My name is Marcel Nwalozie, the Scientific Co-ordinator of the West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development (WECARD/CORAF). WECARD is charged with the co-ordination and facilitation of agricultural research co-operation in the sub-region, consisting of 24 countries, and has a population more than 230 million.
Having said this, may I make an attempt at the question: 'How appropriate are currently available biotechnologies in the crop sector for food production and agriculture in developing countries'. First, it is important to state that most national research systems in sub-Saharan Africa still have very low funding for institutional and operating costs. Therefore, most of these countries cannot afford the necessary enabling funding for the acquisition and maintenance of biotechnology facilities. For example, in crop improvement most national systems are still reliant on the use of agronomic characters (of varieties which sometimes have very close parental lines) for breeding. Physiological characteristics are sometimes used, but molecular biology (recombinant DNA technique) is little 'known' in crop improvement.
Thus, there may be the availability of inflow of biotechnologies into the zone (sub-Saharan Africa). There may also be the availability of other local or indegineous technologies (other than high biotech), but there is practically little new biotechnology being generated by the national systems to tackle the problems of crop production. The International Centres of the CGIAR may have the capacities for the development of these high technologies, but such capacities are sometimes over-stretched as a result of many factors. The factors include the fact that the national systems do not have the capacities/resources to sustain such high biotechs from the CG centres. Of course, the CG centers cannot do everything, and there are a number of crops that are not CG centres mandates.
A technology can only be appropriate if its use and sustainance is assured. Or what do you think?
Marcel Nwalozie, Ph.D
Scientific Co-ordinator,CORAF/WECARD,
N° 7 Avenue Bourguiba,
BP 8237, Dakar-Yoff, Senegal.
Tel. (221) 825.4823,
825.9618
Fax (221) 825.5569
Email: nwalozie@sonatel.senet.net, marcel.nwalozie@coraf.org
http://www.coraf.org
** To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org ** For further information on the Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see ** http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod1
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2000 4:00 PM
To: 'biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: Agricultural Research / Sub-saharan Africa / Resources
This is Saturnina C. Halos, a molecular geneticist from the Philippines. I currently provide advice to the Department of Agriculture on modern biotechnology development.
It is quite difficult to generalize and say that if one cannot sustain a technology one must not start. One must try to start something if one wants to progress. As for cost of techniques, tissue culture is relatively cheap and you just have to identify a problem where it could be very useful. If such a problem is critical and solving it could revolutionize production, then sustaining the technology later will not be a problem. A most revolutionary but simple technology developed and applied in the Philippines is mango flower induction. This technology involves the application of an inorganic chemical to mango plants and the flowering is assured. Increased and programmed fruit production has been achieved with this technology. We used to produce only for the local market but now mango is a major export. Going back to tissue culture, it is a very useful technique and there are a number of things one can do with it. Selection for desirable traits in tissue culture is manageable, for example and maybe more cost-effective than field selections.
We in the Third World are in the same boat, you know. Funds are always scarce and in our case the first item in the national budget that usually gets cut when the going gets rough is R & D. Then we also have a problem of maintaining our best scientists in R & D. They either migrate, go into consultancy or join the CGIAR centers. However, as I see it the only alternative technology to chemical pesticides for our farmers who often abuse chemical use are pest-protected GM-crops. The organics would disagree but organic farming is actually labor intensive and there are few in my country who can pay and willing to pay a premium for organically grown crops. On the other hand, collaboration with other countries with similar project or accessing grants might help reduce cost. It would be too expensive for us to start our own biotechnology programs that includes gene isolation to transformation to commercialization. It would be cheaper to access and adopt GM-crops developed elsewhere or access desirable genes which in some cases can be obtained free.
Saturnina C. Halos, Ph.D. Bureau of Agricultural Research, Department of Agriculture, Philippines
[To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room1@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]