SEED AND PLANTING MATERIAL SECURITY IN
PACIFIC ISLAND COUNTRIES
Stephen Preston

Previous Chapter Table Of Contents Next Chapter

1. INTRODUCTION

This paper considers the current state of seed security in Pacific Island Countries (PICs). ‘Seed’ includes true seed and vegetative planting material, the latter being especially important in the Pacific islands. The supply is considered to be secure if every household has physical and economic access to enough seed (and other planting material) to maintain existing systems of crop production. Seed security is thus defined at the level at which people raise crops; in the Pacific islands, this is the household level.

Vulnerability is exposed in times of stress, which may be caused by drastic events or by gradual change. Seed security in the Pacific islands is threatened by drastic (attention grabbing) events such as:

Some more gradual (and sometimes insidious) changes in farming systems also affect seed security. Nearly all of these are related to the increased pressure on land and changes in lifestyle caused by population growth and increased contact with the outside world. These gradual changes include, but are not limited to:

To attain security, the systems for obtaining seed at a household level must be flexible, to adapt to gradual change, and robust, to cope in emergencies.

2. CROPS AND SOURCES OF SEED AND PLANTING MATERIAL

Agriculture in the Pacific involves a mix of subsistence and commercial farming. Subsistence agriculture is the mainstay of most Pacific island economies and is the dominant feature of rural life. It is fundamentally based on vegetatively propagated crops, excluding coconut (Cocos nucifera). However, pure subsistence gardens, although still common, are increasingly changing into more intensive, semi-commercial systems, and seed-propagated crops are increasingly common. Most traditional food crops also serve as cash crops. The seed security problems of vegetative and seed-propagated crops differ in many ways.

2.1 Vegetatively Propagated Crops

Many of the traditional food crops in the Pacific region are asexually propagated, for example various species of taro, yams, banana, breadfruit and sago. Some introductions of Latin American origin are increasingly important, for example sweet potato and cassava. These are propagated by suckers, and root or stem cuttings. Farmers normally produce their own planting material on-farm, and this is often readily available either during crop growth or at harvest.

Until recently, farmers made all cultivar selections. However, the selection and dissemination of new varieties increasingly involves researchers and others, especially in sweet potato, taro, yams and introductions of other crops. Tissue culture provides an increasingly important source of new varieties and disease-free planting material. Indeed, for quarantine reasons, it is often the only acceptable route for germplasm exchange between countries. Commercial sources, again often involving tissue culture, are important for specialist crops.

Vegetatively propagated crops suffer from many diseases, some of which affect the planting material. Disease-free sources may have advantages over field material but subsequent reinfection in the field causes a yield decline. For most crops, there is little information on what the initial advantages are and how long plants remains clean once taken into the field. Van Wijmeersch found that sweet potato in PNG that had been through virus therapy and tissue culture usually gave more than double the yield of the original source and suffered less tuber cracking (PRAP, 1998).

Pathogen-tested material that was in the field for three to four years still outperformed the original source. However, there was a yield decline compared to recently pathogen-tested material, pathogen-tested material kept in a screenhouse for several years, and field material put in tissue culture. Reinfection in sweet potato is thus "certainly not as fast as the ACIAR project ‘Pathogen tested germplasm for the South Pacific’ concluded (within one growing cycle)" (Van Wijmeersch, in PRAP, 1998).

Similar work is needed to establish the benefits of tissue culture and rates of reinfection in other crops that are propagated vegetatively, and in other locations. Observation from Papua New Guinea and Tonga suggest that pathogen tested material in some sweet potato accessions can increase yields by 250% and that yields were still significantly higher in some accessions after two generations in the field (Beetham and Mason, 1992).

Van Wijmeersch (PRAP, 1998) advised that, if virus reinfection is likely to occur, sweet potato planting stock for distribution to farmers should be renewed every 2-3 years, either by using new pathogen-tested planting material from a laboratory or screenhouse, or field material put into tissue culture. This is seldom done.

Some diseases have quarantine significance. If there are quarantine concerns, the mother stock must be carefully screened for viruses, viroids or phytoplasmas; some bacteria, fungi and nematodes can also survive unmasked in cultures (Barber, 1999). Germplasm exchange between countries is often possible only with virus therapy, indexing and tissue culture.

Many vegetatively propagated crops have centres of genetic diversity in the Pacific (Table 1). New Guinea is a centre of genetic diversity for Colocasia taro, bananas, plantains, sago, yams, sweet potato, sugarcane, aibika and others. Many of these do not set seed in farmers' fields (Lebot, 1992). There is striking morphological variation among the different varieties of these crops. However, their breeding system does not provide a mechanism for rapid genetic response to environmental change. All have spread from west to east, as clones carried during human migrations, and have had little or no opportunity for sexual recombination. There is also a large decrease in the genetic diversity of traditional Pacific crops as one moves eastwards from Melanesia into Polynesia. This is a cause for concern: "Clonally propagated crops tend to perform poorly when under stress" (Lebot, 1992).

In most traditional crops, a number of cultivars have disappeared or are becoming rare and genetic erosion is occurring in the region. The major causes of genetic erosion are related to population growth, the shift to a cash economy, and an increased reliance on imported food. Ragone (1997) analyses the situation for breadfruit but many of the factors apply equally to other traditional crops.

However, the genetic base of these Pacific crops is much narrower than their morphological variation suggests, according to a series of isozyme studies (Lebot, 1992). For example, the isozyme variation in seven enzyme systems of taro from Hawaii, and most islands of Polynesia, is nil (Lebot and Aradhya, 1991). Lebot recently confirmed this important conclusion following studies of DNA markers in taro, kava, banana, breadfruit, sugarcane and the greater yam (Lebot, 1998). Lebot has stressed the need for selection and breeding, particularly resistance breeding, based on introductions from centres of diversity.

The devastating outbreak of taro leaf blight (caused by Phytophthora colocasiae) in Samoa gives an example of the vulnerability of Pacific crops caused by their narrow genetic base. Taro leaf blight appeared for the first time in Samoa in early July 1993, probably introduced by the illegal importation of taro. The problem in Samoa was exacerbated by the susceptibility of all local cultivars. One susceptible taro cultivar predominated. Supplies of taro on the domestic market approached zero by June 1994. Paulson and Rogers (1997) document how rural households responded by producing alternative food crops. Annex 1 gives more details in a case study of seed and planting material security in Western Samoa.

The scientific community has neglected many important staple crops of the Pacific. The IPGRI series of ‘neglected crop’ monographs includes aibika (Preston, 1998), breadfruit (Ragone, 1997) and sago palm (Flach, 1997). It also includes choko (Sechium edule), providing useful information from Latin America (Saade, 1996). A major work on yams (Coursey, 1967) is being updated (Margaret Quin, pers. comm.). Researchers in the Pacific need similar publications on taro, sweet potato, cassava, Alocasia and Xanthosoma, to mention a few.

Table 1. Vegetatively propagated crops of importance in the Pacific region, showing their centers of genetic diversity

Common name

Scientific name

Centre(s) of genetic diversity
   

Pacific

Asia

Latin America

a) Planting material normally obtained on-farm:

      

sweet potato

Ipomoea batatas

Y

  

Y

taro

Colocasia esculenta

Y

Y

  

yams

Dioscorea alata, D. esculenta and D. nummularia

Y

?

?

swamp taro

Cyrtosperma chamissonis

Y

    

giant taro

Alocasia macrorrhiza

Y

    

bananas, plantains

Musa spp.

Y

    

breadfruit

Artocarpus spp.

Y

    

sago

Metroxylon sagu

Y

    

sugar-cane

Saccharum officinarum

Y

    

kava

Piper methysticum

Y

    

aibika (bele)

Abelmoschus manihot

Y

    

cassava

Manihot esculenta

    

Y

Xanthosoma taro

Xanthosoma saggitifolium

    

Y

b) Planting material obtained through commercial sources (often via tissue culture)

      

potato

Solanum tuberosum

    

Y

ginger

Zingiber officinale

  

Y?

  

vanilla

Vanilla planifolia

    

Y

2.2 Crops Propagated by Seed

Farmers increasingly grow many relatively new seed-propagated crops in areas where there is little tradition of seed use. The exceptions are coconut and a few minor, traditional crops, such as winged bean (Psophocarpus tetragonolobus).,

Vegetables such as tomato, capsicum, cabbage, Chinese cabbage, pumpkin, watermelon, and cucumber are increasingly grown, especially where conditions are most favourable (e.g. the highlands of PNG, the Sigatoka Valley in Fiji, and on islands at higher latitudes e.g. Tonga, New Caledonia). Most vegetable production is small scale. However, some vegetables have become important export crops, such as squash (produced in Tonga, Fiji, Vanuatu and New Caledonia for a niche market in Japan) and chilli pepper (produced in Solomon Islands for sale to pharmaceutical companies). Vegetable crops are also increasingly important near urban centers.

There are no local seed-producing companies and, because of the small size of the seed market, it is unlikely that any will be set up. In most countries, the local private sector has emerged as a key seed source. Vegetable seed is mainly imported from outside the region and supplied through commercial channels. Farmers are dependent on what is available on the international market, especially in small retail pack sizes. PNG has several competing importers, whereas medium-sized countries typically rely on one or two key importers. The latter are often fledgling hardware and garden-supply businesses, with a limited number of sales outlets. In contrast to the traditional crops, procuring seed usually requires cash payment (rather than exchange, as is often the case for vegetative material), and access is often far from the garden. Seed supplies are often insecure, because households do not have easy physical and economic access.

The successful seed dealers take a long-term approach but often spread the risk by also selling other agricultural inputs, hardware, and foodstuff. This group needs some reassurance from governments that competition from the public sector will not be supported by subsidies. "There is a delicate balance between encouraging competition, while supporting those suppliers who have demonstrated a long-term commitment to the seed trade" (Turner, 1999). Business failure would, in some cases, seriously harm seed security.

Seed security requires quality control. Storage conditions, especially in transit, are often a problem. There have been instances where seed companies are unwilling to supply small pack sizes of preferred varieties. Some dealers, therefore, repackage seed in smaller packs, introducing the danger that poor packaging and storage will reduce seed viability and vigour. Seed security is also well served if several suitable varieties of each crop are physically and economically available, because seed companies have occasionally stopped supplying less profitable open-pollinated (OP) varieties at short notice.

Cereal and grain legume seed is usually produced locally. With these crops, farmer-saved seed is a more practical alternative than for most vegetables. The high cost of freight, and other difficulties associated with importation (notably quarantine), make commercial supplies an expensive alternative. This explains why hybrid maize and sweetcorn, for example, are not common. Farm-saved seed is usually not treated with seed dressings, though some highly cost-effective seed treatments are used (e.g. Ridomil on maize in Fiji).

The scientific literature contains much information on pests and diseases of these crops. The same applies to agronomic and post-harvest practices. Some overseas farming practices clearly do not suit the climate and socio-economic conditions in PICs. Others could be adapted, were it not for the fact that farmers and extension services do not have easy access to this information. The PICs are thus unable to exploit what is sometimes common knowledge elsewhere.

For nearly all these crops, new varieties come from overseas. The Pacific islands are reliant on breeding outside the region for many of the newly introduced seed crops. Examples include the reliance on the Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center (AVRDC) for tomato, the International Maize and Wheat Research Institute (CIMMYT) for maize, the Institute for Crop Research in the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) for groundnut, sorghum and pigeonpea, and commercial breeding programmes for many vegetables. Researchers may do some variety testing but their influence on the range of material supplied by seed importers is limited. Farmers have little opportunity to select varieties, and in many areas have little variety awareness. They grow what is available.

3. DISEASES AND PESTS OF MAJOR CONCERN

McKenzie (1999) states that "Pacific island countries have a broad range of plant diseases of concern. There is continual worry over spread of diseases and their control. There are concerns over the control of diseases already present in the region, and concerns over diseases of perceived quarantine risk. The latter includes diseases with the potential to spread within the Pacific - those currently of restricted distribution within the Pacific (e.g. Taro Leaf Blight, Mitimiti disease of taro, Alomae and Bobone diseases of taro, Bacterial Blight of cassava, Papaya Ringspot, coconut Tinangaja, Panama disease of banana, Vascular Streak of cocoa), and those which are present outside the Pacific region. Besides these diseases of restricted distribution, there are many serious and widespread diseases which limit crop production and hence the potential to export (e.g. kava dieback, taro corm rots, ginger rhizome rots, banana Black Leaf Streak, cucurbit viruses)." Fruit flies and taro beetles deserve a mention because of the resources allocated to reducing their spread and developing control methods. However, there are many other pest problems. Information on the occurrence and distribution of many pests and diseases, excluding viruses, is in the Pacific Plant Protection Information System.

4. LEVELS OF SEED SECURITY

The challenge of achieving seed security has several different levels.

4.1 Household and Community Level

Traditional family and social structures are the main channels for obtaining vegetative planting material of staple crops, and therefore provide key elements of seed security. If farmers are short of planting material, they usually resort first to neighbours, relatives and others in the same social group. Farmers do not normally trade vegetative planting material for cash, although there are an increasing number of exceptions. But even trading for kind involves some value exchange.

The role of traditional social structures has been analyzed in several emergencies and has been found to be crucial. These include frost in the highlands of PNG (Wohlt et al., 1982; Waddell, 1983), a devastating cyclone in Western Samoa (Paulson, 1993), and the outbreak of taro leaf blight in Western Samoa (Paulson and Rogers, 1997) - see Annex 1. However, traditional social structures are slowly changing, and gradual changes can be as important as dramatic events. Where traditional social structures are weakening, modern community-level organizations (e.g. some NGOs) can have an important role, for example in making seed and planting material available in urban areas.

Traditional knowledge is the main source of information about crop agronomy. It is sometimes surprisingly sophisticated, as in the techniques used to store and handle yam planting material in Tonga (SPC, 1998). Several of these techniques help reduce the damage caused by anthracnose (Colletotrichum gleosporiodes). The field method used to multiply scarce taro planting material in Samoa is another example (SPC, 1998).

The strength of the household response to many stresses lies in the following:

For seed-propagated crops, the main issues at the household level are: their novelty, lack of information, distance to supply outlets, and shortages of cash. Demand is greatest for cheap seed in small packets. Seed use is often inefficient because of wasteful nursery practices. Few growers will pay the extra cost for hybrid seed, or apply other inputs that these often require. However, the demand for hybrid varieties is growing. Traditional social structures are less important than for vegetatively propagated crops, although they still play a big role in variety dissemination.

Although it is defined at the household level, there is a limit to what individual households and community organizations can do to achieve seed security.

4.2 The National Level

At a higher level, national governments are responsible for important elements of seed security. This does not mean that governments must always produce their own seed. It does mean that they need policies and various types of infrastructure in place that promote seed security. The special importance of tissue culture facilities has already been emphasized.

Some countries have functional tissue culture laboratories (e.g. New Caledonia, Fiji, Samoa, Tahiti, Tonga and PNG). Others have tissue culture facilities but these are not yet fully functional, usually for reasons of staff and funds (e.g. Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and Cook Islands). There are other tissue culture laboratories in Guam, and doubtless elsewhere (possibly Kosrae and Pohnpei). Most countries need improved, cyclone-proof screenhouses. These facilities are mainly used to facilitate international germplasm movement and are rarely used to regularly replenish stocks of disease-free planting material.

PNG, Tonga and several other countries have experimented with several methods of potato seed production. They increasingly rely on disease-free mini-tubers of preferred varieties, imported from specialist laboratories and potato seed producers in Australia. Countries with tissue culture laboratories and insect-proof screenhouses have the alternative of maintaining disease-free foundation seed in-country. The disease-free seed is grown as mother plants for various types of rapid multiplication by stem cuttings. Where countries have selected varieties that are not commercially available (e.g. CIP selections in Fiji), they often face problems keeping disease-free stocks. Potato seed schemes in the region have generally faced severe disease, managerial and seed storage problems, especially those in lowland areas. The most successful potato seed scheme is in the highlands of PNG.

Many PICs are small, and there are severe limits on what their governments can do. Most face difficulties establishing effective crop research, extension and quarantine services. National breeding programmes, if they exist at all, are found only in the largest countries and then tend to be small, with a narrow genetic base, and are rarely assured of adequate staffing or funds. These difficulties seriously weaken the capacity of governments in all PICs to promote seed security. The difficulties that governments face can best be seen in the details. Where there are trained staff, there may be "no laminar flow unit (in the pathology department)" or similar problems. Agriculture departments in the smaller countries have few staff, and few receive advanced training.

In PNG, the most important plantation crops are supported by commodity research organizations. These cater relatively well for breeding and other activities. The same applies to sugarcane in Fiji. However, multi-crop research organizations are continually initiating research programmes without a thorough review of relevant national or international work elsewhere and they attempt to do too much.

Papua New Guinea shoulders a special burden as custodian of important genetic resources of vegetatively propagated crops. However, it constantly faces problems administering large germplasm collections in the field. The result is that valuable field collections of several crops have been lost, not once but repeatedly, as research priorities and staff change, and because of pests, diseases and natural disasters. The same applies to smaller collections in other countries. "Collecting trips are expensive to undertake and if a proper conservation strategy is not in place, then collecting the germplasm is just a waste of time and money. Many collections in the past failed ... because of financial difficulties in maintaining them, in ex situ conditions" (Kambuou, 1998). To take a recent example, 314 varieties were lost from 1 164 in the lowlands sweet potato collection in PNG in the severe drought of 1997-98. Thanks to good planning, duplicates were available for 229 of these from a collection in the highlands, where 1 380 varieties were planted in polybags to ensure that they survived the drought. There was, at that time, no one in the main highlands research station responsible for food crops research (Van Wijmeersch, in PRAP 1998). Key staff may have been allocated more pressing tasks, such as the emergency distribution of planting material after the drought and associated frost.

Governments play a vital role in providing quarantine services. Apart from preventing the accidental introduction of new pests, quarantine has a direct bearing on variety testing and seed supply. Vegetative material can be especially risky. A few of the many possible examples demonstrate the need for quarantine vigilance:

Fiji has expanded the commercial production of the susceptible cultivar Niue for export. In this risky but profitable venture, Fiji has captured a large part of the overseas markets once supplied by Samoa; in 1995 taro exports from Fiji were valued at F$7.9 million and exports have grown in value since. Yet it is a cause for concern that Fiji does not have a trained plant pathologist and has no buffer stocks of resistant varieties. However, the Ministry of Agriculture in Fiji constructed a tissue culture laboratory in 1997 and multiplies taro planting material as a service to farmers (Losa Naivalulevu, pers. comm.).

True seed is usually one of the safest means of transporting germplasm internationally. Referring to commercial seed, Barber (1999) noted that "quarantine agencies in the Pacific have traditionally taken a very conservative, zero tolerance approach to the importation of seed, which may have involved either prohibition of seed importation, or multiple chemical treatments for often unspecified reasons". Turner (1999) states that "if official procedures are too complex or costly, it will encourage major uncontrolled movements (i.e. smuggling) which means that the trade is less well-supervised and risks are increased".

For seed-propagated crops, perhaps the greatest need is for governments in some PICs to create stable and forward-looking policy environments to stimulate the emergence of a more active private sector. Private sector growth is sometimes slow because of adverse taxation and investment laws, inadequate credit and lack of funds and other resources for variety testing and seed quality control (Wobil and Skovmand, 1996).

Seed policy development can best be stimulated by setting up a national forum made up of all parties interested in seed supply, including the private sector, to discuss seed-related matters. These seed advisory groups would act as the custodian of a constructive, self-regulatory, consensus seed policy, by monitoring progress and suggesting changes (Turner, 1999). Many Pacific Island governments have not yet started this process, principally because seed-propagated crops are low on their list of priorities. In some countries, governments have an inherent distrust of the private sector, believing that it does not act in the farmers' best interest. They also fear over-reliance on foreign companies and a loss of ‘independence’.

Governments and NGOs have legitimate concerns in areas such as food security, especially in remote areas and crops that are not attractive to the private sector. However, subsidized seed is damaging to seed security when it competes with commercial supplies, because it slows the rate of adoption of new (unsubsidized) varieties. Government seed production schemes in some countries have closed (e.g. PNG) or face many of the difficulties found in government seed schemes elsewhere (e.g. Solomon Islands). These include problems with distribution, poor packaging, quality control, and uncertain funding. The opportunity cost of such schemes is often high. Closure of such schemes may improve seed security in the long run. However, governments need to minimize the short-term difficulties that closure of a seed scheme will inevitably cause (e.g. the sudden closure of the government rice seed scheme in Fiji in 1994). Where national departments of agriculture have to cut back for economic reasons, seed security is threatened in many ways.

Fiji is unusual in that it has had government seed schemes for some crops since the 1970s. This particular scheme is, for many crops, not in competition with the private sector. Where it does compete, it produces varieties that are not commercially available. Seed distribution is a problem, and alternative arrangements involving the private sector are being tested. Contract production outside the region is an option for some crops, as demonstrated for AVRDC tomato varieties that are popular in several countries but are not yet commercially available (Preston, in PRAP 1998).

Where there are no regular commercial seed suppliers, such as in the smaller countries, NGOs (e.g. the Foundation for the Peoples of the South Pacific in Tuvalu and Kiribati) and governments often play a vital role in procuring seed from outside the region (e.g. Marshall Islands).

4.3 The Regional and International Level

Various regional, international and global organizations contribute to seed and planting material security. It is at this level that strategic interventions can be especially effective in reducing vulnerability and increasing seed security. This is because important problems that are common to several small countries but beyond the resources of individual nations can be tackled regionally.

The Secretariat of the Pacific Community is an intergovernmental organization of 22 Pacific island countries and territories (SPC, 1996). It constantly monitors and prioritizes regional problems, and has a work programme that is the result of extensive regional consultation. The SPC agriculture programme, based in Fiji, is the hub of regional agriculture. It is surprisingly small but coordinates strategic regional work, including plant protection, quarantine, crop improvement, training and information services (SPC, 1997). The SPC is also the main regional point of contact for many international organizations, including IPGRI, APSA, CTA, the PPPO and others. SPC staffing and funds are limited, and it is difficult for its few staff to meet the diverse needs and expectations of the region. SPC funds some key activities from its core budget. Many others are donor-funded but coordinated by SPC.

The EU-funded Pacific Regional Agricultural Programme (PRAP) was, between 1990 and 1999, by far the largest donor contribution to agriculture in the region, excluding price subsidies. PRAP was developed, monitored and guided by the Directors of Agriculture in the eight ACP countries where it operated.

Several agencies implemented different components of PRAP, including SPC, the University of the South Pacific Institute for Research, Extension and Training in Agriculture (IRETA), and various national departments of agriculture. Regular meetings of representatives served to strengthen the regional approach to common problems. All 11 component projects had activities related to seed and planting material security. Overall responsibility for PRAP was transferred to SPC in early 1998. Most, if not all, of the remaining PRAP projects will finish in December 1999, and only a few key activities will continue under SPC.

4.3.1 Regional initiatives: vegetatively propagated crops

Four PRAP projects have been especially active in the selection, distribution and on-farm testing of agriculture and vegetatively propagated crops. These provide regional machinery to deliver and test new crops and varieties:

There are several new regional initiatives on taro and yam. These are more than food crops; they are part of the ‘ritual and fabric’ of many societies in addition to being valuable export crops. AusAID is funding a three-year project (1998-2001), coordinated from SPC, to tackle problems of taro genetic conservation and breeding, especially for resistance to taro leaf blight (Annex 2). A related four-year project, the Taro Network for South East Asia and Oceania (TANSAO) was launched in January 1998, funded under the European Union DG XII-INCO Programme. TANSAO aims "to enhance the competitive position of taro in rainfed cropping systems of South East Asia and Oceania". It will provide information on the genetics, major pathogens and physiochemical characteristics of taro. TANSAO focuses on characterizing taro genetic resources in Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, and the Philippines. The links with Asia are important to the AusAID project because of the genetic diversity of Asian taro. DAL/NARI hosted the first TANSAO regional meeting in Lae, PNG, in March 1998.

CIRAD coordinates a four-year, EU-funded yam project in which SPC is also involved (Annex 3). The purpose of the yam project is to find solutions to various problems of D. alata, including resistance to the most important disease, anthracnose (caused by Colletotrichum gleosporiodes). IITA is also working on yams and SPC provides its regional point of contact.

4.3.2 SPC Regional Germplasm Centre

SPC has been involved in the regional exchange of tissue cultures since a laboratory was constructed in Suva in the early 1980s. In the 1990s, the PRAP tissue culture project strengthened national capabilities in tissue culture in the eight ACP countries, from a base at the Alafua campus of the University of the South Pacific in Samoa. A larger SPC laboratory with cryopreservation equipment, commissioned with financial assistance from AusAID, the Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR) and the European Union, will be formally opened in Suva, Fiji in July 1999.

The SPC regional germplasm centre will be vital to the long-term security of major crops in the region. When it opens, the centre will give priority to Colocasia taro, yam, and sweet potato. Attention will later be given to other edible aroids, cassava, banana, breadfruit and traditional leafy vegetables (SPC, 1999).

When countries gain access to germplasm that has durable resistance to major diseases, through the regional germplasm centre, this will remove their vulnerability to these pathogens. SPC will distribute pathogen-tested material. Taro will be virus-tested at Queensland University of Technology, and the technology later transferred to Unitech (PNG). Within the CIRAD yam project, virus testing will be done by NRI in the United Kingdom. If a simple diagnostics kit is developed, it will be possible to test for taro viruses within the region.

SPC has imported 24 varieties of yam from IITA in Nigeria that are resistant to anthracnose disease. After years of having good D. alata germplasm that could not be moved internationally, IITA now routinely uses a basket of molecular and serological diagnostics that were developed collaboratively with scientists in the UK (Margaret Quin pers. comm.). This development made IITA yam germplasm acceptable to SPC.

The PICs rely for banana breeding on a programme in Honduras (FHIA). Several desirable banana varieties (e.g. Goldfinger) have come out of this programme, including material reported to be resistant to black Sigatoka leafspot disease (caused by Mycosphaerella fijiensis), one of several important banana diseases. SPC gets this germplasm through international banana networks (INIBAP and ASPNET) and DPI Queensland (SPC, 1998). Yet FHIA’s "only assured funding for 1999 comes from the limited FHIA core budget. Since FHIA is a national institution, the banana and plantain breeding component is just one of its several programs. Only a fraction of the current rather wide, genetic improvement objectives can be maintained without assured long term support." (Rowe, 1999; see also Simmonds, 1999).

The examples of banana varieties from Honduras and yams from Nigeria demonstrate how SPC's ability to enhance seed and planting material security in the Pacific rests on the changing circumstances of many organizations.

This paper has already stressed weaknesses in the maintenance of national field collections. These are too expensive for some countries, and there has been little progress in developing and exploiting core collections. The new taro and yam projects will study different conservation strategies including reduced temperature in vitro storage, cryopreservation, seed storage, field genebanks and in situ conservation. Comparative studies will allow rational decisions on conserving genetic diversity in taro and yams, and may also be relevant to other crops.

In both projects, high hopes rest on advances in cryopreservation in France (CIRAD) and Japan. Successful cryopreservation will help countries maintain large numbers of accessions. Where collections are large, there may be large savings; the cost of cryopreservation equipment is high but running costs are small. Countries will be able to concentrate their efforts on smaller working collections, releasing resources for other work. They will also be able to replace varieties lost from national collections.

There has been little research work, even at the regional level, on several crops that are important in the PICs including cassava, Alocasia, Xanthosoma and kava (Piper methysticum). To take one example, Kava wilt dieback (caused by Cucumber Mosaic Virus), causes large losses; kava production is no longer possible in some areas. This disease is likely to become more important as cultivation intensifies. This will threaten a high-value export crop of growing importance. Kava wilt dieback will be difficult to control because of the nature of the virus; the solution may lie in avoidance. Breeding is not a simple option.

4.3.3 SPC and seed-propagated crops

The PRAP coconut project supported several national breeding and seed production programmes from 1990-99, though there have been severe quarantine restrictions on the movement of coconut germplasm (Ikin and Ovasuru, 1997). SPC and CIRAD provide regional points of contact for the coconut network COGENT.

In other crops, the PRAP seed and planting material project was the first to consider seed problems from a regional perspective. It focuses on seed from overseas, and has had excellent support from the FAO/DANIDA project to establish APSA, and APSA itself. The project convened an international workshop on Improved seed supply strategies for Pacific Island Countries, in Fiji in November 1996, attended by seed leaders from all the larger ACP countries. Their recommendations form the basis of the current programme.

The workshop participants expressed strong interest in developing national seed policies. SPC/PRAP therefore arranged the preparation of a draft national seed policy to help countries identify the main issues (Turner, 1999). The workshop also revealed that quarantine problems constrain variety testing and seed supply in some countries. SPC/PRAP therefore commissioned work by a second specialist, who prepared a draft set of quarantine guidelines for importing seed. Annex 4 presents his conclusions and recommendations (Barber, 1999). SPC/PRAP has recently circulated the seed policy and quarantine documents to obtain feedback. Regional seed leaders from the private and public sector will discuss these and other seed issues at a Regional Seed Strategy Meeting in Vanuatu in August 1999. The quarantine guidelines will then pass to the Pacific Plant Protection Organization, through its secretariat, namely SPC.

PRAP also sponsored the participation of more than 20 seed leaders from PICs in the annual APSA conferences, and encouraged others to attend. This gave leading researchers and seed dealers valuable exposure to the seed world. The practical benefits of this can already be seen in several countries.

APSA has been particularly helpful by assembling appropriate varieties for testing in Fiji. The hope is that this will evolve into a regional variety testing scheme. As with the formation of national seed advisory groups, it is difficult to see how this will happen without external support at the national and regional levels. The greatest need, given the imminent closure of PRAP, is for further support to SPC for strategic seed activities.

4.3.4 Intellectual property rights

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) issues have a direct effect on seed security, through germplasm exchange, the prerequisite for effective breeding and selection. Unless the issues of IPR are satisfactorily resolved, regional collaboration or plant breeding will be a distant dream. No PIC has specific IPR legislation to cover plants. PICs are generally keen to share genetic resources if this is done according to their rights under the Convention on Biological Diversity. However, there is concern about the amount of bio-prospecting in the region, which sometimes takes the form of covert collecting without prior informed consent (Taylor, 1996). PICs need guidance in developing policies and legislation to protect their rights.

In 1997, PRAP and SPC convened a Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights, with representatives from PICs, regional organizations and IPGRI. The group made 20 recommendations (Taylor, 1997) but has not met since. Taylor (PRAP, 1998) developed material transfer agreements (MTAs), after regional consultations, based on those used by the International Agricultural Research Centers (IARCs). The SPC regional germplasm centre will use these MTAs, even without formal systems of intellectual property protection.

In resolving the IPR issues, it is important that discussions are well-informed and not unduly influenced by pressure groups, some of which have a limited understanding of the benefits of plant breeding and the need for international exchange of germplasm. However, there must be an equitable sharing of the benefits of germplasm exchange, which are not necessarily financial. Some countries, notably Papua New Guinea, have not benefited sufficiently from repeated provision of germplasm in the past. The idea that germplasm should only be shared with neighbouring countries if the price is right runs against the principle of regional cooperation and is too restrictive.

Commercial and other factors limit the range of varieties of seed-propagated crops available off-the-shelf far more than matters of IPR. It would be premature to worry about access to the new products of biotechnology when many conventional varieties developed in tropical conditions have not been tested. In theory, lack of IPR legislation can only delay access to new varieties. In practice, it would be inappropriate for PICs to build their own administrative and technical capabilities for plant variety protection, especially as this would divert the few plant breeders in the region from their main task. The logical way forward is a regional approach, possibly tapping into the plant variety protection systems of New Zealand or Australia.

4.4 Interactions Between Levels

The effectiveness of interventions at each level, from household to international, depends on the quality of support and involvement at adjacent levels. For example, the impact of national efforts depends on the amount and quality of support at regional and provincial or community levels. Interventions limited to one or two levels, whatever their technical merit, will be weak at neglected levels. For example:

The problem, however, is not merely one of ensuring that each level has adequate resources. The biggest challenge is to achieve ‘depth of focus’ by linking different levels together in productive partnership.

4.5 Depth-of-Focus

The most successful agricultural development projects in PICs have been those that engineer quality support for specific activities from networks of stakeholders at all levels. They have wide depth-of-focus. In addition, successful agricultural projects usually have generous and secure long-term funding, and a clear understanding of problems at the household level. Examples of projects with a wide depth-of-focus include:

Interventions with a narrower depth-of-focus are less effective when judged by their impact at the household level.

5. REALITIES OF PROJECT FUNDING

Another special feature of the Pacific islands is their heavy reliance on aid in the form of donor-funded project interventions. However, donors spent only 5.2 % (approximately) of total aid to the eight Pacific ACP countries on agriculture. The proportion of total aid seems to be low, given that agriculture normally contributes 20-40% of GDP and occupies 40-80% of the population. The indications are that aid to agriculture will decrease further, in total amount and as a proportion of the total (Roth, 1996).

Short-termism and stop-start funding plague many donor-funded agricultural projects. Yet continuity is essential in breeding and genetic conservation, on which seed and planting material security ultimately depends. There have been many instances where donor-funded work on germplasm collections, breeding and selection has stopped and re-started. Each time aid projects close, valuable germplasm is lost. The PRAP model demonstrates how some continuity can be assured, if strategic donor-funded projects pass responsibility for key follow-up activities to a permanent regional organization such as SPC. Given adequate resources, SPC will be able to maintain progress.

Table 2. Elements essential for seed and planting material security in Pacific Island Countries

Level

Vegetatively-propagated
crops

  

Seed-propagated
crops

Household

  • clean planting material

  • resistant/appropriate cultivars

  • rapid multiplication

  

  • variety awareness

  • physical and economic access to appropriate crops and varieties

National
  • quarantine vigilance
  • tissue culture and rapid multiplication facilities
  • buffer stocks of resistant varieties
  

  • national seed advisory groups

  • quality control

  • involving the private sector

  • variety testing/awareness

  • participation in APSA

  • streamline quarantine

Regional
(SPC)
  • germplasm centre, tissue culture + IPR
  • liaison with IARCs
  • plant protection services/PPPO
  • information services
  

  • support to national seed councils

  • regional seed policy

  • seed quarantine issues

  • regional variety testing

  • representation in APSA

  • liase with seed companies/IARCs

  • information service

International

  • virus indexing

  • breeding and selection

  • germplasm management

  • cryopreservation

  • work on ‘neglected’ crops

  

  • APSA activities

  • breeding

  • seed production

 

Acknowledgements

Thanks are due to the EU for funding the SPC Pacific Regional Agricultural Programme, and to Tom Osborn, Monica Raghwan, Mario Boccucci and others at SPC; William Fiebig of FAO; and Noel Mamicpic of APSA, for arranging my participation in the FAO/APSA meeting. I also thank Samila Devi of SPC for information supplied. This paper draws heavily on information kindly supplied by Simon Field, Grahame Jackson, Vincent Lebot, Deborah Paulson, Mat Purea, Anthony Polupe, Steve Rogers and Mary Taylor. Special thanks go to Tom Osborn for comments on an early draft. Any mistakes and errors of judgement are mine.

6. REFERENCES

Anon (undated). Yam: cultivar selection for disease resistance & export potential in Pacific islands. EU Project Proposal.

Barber, C. J. 1999. Quarantine guidelines for the importation of seed into Pacific Island Countries. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Suva, Fiji. 13 pp.

Beetham, P. & A. Mason. 1992. Production of pathogen-tested sweet potato. ACIAR Technical Reports 21. Australian Centre for Agricultural Research, Canberra. 47 pp.

Clarke, T. 1992. The effects of a cyclone on crops. Journal of South Pacific Agriculture, 1(1): 66- 76.

Coursey, D. G. 1967. Yams. Longman, London.

Flach, M. 1997. Sago palm. Metroxylon sagu Rottb. Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops. 13. Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, Gatersleben/International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy.

Ikin, R. & T. Ovasuru. 1997. Report on meeting of FAPO/IPGRI/ACIAR. Viroid-like sequences of coconut. Palm Gardens Hotel, Kajang, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 21-23 April 1997. 14 pp.

Iosefa, T. & S. Rogers. 1998. The multiplication, growth and use of introduced taro cultivars in Samoa. Report of an impact assessment carried out during August to November 1998. Pacific Regional Agriculture Programme, SPC, Suva, Fiji.

Irwin S.V., P. Kaufusi, K. Banks, R. de la Peñas & J. Cho. 1998. Molecular characterization of taro (Colocasia esculenta) using RAPD markers. Euphytica 99:183-189.

Kambuou, R. N. 1998. Paper presented to the TaroGen workshop, Lae, 7-11 December 1998.

Kokoa, P. 1998. Genetic diversity of Phytophthora colocasiae in Papua New Guinea. 1998 Annual Report of the Taro Network for South East Asia and Oceania (TANSAO). p81. CIRAD, Department of Agriculture, Port Vila, Vanuatu.

Kunzel, W. 1997. Handing over notes. Pacific Regional Agricultural Programme.

Lebot, V. 1992. Genetic vulnerability of Oceania's traditional crops. Experimental Agriculture. 28: 309-323.

Lebot, V. 1998. Biomolecular evidence for plant domestication in Sahul. 1998 Annual Report of the Taro Network for South East Asia and Oceania (TANSAO). p. 59-67. CIRAD, Department of Agriculture, Port Vila, Vanuatu.

Lebot, V. & K.M. Aradhya.. 1991. Isozyme variation in taro (Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott) from Asia and Oceania. Euphytica. 56: 55-66.

Lloyd, M.L. 1999 Quoted from the Fiji Times, 16 April 1999 p 16.

McKenzie, E. 1999. Regional priorities for Plant Pathology - Summary. Tenth Regional Technical Meeting on Plant Protection. Nadi, Fiji, 29 March - 2 April 1999. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Suva, Fiji.

Paulson, D. 1993. Hurricane hazard in Western Samoa. Geographical Review. 83: 43-53.

Paulson, D. & S. Rogers. 1997. Maintaining subsistence security in Western Samoa. Geoforum 28(2): 173-187. Elsevier Science.

PRAP. 1998. Six-monthly reports of the Pacific Regional Agricultural Programme. Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Suva, Fiji.

Preston, S.R. 1998. Aibika/bele. Abelmoschus manihot (L.) Medik. Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops. 24. Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, Gatersleben/International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy.

Ragone, D. 1997. Breadfruit. Artocarpus altilis (Parkinson) Fosberg. Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops. 10. Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, Gatersleben/International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy.

Roth, S. 1996. Donor assistance to agricultural research and development services at the Pacific ACP Level. Report for the European Union. Pacific Regional Agricultural Programme, SPC, Suva, Fiji.

Rowe, P. 1999. A new dwarf cooking banana resistant to black Sigatoka leaf spot disease. Tropical Agriculture Association Newsletter UK. Volume 19 No 1 p. 40-41.

Saade, R.L. 1996. Chayote. Sechium edule (Jacq.) Sw. Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops. 8. Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, Gatersleben/International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy. ISBN 92-9043- 298-5.

Simmonds, N.W. 1999. Agricultural Research Revolutionized. Tropical Agriculture Association Newsletter UK. Volume 19 No 1 p. 36-39.

South Pacific Commission. 1996. South Pacific Commission: history, aims and activities. 13th Edition. 72 pp. SPC, Suva, Fiji. <http://www.spc.org.nc>

South Pacific Commission. 1997. Taro Genetic Resources: Conservation and Utilisation A Project Design Document. The South Pacific Commission and International Institute of Plant Genetic Resources in consultation with Pacific Island Governments.

Secretariat of the Pacific Community. 1998. SPC Agriculture News. Vol. 7 No. 2.

Taylor M. 1997. Report of the first meeting of the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights, 5-7 May 1997. South Pacific Commission, Suva, Fiji.

Turner, M.R. 1999. Draft regional policy on crop varieties and seed. Prepared for the Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Suva, Fiji.

Waddell, E. 1983. Coping with frosts, governments and disaster experts: some reflections based on a New Guinea experience and a perusal of the relevant literature. Interpretations of calamity: from the viewpoint of human ecology. Ed K. Hewitt. Allen & Unwin.

Wobil, J. & B. Skovmand. 1996. Report of the mid-term evaluation mission GCP/RAS/153/DEN: Establishment of a seed association for public and private seed enterprises in the Asia- Pacific region, Food and Agriculture Organization, Rome.

Wohlt, P.B., B.J. Allen, A. Goie & P.W. Harvey. 1982. An investigation of food shortages in Papua New Guinea, 24-March to 3 April, 1981. IASER Special Publication No. 6. Institute of Applied Social and Economic Research, Port Moresby, PNG.

Annex I

Case study: Seed and planting material security in Western Samoa, 1989-1999

The resilience of subsistence farming systems in Western Samoa between 1989 and 1999 has been remarkable. Taro is the preferred staple and was a profitable cash crop for the local and export market. In 1989, bananas, breadfruit and A. macrorrhiza were the most important supplements to taro in local diets. A. macrorrhiza is used more in food shortages, for example when taro is scarce, as was the case following a drought that occurred between April and November 1989 (Clarke, 1992).

On 2-4 February 1990, an exceptionally severe hurricane (Cyclone Ofa), hit Western Samoa and caused extensive crop damage. Taro ‘generally survived the cyclone reasonably well’ but breadfruit trees were devastated and nearly all bananas were blown over (Clarke, 1992). By September 1990, taro production for domestic consumption and export had almost completely recovered. Paulson (1993) analyzed this resilient response in two rural villages in Western Samoa. She concluded that "One key to promoting self-reliant response to natural hazards is the strengthening of local-community social organization and resource management". In December 1991, an even more powerful storm (Cyclone Val), severely damaged crops again. Within a year the taro crop had recovered (Paulson and Rogers, 1997).

Lebot’s 1992 prediction about the genetic vulnerability of taro then came horribly true in the tropical equivalent of the potato disaster in Ireland last century. The devastating taro leaf blight (caused by Phytophthora colocasiae) appeared for the first time in Samoa in early July 1993. It was probably introduced by the illegal importation of taro. Supplies of taro on the domestic market approached zero by June 1994. Paulson and Rogers (1997) document how rural households responded by producing alternative food crops, this time without taro. By January 1995, rural households were producing enough food for their needs.

The problem in Samoa was exacerbated by the susceptibility of all local cultivars to taro leaf blight. One susceptible taro cultivar (Niue) predominated. Despite a series of root crop projects in the 1980s, and good information on the distribution of taro leaf blight, few resistant varieties were available for testing. A few exotic varieties from the Philippines, FSM and Palau were reported to be tolerant of taro leaf blight. Western Samoa imported tissue cultures after checking that they were free from the viruses that cause Dasheen Mosaic and the Alomae-Bobone diseases. Valerie Saena Tuia and Anthony Palupe, working on the PRAP tissue culture project, developed tissue culture multiplication methods (Mary Taylor pers. comm.). After transferring this material to a screenhouse, over 100 farmers were given limited quantities of the most promising varieties in 1996-97.

The multiplication, growth and use of five cultivars were assessed between August and November 1998. Iosefa and Rogers (1998) report the eagerness of Samoan farmers to plant taro, and the rapid multiplication of PSB-G2 (from Philippines) by cut nodal segments of runners in nursery beds. SPC (1999) records the farmer-to-farmer spread of this technique. Farmers considered PSB-G2 to be more tolerant of taro leaf blight than local cultivars but the assessment spanned an extended dry period, so the jury is still out on this. "If disease tolerance, growth and multiplication of taro are sustained at similar levels over the next two years, more than 18 million taro could be growing on farms in Samoa" (Iosefa and Rogers, 1998). There is, therefore, hope that the traditional staple food crop can be revived through mass propagation. However, little is known about the type of resistance, whether horizontal or vertical. There is justifiable concern about possible genetic changes in the pathogen; if resistance is based on one or a few major genes, the pathogen may rapidly evolve virulent strains, as occurred with Phytophthora on potato. There are FAO/TCP and JICA proposals for funding to help Samoa develop its taro rapid multiplication, selection and breeding capability (Mat Purea, pers. comm.).

Taro leaf blight is now present in Samoa, American Samoa, the Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Palau, Papua New Guinea, and Solomon Islands. Many other Pacific countries are, therefore, still vulnerable to taro leaf blight, the largest being Fiji, Tonga and Vanuatu.

Annex 2 gives an outline of a high-priority regional taro project, funded by AusAID, to help find durable resistance to taro leaf blight.

Annex II

TaroGen Project description (modified from the SPC Project Document, 1997)

This is a three-year project to collect, conserve and utilize taro germplasm in plant improvement programmes in Pacific Island Countries. The spread of taro leaf blight to Samoa in 1993 was a major impetus for the project. Many other countries are now vulnerable to the disease. In the region served by the South Pacific Commission (SPC), taro leaf blight is present in American Samoa, the Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Western Samoa.

The project is implemented by SPC in collaboration with IPGRI and USP, and works with national programmes to develop a regional strategy for taro genetic resource conservation and crop improvement. A unit has been established within SPC to provide expertise in tissue culture, plant breeding, crop conservation and project management.

Major inputs concerning virus indexing, DNA fingerprinting of taro germplasm and plant pathology will be given by ACIAR and MFAT, New Zealand. IPGRI provides expertise in genetic resource collection and management, and USP will support taro improvement through either breeding or selection in Western Samoa.

The goal of the project is to guarantee long-term access to diverse varieties of taro by Pacific island populations to ensure food security and opportunities for income generation.

There are three components:

Two sub-components, one on DNA fingerprinting to facilitate accurate comparison of accessions between countries, and the other on virus indexing procedures to overcome quarantine concerns in the international exchange of taro germplasm, will be financed by ACIAR. Techniques will be developed at the Queensland University of Technology (virus-indexing) and the University of Queensland (DNA fingerprinting), and transferred to Papua New Guinea (Department of Agriculture and Livestock and the Papua New Guinea University of Technology), in the first instance.

All of the above activities are expected to be completed within three years. However, it is unlikely that taro leaf blight varieties will be released from the breeding programmes in that time. Taro breeding will occur throughout the project, but, at most, two cycles of breeding can be expected. During this time, national staff will be trained to take over responsibilities, plant pathology techniques developed to assist the selection of disease-resistant progeny, and virus-indexed material exchanged between countries (including Asia) for incorporation into taro improvement programmes. Ideally, the project should continue for a second phase.

Annex III

EU - Yam: cultivar selection for disease resistance & export potential in Pacific islands: (extracted from project proposal)

This is a four-year project on the greater yam, Dioscorea alata, in Fiji, New Caledonia, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu. The overall aim of the project is to help Melanesian countries utilize and conserve the genetic resources of the crop by developing regional collaboration and by applying modern biotechnologies to overcome production constraints. There are six objectives: 1) Characterization and selection of germplasm; 2) Epidemiology of anthracnose disease (Colletotricum gloeosporioides); 3) Germplasm exchange; 4) Regional trials; 5) In vitro conservation; 6) Project management.

The project brings together a package of modern biotechnologies to solve practical problems concerned with yam improvement and conservation and involves six main partners:

Partner 1—France (CIRAD-CA, Project coordinator): New Caledonia is considered as included in CIRAD activities. This partner will assemble the descriptor data, collect germplasm of selected cultivars, if not already held in national genebanks, multiply the selections agreed by regional consent, and conduct agronomic trials in different agro-ecological zones to evaluate the cultivars selected.

Partner 2a—United Kingdom (University of Reading): will assist Pacific partners in studies on molecular characterization of yam cultivars and sources of yam anthracnose inoculum.

Partner 2b—United Kingdom (NRI, University of Greenwich): will assist the project with virus indexing and therapy treatments of infected germplasm. For accessions where symptoms of virus infection are observed, but no virus is detected by ELISA, electron microscopy and transmission studies to alternative/indicator hosts will be used to determine if previously unidentified viruses are present.

Partner 3 —Fiji (South Pacific Commission, Agriculture Programme): will develop a germplasm centre for in vitro conservation of selected cultivars (including cryopreservation) and propagate virus-free genotypes for distribution to other Partners (and for ACP-member countries of the South Pacific Commission). Partner 3 will develop material transfer agreements to ensure germplasm moved internationally is under intellectual property rights protection.

Partner 4—Papua New Guinea (Department of Agriculture and Livestock): will assemble descriptor data, collect germplasm of selected cultivars, if not already held in national genebanks, multiply the selections agreed by regional consent, and conduct agronomic trials in different agro-ecological zones to evaluate the cultivars selected.

Partner 5—Solomon Islands (Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries): will assemble the descriptor data, collect germplasm of selected cultivars, if not already held in national genebanks, multiply the selections agreed by regional consent, and conduct agronomic trials in different agro-ecological zones to evaluate the cultivars selected.

Partner 6—Vanuatu (Department of Agriculture, Livestock and Horticulture): will assemble the descriptor data, collect germplasm of selected cultivars, if not already held in national genebanks, multiply the selections agreed by regional consent, and conduct agronomic trials in different agro-ecological zones to evaluate the cultivars selected.

Annex IV

SPC/PRAP Seed Quarantine Consultancy Conclusions and recommendations

(based on Barber 1999)

1. That some quarantine authorities tend to maintain an over-conservative approach to entry conditions because of a lack of confidence or lack of knowledge in Pest Risk Assessment Techniques.

Recommendation: That suitable training workshops in PRA assessment methods be implemented as a matter of priority.

2. That Pacific Island Countries would gain benefits from a more integrated (harmonized) approach to Quarantine procedures.

Recommendation: That an inter-country working group be set up under the SPC or PPPO to give consideration to:

2.1 developing uniform import protocols into the Pacific ACP countries;

2.2 developing a master quarantine weed seed list, which could possibly be adapted to individual countries needs;

2.3 producing a list of accredited seed suppliers, to avoid the need for opening hermetically sealed packs for inspection; and

2.4 reviewing the benefits or desirability of requiring general seed treatments, where no specific quarantine pests have been identified.

3. Most Pacific Island Countries require single entry permits for all seed consignments.

Recommendation: That countries consider adopting multiple entry permits for seed, or no permit at all for seed assessed as being "low risk".

4. Most countries visited had either recently reviewed their import specifications and quarantine procedures or were in the process of reviewing them, to produce updated documented systems.

Recommendation: Countries that have not reviewed their import specifications/quarantine procedures in the last x years should do so, and develop an updated and documented system.

Go Top Previous Chapter Table Of Contents Next Chapter