool for establishing and improving national programmes; • although several countries, especially in Europe, reported that overall funding has increased since 1996, many of the country reports noted that their national programme received inadequate and unreliable funding, making it difficult to plan over multiple years; • while in most countries national government institutions are the principal entities involved in national programmes, the inclusion of other stakeholders has expanded, especially of private for-profit companies, NGOs, farmer organizations and educational institutions; • public-private research and development partnerships appear to have grown in importance, especially in plant breeding and biotechnology, not only in developed but also in many developing countries; • universities have become increasingly involved in research on PGRFA, especially in the application of biotechnology to conservation and crop improvement; 136 THE SECOND REPORT ON THE STATE OF THE WORLD’S PGRFA • new education and training opportunities have opened up in several countries and more universities now offer M.Sc. and Ph.D. courses. Collaboration in training between national programmes and international and regional organizations has become stronger and new training materials have been developed; • since the first SoW report was published, most countries have enacted new national phytosanitary legislation, or revised old legislation, in large part in response to the adoption of the revised IPPC in 1997; • there have been three main trends in national seed legislation and policy over the past decade: the emergence of voluntary arrangements on seed certification and variety release; the growing use of accreditation principles alongside official national rules and standards; and the regional harmonization of seed laws; • most developing and Eastern European countries that now provide legal protection to new plant varieties, have done so in the last decade. A few others are currently drafting legislation; • the importance of farmers as custodians and developers of genetic diversity was recognized in the ITPGRFA through the provisions of Article 9 on Farmers’ Rights. A few countries have adopted regulations covering one or more aspects of Farmers’ Rights; • since the first SoW report was published, biosafety has emerged as an important issue and many countries have now either adopted national biosafety regulations or frameworks, or are currently developing them. As of February 2010, 157 countries and the European Union had ratified the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. 5.6 Gaps and needs Key gaps and needs for the future include: • whether a national PGRFA programme is centralized, sectorial, or even regional, it is vital that there be effective coordination and collaboration among its elements, including ministries, government institutions, universities, private companies, NGOs, farmers’ groups and others;

  • 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 and 136: CHAPTER 4 4.7.4 Cooperation and lin
  • Page 137 and 138: CHAPTER 4 seed legislation to meet
  • 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: CHAPTER 5 Box 5.2 India’s Protect
  • 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
The State of Food and Agriculture - FAO
ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCES RESSOURCES ... - FAO
The State of Food and Agriculture 2013 - FAO
indian society of plant genetic resources - Bioversity International
THE NATIONAL ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCES CENTRE ... - FAO
The state of food and agriculture, 1968 - FAO
The Right to Food and Access to Natural Resources - FAO
New Genetics, Food and Agriculture - International Council for Science
Food Security and Agricultural Mitigation in Developing ... - FAO
ANIMAL GENETIC RESOURCES RESSOURCES ... - FAO
Conservation Agriculture and Sustainable Crop Intensification ... - FAO
Genetically Modified Plants for Food Use and Human ... - Guardian
The State of the World's Land and Water Resources for Food ... - FAO
GROWING FOOD - FAO
varieties creation and conservation of plant genetic resources
New Genetics, Food and Agriculture: Scientific ... - ArgenBio
Genetic Modified Food - State Agriculture and Rural Leaders
Land tenure and international investments in agriculture - FAO
Climate change, water and food security - FAO
Food wastage footprint: Impacts on natural resources ... - FAO
Conservation agriculture as practised in Kenya: two case ... - FAO
BIODIPLOMACY -- Genetic Resources and International Relations
Explanatory Guide to the International Treaty on Plant Genetic - IUCN
food insecurity in the world - FAO
Agriculture Sector Bulletin Summer 2011 [pdf] - FAO
BEFS Module 3 – Agricultural commodities outlook - FAO