BCPs and Boundary Work in Madagascar 251
• as the commune is a rich farming area, Bioversity International can work on
the linkages between the BCP, the Plant Treaty and MLS;
• and last but not least, the municipality is made up of several dynamic Seed
Producer Groups (SPGs),
25 which are considered exemplary for the rest of
the country.
This third aspect is critical for the Ministry of Agriculture and fostered its opportunistic behaviour. While seemingly fitting into the second script (i.e. “institutional incentives” and the MLS), the major impetus behind the choice of site was
in fact the Malagasy government’s willingness to advance its own public policies.
It is no coincidence that the predecessor of the SOC pushed for Analavory: the
model SPGs play a critical role in the multiplication of basic seeds developed by
the National Centre for Applied Research on Rural Development (FOFIFA).
From the Ministry’s point of view, the Mitsinjo and Santatra SPGs, in particular, play two essential roles. First, for what is still a minority of farmers who are
“market-oriented”, certified seed must be more easily accessible (MAEP, 2008).
For example, one of the priorities of the national seed strategy, as well as the
national rice development strategy (Ministère auprès de la Présidence en charge
de l’agriculture et de l’élevage, 2017), is to increase the use of certified seeds,
to boost the growth of agricultural production and, thus, to ease land pressure.
Second, for the great majority of farmers who practise subsistence farming, and
who therefore depend on landraces and farmers’ seed networks for seed supplies,
SPGs are confidently seen as able to bring about a change in practice, notably by
providing local services and implementing incentives, such as swapping seeds for
grain or selling seeds on credit (MAEP, 2008).
This interpretative twist, in other words the move from the “institutional
incentive” script to that of farmers in need of modernisation, has largely gone
unnoticed. The first reason for this is that, as the result of a fundamental shift
away from colonial and Cold War patterns, major development agencies now
incorporate managerial tools (such as “log-frames” and “theories of change”)
and long-term impact indicators (such as the fight against poverty and sustainable
development goals). As a consequence, partners are given greater leeway in the
kind of actions and means they can deploy (which can also be modified part way
through the process), and the criteria for assessing the success of the project are
significantly broader.
26 In light of this, it is easy for the Ministry of Agriculture
to surreptitiously integrate its objectives into the project. For instance, in a confidential pre-report prepared by SAGE for Bioversity International’s second annual
report (Bioversity International, 2017), significant parts of the text insist on the
role of new varieties that have “a multiplier effect on the economy by increasing
the efficiency and total volume of agricultural production contributing to food
security” (SAGE, confidential). In any event, the Ministry can showcase the role
of the MLS and ABS mechanisms (and thus the BCP) without losing sight of
its own hidden agenda. Following extensive fieldwork, financed through additional funds, ecologists, agronomists, technicians and farmers carried out a rich
• as the commune is a rich farming area, Bioversity International can work on
the linkages between the BCP, the Plant Treaty and MLS;
• and last but not least, the municipality is made up of several dynamic Seed
Producer Groups (SPGs),
25 which are considered exemplary for the rest of
the country.
This third aspect is critical for the Ministry of Agriculture and fostered its opportunistic behaviour. While seemingly fitting into the second script (i.e. “institutional incentives” and the MLS), the major impetus behind the choice of site was
in fact the Malagasy government’s willingness to advance its own public policies.
It is no coincidence that the predecessor of the SOC pushed for Analavory: the
model SPGs play a critical role in the multiplication of basic seeds developed by
the National Centre for Applied Research on Rural Development (FOFIFA).
From the Ministry’s point of view, the Mitsinjo and Santatra SPGs, in particular, play two essential roles. First, for what is still a minority of farmers who are
“market-oriented”, certified seed must be more easily accessible (MAEP, 2008).
For example, one of the priorities of the national seed strategy, as well as the
national rice development strategy (Ministère auprès de la Présidence en charge
de l’agriculture et de l’élevage, 2017), is to increase the use of certified seeds,
to boost the growth of agricultural production and, thus, to ease land pressure.
Second, for the great majority of farmers who practise subsistence farming, and
who therefore depend on landraces and farmers’ seed networks for seed supplies,
SPGs are confidently seen as able to bring about a change in practice, notably by
providing local services and implementing incentives, such as swapping seeds for
grain or selling seeds on credit (MAEP, 2008).
This interpretative twist, in other words the move from the “institutional
incentive” script to that of farmers in need of modernisation, has largely gone
unnoticed. The first reason for this is that, as the result of a fundamental shift
away from colonial and Cold War patterns, major development agencies now
incorporate managerial tools (such as “log-frames” and “theories of change”)
and long-term impact indicators (such as the fight against poverty and sustainable
development goals). As a consequence, partners are given greater leeway in the
kind of actions and means they can deploy (which can also be modified part way
through the process), and the criteria for assessing the success of the project are
significantly broader.
26 In light of this, it is easy for the Ministry of Agriculture
to surreptitiously integrate its objectives into the project. For instance, in a confidential pre-report prepared by SAGE for Bioversity International’s second annual
report (Bioversity International, 2017), significant parts of the text insist on the
role of new varieties that have “a multiplier effect on the economy by increasing
the efficiency and total volume of agricultural production contributing to food
security” (SAGE, confidential). In any event, the Ministry can showcase the role
of the MLS and ABS mechanisms (and thus the BCP) without losing sight of
its own hidden agenda. Following extensive fieldwork, financed through additional funds, ecologists, agronomists, technicians and farmers carried out a rich