Skip to main content

Biosafety Regulation of Genetically Modified Orphan Crops in Developing Countries: A Way Forward

  • Chapter
Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy

Part of the book series: Natural Resource Management and Policy ((NRMP,volume 30))

Abstract

Orphan crops are critical to developing country strategies for poverty alleviation. However, some productivity constraints of orphan crops cannot be addressed by conventional research, but potentially through genetically modified (GM) crops. These undergo biosafety regulatory assessment in-country. Significant scientific and regulatory gaps exist for orphan crops, potential genes, and transformation protocols. Biosafety assessments of orphan crops may require generation of new information. This becomes difficult if extensive new data is asked for during research, especially for public sector institutions in developing countries investing in GM technologies. We propose alternative approaches to help orphan crops move forward in their testing and development, achieving safety goals, while taking into account the limited resources available for this effort.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Atanassov, A., A. Bahieldin, J. Brink, M. Burachik, J.I. Cohen, V. Dhawan, R.V. Ebora, J. Falck-Zepeda, L. Herrera-Estrella, J. Komen, F.C. Low, E. Omaliko, B. Odhiambo, H. Quemada, Y. Peng, MJ. Sampaio, I. Sithole-Niang, A. Sittenfeld, M. Smale, Sutrisno, R. Valyasevi, Y. Zafar, and P. Zambrano. 2004. “To Reach the Poor: Results from the ISNAR-IFPR1 Next Harvest Study on Genetically Modified Crops, Public Research, and Policy Implications.” EPTD Discussion Paper No. 116, Environment and Production Technology Division, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J.I. (ed.) 1999. “Managing Agricultural Biotechnology.” Wallingford, UK: CAB1 Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • ____. 2005. “Poorer Nations Turn to Publicly Developed GM Crops.” Nature 23(1): 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMasi, J.A., R.W. Hansen, and H.G. Grabowski. 2003. “The Price of Innovation: New Estimates of Drug Development Costs.” Journal of Health Economics 22(2): 151–185.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Department of Biotechnology — India. 1998. “Revised Guidelines for Research in Transgenic Plants and Guidelines for Toxicity and Allergenicity of Transgenic Seeds, Plants and Plant Parts.” Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India, New Delhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eyzaguirre, P., S. Padulosi, and T. Hodgkin. 1999. “IPGRI’s Strategy for Neglected and Underutilized Species and the Human Dimension of Agrobiodiversity.” In S. Padulosi, ed., Priority Setting for Underutilized and Neglected Plant Species of the Mediterranean Region (report of the IPGRI Conference, February 9–11, 1998, in Aleppo, Syria). International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falconi, C. 1999. “Agricultural Biotechnology Research Capacity in Four Countries.” ISNAR Discussion Paper No. 42, International Service for National Agricultural Research, The Hague, the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Food and Agricultural Organization. 2004. “State of Food and Agriculture 2003–2004.” FAO Agriculture Series No. 35, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR). 2001. “Under-utilized and Orphan Species and Commodities — A Global Framework for Action.” A position paper of the GFAR-UOC Secretariat, Rome, Italy

    Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, J.F. 2003. “A Framework for Assessing the Risk of Transgenic Crops.” BioScience 53(5): 512–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, J., Q. Wang, Y. Zhang, and J. Falck-Zepeda. 2001. “Agricultural Biotechnology Research Indicators: China.” ISNAR Discussion Paper, No. 01-5, International Service for National Agricultural Research, The Hague, the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Isaac, G. E. 2004. “The Interaction Between Levels of Rule Making in International Trade and Investment: The Case of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.” Discussion paper prepared for the “Workshop on the Interaction Between Levels of Rule Making in International Trade and Investment UNU CRIS/LSE ITPU Project” in Brussels, Belgium, December.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naylor, R.L., W.P. Falcon, R.M. Goodman, M.M. Jahn, T. Sengooba, H. Tefera, and RJ. Nelson. 2004. “Biotechnology in the Developing World: A Case for Increased Investments in Orphan Crops.” Food Policy 29(1): 15–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naylor, R.L., R. Nelson, W. Falcon, R. Goodman, M. Jahn, J. Kalazicgh, T. Sengooba, and H. Tefera. 2002. “Integrating New Genetic Technologies Into the Improvement of Orphan Crops in Least Developed Countries” Paper presented at the 6th International ICABR (International Consortium on Agricultural Biotechnology Research) Conference on Agricultural Biotechnologies: New Avenues for Production, Consumption and Technology Transfer, July 11–14, in Ravello, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odhiambo, B. 2002. “Products of Modern Biotechnology Arising from Public Research Collaboration in Kenya.” Paper presented at the conference “Next Harvest — Advancing Biotechnology’s Public Good; Technology Assessment, Regulation and Dissemination,” October 7–9, International Service for National Agricultural Research, The Hague, the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Padulosi, S., T. Hodgkin, J.T. Williams, and N. Haq. 2002. “Underutilized Crops: Trends, Challenges and Opportunities in the 21st Century.” In J.M.M. Engels, V.R. Rao, A.H.D. Brown, and M.T. Jackson, eds., Managing Plant Genetic Diversity. Oxon, UK: CABI Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pray, C.E., P. Bengali, and B. Ramaswami. 2004. “Costs and Benefits of Biosafety Regulation in India: A Preliminary Assessment.” Paper presented at the 8th ICABR (International Consortium on Agricultural Biotechnology Research) Conference, July 8–11, Ravello, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quemada, H. 2003. “Developing a Regulatory Package for Insect Tolerant Potatoes for African Farmers: Projected Data Requirements for Regulatory Approval in South Africa.” Paper presented at the symposium “Strengthening Biosafety Capacity for Development,” June 9–11, Dikhololo, South Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampaio, M.J. 2002. “Ag-Biotechnology GMO Regulations/IP Progresses and Constraints.” Paper presented at the conference “Next Harvest — Advancing Biotechnology’s Public Good: Technology Assessment, Regulation and Dissemination,” October 7–9, International Service for National Agricultural Research, The Hague, the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity. 2000. “Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity: Text and Annexes.” Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal, Quebec. Available online at http://www.biodiv.org/doc/legal/cartagena-protocol-en.pdf (accessed July 28, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sittenfeld, A. 2002. “Agricultural Biotechnology in Costa Rica: Status of Transgenic Crops.” Paper presented at the conference “Next Harvest — Advancing Biotechnology’s Public Good: Technology Assessment, Regulation and Dissemination,” October 7–9, International Service for National Agricultural Research, The Hague, the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, N., L. Kent, and C. Fauquet. 2000. “Progress and Challenges for the Deployment of Transgenic Technologies in Cassava.” AgBioForum 7(1&2): 51–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torres, R., and C. Falconi. 2000. “Agricultural Biotechnology Research Indicators: Colombia.” ISNAR Discussion Paper No. 00-5, International Service for National Agricultural Research, The Hague, the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J.T., and N. Haq. 2002. “Global Research on Underutilized Crops: An Assessment of Current Activities and Proposals for Enhanced Cooperation.” International Centre for Underutilised Crops, Southampton, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, F., and W.P. Butz. 2004. “The Future of Genetically Modified Crops: Lessons from the Green Revolution.” RAND Corporation Monograph Series MG-161, RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zepeda, J.F., Cohen, J.I. (2006). Biosafety Regulation of Genetically Modified Orphan Crops in Developing Countries: A Way Forward. In: Just, R.E., Alston, J.M., Zilberman, D. (eds) Regulating Agricultural Biotechnology: Economics and Policy. Natural Resource Management and Policy, vol 30. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-36953-2_23

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics