The results of the
e-mail based Global Consultations
on Farmers’ Rights
Regine Andersen, Senior Research Fellow
and Tone Winge, Research Fellow,
Fridtjof Nansen Institute, Norway
Global Consultations Conference on Farmers’ Rights
Addis Ababa, 23–25 November 2010
Background
 Aim: Enabling participation and involvement
in the Global Consultations.
 Questionnaire developed in collaboration
with various stakeholders – three languages
 Distribution of questionnaire through the
Secretariat, and an own address base of
1000 names + at various websites
 All recipients asked to further distribute the
questionnaire and to consult with farmers
and others who have no access to e-mail
State of the report
 Draft preliminary report
 Comments welcome
 To be finalized next month, taking all
comments into consideration
 To be presented together with the report
from this consultation conference as one
joint report
 Focus here: Present highlights as basis to
discussing key issues to take into account
in the conference
The respondents
 Received questionnaires: 60 (61)
 Number of participants: 130
 Respondents sending position papers: 7
 Number of position papers 6
 Grand total: 137 respondents
The respondents per region
 Africa: 21 questionnaires/11 countries
In addition: 16 consulted farmers/researchers
 Asia: 11 questionnaires/ 7 countries
In addition: 14 consulted farmers/NGO workers
 Near East: 6 questionnaires/ 1 country
In addition: 12 consulted mainly extension workers
 Latin America: 5 questionnaires/ 5 countries
Altogether: 32 consulted farmers/ppb-scientists
 Europe: 12 questionnaires/ 8 countries
No extra consulted people
 North America: 5 questionnaires/ 2 countries
No extra consulted people
The respondents per stakeholder
 NGOs: 23 questionnaires
+ 2 respondents sending 2 position papers
 Public sector: 15 questionnaires
 Farmers: 13 questionnaires
+ 2 respondents sending 2 position papers
(but many farmer participants – appr. 60)
 Seed industry: 3 questionnaires
+ 5 respondents sending 4 position papers
 Others: 6 questionnaires
Topics of the questionnaire
 General views and experiences:
– Importance of aspects of Farmers’ Rights
– Major achievements of the country
– Major obstacles to the realization of FR
– Performance of country with regard to the
realization of Farmers’ Rights
– Most important measures to be taken in the
country
– Other views and experiences
– Recommendations to the Governing Body
The questionnaire (cont.)
 The four aspects of Farmers’ Rights:
–
–
–
–
The protection of traditional knowledge
Participation in benefit sharing
Participation in decision making at national level
Farmers’ rights to save, use, exchange and sell
farm saved seed
 Questions regarding these aspects:
– National measures affecting FR – with evaluation
– Most important gaps and needs
– Other views and experiences
General views and experiences
 Most important aspects of farmers’ rights:
– All aspects rated as important by the majority of
respondents
– Slight differences between stakeholders with
regard to rating of importance
General views and experiences
 Major achievements:
– We asked about achievements with regard to the
four FR-aspects in terms of law, policies,
programmes and projects, and of awareness
– Achievements have been reported with regard to
all four elements of Farmers’ Rights
– Traditional knowledge is the element where
most respondents noted achievements/projects,
followed by benefit sharing projects
– Few achievements were noted with regard to
conducive law and policy, but some examples
– Many respondents have noted markedly
increased awareness
General views and experiences
 Major achievements (cont.), examples:
– Development of legislation/policies (India/Bhutan)
– Seed collection, -banks, -fairs, and –multiplication
– Participatory plant breeding and seed networks
– Awareness campaigns and organizing
 Most achievements mentioned are made by
NGOs and IGOs – mainly at local level
 Also some government-run programmes are
mentioned, and legislation achievements
General views and experiences
 Major obstacles:
– In the South, many respondents mention the lack
of laws and policies specifically targetting
Farmers’ Rights
– In the North, laws and policies affecting Farmers’
Rights are seen as obstacles among the majority
of the respondents (but not all)
– Lack of awareness among farmers, decisionmakers and in general is noted as an obstacle.
– Lack of participation of farmers and the need for
empowerment are addressed by many.
Perceived performance
 A clear majority rated their countries’
performance as insufficient
 7 respondents rated it as tolerable
 6 respondents rated it as fairly good
 2 respondents rated it as good
 Three respondents, all from Europe (2 from
seed sector, 1 from public sector) rated
their countries performance as very good.
Most important measures needed
 Development and implementation of legal
framework and policies for Farmers’ Rights
 Promotion of small-scale diversity farming
 Awareness raising measures
 Farmers’ participation in decision-making
Most important measures (cont.)
 ‘New’ ideas:
– Preventing de-registration of varieties protected
by plant breeders’ rights, as this removes the
varieties from the market
– Divide legislation: The formal seed system
regulations should not be applied to the
informal seed system. Develop new regulations.
– Legal recognition to farmers engaged in diversity
farming, through specific legal status
– Make seed companies responsible for GMcontamination
– Creating space for dialogue between different
stakeholders
Aspect 1: Traditional knowledge
 What means protection of traditional
knowledge related to crop genetic resources?
 The most pressing concern among the
respondents is to save traditional knowledge
from becoming lost
 Only very few respondents find protection
from misappropriation more important
 Few examples of misappropriation
 Important to balance these concerns
Aspect 1: Traditional knowledge
 The huge problem is the loss of knowledge,
due to agricultural practices, new dietary
preferences, & lack of interest among young
 Laws on intellectual property rights are seen
as important obstacles to free sharing of
traditional knowledge
 Gaps and needs:
– Establishing, mainstreaming and implementing
adequate legislation
– Documenting remaining traditional knowledge,
encourage sharing and spread awareness
Aspect 2: Benefit sharing
 What means benefit sharing in the context
of Farmers’ Rights?
– Funding priority under the Treaty to to be given
to farmers contributing to maintaining crop
genetic diversity (Art. 13.3 and 18.5).
– Contracting Parties to provide technical
assistance to developing countries and countries
with economies in transition to facilitate the
implementation of the Treaty (Art. 7).
– Important difference to the CBD: All farmers
engaged in diversity farming may participate in
benefit sharing. No focus on providers of genetic
resources to commercial breeding.
Aspect 2: Benefit sharing
 Most – least often noted positive measures:
– Participatory plan breeding projects (many)
– Community seed banks
– Projects for marketing of diversity products
– Capacity building for diversity farming
– Capacity building for Farmers’ Rights
– Financial support for diversity farming
– Awards for for diversity farmers
– National fund for benefit sharing (few)
– Farmers benefit from new varieties of plants
Aspect 2: Benefit sharing
 Gaps and needs:
– Agricultural policies and incentive structures are
not favourable to the on-farm conservation and
sustainable use of crop genetic resources
– Patent law and plant breeders’ rights legislation
have no provisions to ensure benefit sharing
– Lack of legal and policy framework to promote
benefit-sharing
– Lack of adequate institutional framework
– Lack of awareness and capacity
Aspect 3: Participation – decisions
 Most – least often noted measures:
– Participation in relevant committees and hearings
(often positive effects)
– Legislation covering the right to participate in
decision-making (negative/mixed/none effects)
– Capacity building projects for farmer participation
in decision-making (positive effects)
– Facilitation of participation in media (positive
effects)
– Capacity building among decision makers (few)
Aspect 4: Rights to seed
 Article 9.3: Farmers practices of saving, using
exchanging and selling farm-saved seed are
labelled rights, but does not provide much
direction with regard to its contents
 Preamble: ‘These rights’ are fundamental to
the realization of Farmers’ Rights
 Countries are free to define these rights
 Challenge to strike the right balance between
farmers’ and breeders’ rights: both are
crucial to future food security.
Aspect 4: Rights to seed
 Typical measures affecting farmers’ rights to
seed: Patents, plant breeders’ rights, variety
release and seed distribution regulations,
seed fairs, informal seed saving networks
 Intellectual property regulation most
restrictive in the North, less in developing
countries, but the trend is moving towards
more restrictive legislation
 Seed sector considers this positive,
farmers and NGOs consider it negative
 Some countries seek balance: e.g. Norway
Aspect 4: Rights to seed (cont.)
 Variety release and seed distribution
regulations affect conservation and
sustainable use of farmers’ varieties
 Rules are strictest in the North, in some
countries seed exchange among farmers is
prohibited (but they do)
 The European seed industry is largely positive
to such regulations (but not all)
 Farmers, NGOs and most government officials
are critical to such regulations
 Some countries seek balance, e.g. Switzerland
Aspect 4: Right to seed
 Many examples of seed fairs and seed
exchange networks
 Mostly small with local outreach
 More or less underground in several
countries
 Still tolerated in several countries
 Most respondents regard them as positive
Aspect 4: Right to seed
 Gaps and needs:
– Farmers’ contribution to conservation and
sustainable use is under threat
– Lack of adequate laws and regulations: legal
space for farmers to continue practices required
(seed sector find legislation largely adequate)
– Lack of awareness among decision makers and
farmers with regard to the consequences
– Need to support and promote informal seed
systems: seed fairs, -networks, local seed banks
– Need to recognize the contributions of NGOs
and local organizations to crop genetic diversity
– Need to avoid the use of GMOs: farmers’ choice
Recommendations to the GB
 GB may guide and support the development
of national legislation, policies, strategies,
programmes and projects
 Need to amend legislation in the North to
allow for legal space for farmers practices
 Facilitate and ensure support for awareness
raising and capacity building measures
 Promote and improve informal seed systems
 Prohibit the marketing of GM seeds
 Develop minimum standards
Thank you for your attention!