The Legitimation of GMO Governance in Africa

1. The Legitimation of GMO Governance in Africa Seife Ayele The Open University

2. Objective: examining the extent to which GMO regulatory institutions facilitated contested views and produced integrated solutions. Based on: case studies from Ethiopia and South Africa three examples of Africa-wide biosafety harmonisation initiatives

3. Outline The evolution of GMO regulatory institutions in Africa The role and legitimation of GMO Governance Institutionalising a biosafety system in Ethiopia Institutionalising a biosafety system in South Africa Harmonising biosafety systems in Africa Conclusion

4. 1. The evolution of GMO regulatory institutions in Africa early starters (South Africa and Egypt) Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB) in 2000 and post-CPB harmonising national biosafety systems at African and sub-regional levels

5. 2. The Role and Legitimation of GMO Governance the key concepts (actors, participation, governance and legitimacy) actors participate or demand to participate in politics and the decision-making process of GMOs (Purdue, 1999; Harrison and Mort, 1998; Black, 1998; Haas, 2004; Feidberg and Horowitz, 2004; Harsh, 2005)

6. modalities of participation include citizens� juries, deliberative polls... but participation is not a guarantee that contributions are taken on board Harmonisation (methods include evolutionary process, cooperation and imposition - Drezner, 2005; Busch and Jorgens, 2005).

7. 3. Institutionalising the Ethiopian Biosafety System background: agriculture and biodiversity are central to the GM debate biosafety implementation process led by EPA major differences that emerged in the course of biosafety implementation: developing legal and technical documents the location of the competent authority for GMOs administration, and the interpretation of precaution and application of socio-economic criterion for GMO evaluation

8. [Some] patent owners are saying �we will give it free�. But I don�t believe that. If patents were to be given free to developing countries, why should they have existed in the first place? TRIPs of the World Trade Organisation� will make it compulsory for developing countries to respect patent owners� and when that happens a smallholder farmer, who requires negotiating for the use of patents around the world, couldn�t even say �I will continue as my parents did, I don�t want your patented varieties�.

9. It would put [the developing countries] in a totally new form of colonialism where the only resources we have, our biological resources, will also be controlled by companies in the north (Egzabher, head of EPA).

10. Ethiopia: Summary our research found much common ground bridging the differences between the main protagonists of GMOs however, the biosafety rule-making process was perceived to have failed to connect and mediate between the different views and concerns over GMOs, leaving sufficiently potent ground for contesting impending decisions on GMO activities.

11. 4. Institutionalising the South African Biosafety System background: SA is the economic and S&T giant of Africa South African Committee on Genetic Experimentation (SAGEN) developed the biosafety guideline (1990) GMO draft bill was prepared by scientists and industry reps (1994-95) Parliament passed GMO Act in 1997 (Act implemented from 1999).

12. Limitations of the SA GMO regulatory institutions, as perceived by some actors: considered as elitist and non-participatory its decision-making process controlled by technology developers and suppliers decisions largely based on scientific and technical inputs, with little regard to socio-economic concerns

13. insufficient access to information and lack of transparency of decisions on GMOs inadequate GM product labelling; and liability and redress issues are hardly addressed communication of the science was �not good�

14. But�. institutionalising the regulatory body in DoA has enabled to draw on the expertise and knowledge of innovation practices, and technology assessment. The system copes well in processing applications and interpreting the �precautionary approach�. more awareness building work being made, specially by PUB contestations are shaping and reshaping the GMOs governance structure in South Africa. The new (revised) bill is hoped to build on lessons learnt from its predecessor.

15. 5. Challenges of Harmonising Biosafety Systems in Africa a series of declarations and initiatives have been made towards harmonisation of biosafety systems in Africa. Examples include: AML (2001); AU-NEPAD high level African Panel on Biotechnology (APB) (2005); the implementation of UNEP-GEF biosafety framework

16. Some common features and difficulties of harmonisation: initiatives tend to be a top-down process, often lack a mandate, and some are not owned by African institutions differences in the methods of harmonisation are making convergence more difficult differences in social and economic development and S&T capacities between nations are also likely to skew the return to harmonisation, making the harmonisation agenda more complicated

17. Conclusion instead of mediating and reconciling differing views and needs, the emerging GMO rules tend to take a position on the technology the decision-making process too is often dominated by one of the main protagonists these leave little confidence in the minds of those marginalised that the governance system would be free of bias. Over and above the disagreements on the inherent attributes of the technology, therefore, the process of rule making and institutionalising it has become a major source of disagreement.