The results of the e-mail based Global Consultations on Farmers’ Rights Regine Andersen, Senior Research Fellow and Tone Winge, Research Fellow, Fridtjof.

The results of thee-mail based Global Consultations

on Farmers’ Rights

Regine Andersen, Senior Research Fellowand 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, decision-makers 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 GM-contamination

– 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!