In 1992, the first RIO conference established a framework for the conservation of biological diversity, which resulted the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (ITPGRFA). In its RIO+20 Call-to-Action, CGIAR urges for an endorsement of the Treaty’s full implementation. Michael Halewood from Bioversity International explains the background of the Treaty and its importance for the future of sustainable agriculture. What is the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture? Michael Halewood: The Treaty is the first international legally binding framework promoting the sustainable use and conservation of plant genetic resources, and sharing benefits derived from their use. It represents a breakthrough in terms of the international community’s understanding of the importance of plant genetic resources. It shows the need for countries to work together to make sure those resources are not squandered, lost, or used unfairly. It’s a ‘framework’ agreement, which means that it creates space and momentum for the international community to develop best practices or norms in key areas, such as how to promote sustainable use and farmers’ rights, how to link up conservation efforts and so on. To date, 127 countries have ratified the Treaty. So, “the use and conservation of plant genetic resources” are key to sustainable agriculture, according to you? Michael Halewood: Absolutely. Plant genetic resources are among the important portfolio of resources that farmers and breeders have to use. Using genetic resources sustainably, and deploying them in sustainable ways, is an essential element of sustainable agriculture. As far as the multilateral system is concerned, if all member countries, companies and research organizations fully participate and share genetic material of the world’s most important crops, the Treaty will have an array of the world’s diversity for safekeeping and use. This is vital for our future. Think of the way CGIAR works with partners on climate change adaptation, as an example: Our scientists work with national partners using the genetic material to adopt crops to anticipated climate shifts: to make some crops more drought resistant in one area, or more flood-tolerant in others, to allow crops to grow in soil with a higher salinity, etc. So access to the genetic material is key. What is the most important aspect of the Treaty? Michael Halewood: It addresses the issue of “access and benefit sharing”. It creates a virtual global pool of crop and forage genetic resources that can be used in research, breeding, training and conservation. The Treaty also provides set rules on how financial benefits should be shared when the pooled resources are used for commercial purposes. In short, contracting parties agree to that in return for pooling genetic resources of 64 crops and forages that are particularly important for food security, they will gain access to all the other countries’ pooled genetic resource of those same crops and forages, as well as those hosted by international organizations, such as the CGIAR Consortium. The multilateral system is designed to radically lower transaction costs that would otherwise be related to negotiating, on a case-by-case basis, the legal terms of transferring those resources. In the multilateral system, all contracting parties agree to a standard set of access and benefit sharing terms, and they apply to all transfers in the system. To date, there are more than 1.5 million accessions in the multilateral system, and more are being added all the time. It has great impact for everyone, because it ensures that breeders, researchers, farmers, conservationists – big and small – all have access to the genetic material they need in their efforts to feed the world. Who uses the multilateral system? Michael Halewood: Based on the distribution of materials from the CGIAR Consortium members – which represents a large percentage of the overall activity in the multilateral system to date – there is evidence that approximately 85% of plant genetic resources for food and agriculture transferred through the multilateral system is going to developing countries and countries with economies in transition. Most of the recipients in those countries are public sector research and breeding organizations, including universities and national research institutes, and crop improvement networks. How has CGIAR been involved in the Treaty? Michael Halewood: In 1994, international negotiations began on what would become the Treaty. It took almost 20 years to have the basic building blocks in place for the multilateral system to function. In view of the complexity of the issues, this is an enormous achievement. CGIAR has been involved as active observers, since the beginning of the negotiations of the Treaty, making scientific technical contributions. The members of the CGIAR Consortium host some of the biggest collections in the world for plant genetic resources for food and agriculture. It was always our hope that those collections would ‘find a home’ under the Treaty, and be subject to rules and governance mechanisms that would guarantee the open, public availability of those collections for researchers, breeders, farmers conservationists, around the world, in perpetuity. The CGIAR Consortium members signed agreements with the Governing Body in 2006, placing their international collections under the Treaty’s framework. So we see ourselves, and our work maintaining and supporting the use of those collections, as an important part of Treaty’s overall functioning. If the Treaty didn’t exist, what would happen? Michael Halewood: Without it, the costs and negotiations on a case-by-case basis to access genetic plant resources would make the activities of these people and organizations extremely difficult, and in many cases, impossible. For example, if you look at the pedigrees of modern released crop varieties, you can find that they may include ancestors that were originally collected in 20, 30 or more countries. To start such breeding efforts afresh now, without the multilateral system, would require negotiations of at least that number of contracts with the countries concerned. Each contract would include different conditions, creating severe institutional monitoring and compliance challenges. Under the Treaty, with its pooled resources, fixed access and benefit sharing terms, and (one day, we hope) a centralized information system about what materials are in the multilateral system, countries, organizations and individuals can get what they need without arduous negotiations. In short, if the Treaty wasn’t adopted, researchers, breeders, conservationists and farmers would not have access to all of the genetic resources that are being pooled in the multilateral system. What are the challenges going forward and the importance in relation to RIO+20? Michael Halewood: RIO was the birthplace of the Treaty in 1992. Unfortunately, we are still way behind in our collective efforts to ensure that biological and genetic resources are sustainably used to promote food security and economic development, and that they are conserved for use by future generations. The Treaty has enormous potential to help the international community achieve these goals. To that end, it is an important part of the overall infrastructure that needs to be strengthened and supported by RIO+20. There is a need for more participation and implementation by all countries in the Treaty. This will help to ensure diversity and meet the goals set out from the beginning. That’s why CGIAR has highlighted its importance in “the RIO+20 call-to-action”. Michael Halewood is the Policy Theme Leader at Bioversity International. He coordinated representation of the CGIAR Consortium members during the latter years of negotiations of the Treaty, and at meetings of the Governing Body. Michael currently manages an international project supporting national implementation of the Treaty.

Link:

Attachement: