168
6 Two Country Examples of PGRFA Conservation Systems
conservation facilities provide more accessions to the "international market" than
they receive from foreign sources. IPK, for instance, has registered an annual
average of only 2,431 entries into the genebank since 1953 (Hammer et aI., 1994).
According to Gade (1995), 41% of the accessions received from outside the
genebank in the years 1991 to 1993, were from outside Germany. However, this
does not imply that the 59% of all new entries into the genebank were of German
origin. They are made up in part by newly collected material, coming, however,
predominantly from another German institute.
The expenditures for all activities related to the conservation management of
PGRFA in Germany are approaching US $ 113,215 million per yearB. These
expenditures involve very different costs, which have to be discussed in the
following section (see Table 6.4).
In analyzing Germany's expenditures for the conservation management of
PGRF A in 1995, one major point can be highlighted immediately - although it was
not possible to assess all expenditures on a federal and state level, as well as those
expenditures of all organizations involved in the conservation management. The
expenditures for pure conservation efforts constitute only a fraction of the overall
expenditures. Only approximately US $ 4 million are listed in Table 6.4 for the
conservation of germplasm in genebanks and other storage facilities. The two
individual genebanks, IPK and BGRC, are, however, responsible for only 60% of
the stored accessions in Germany; other material is stored in the working
collections of various institutes. It has been moderately estimated that
approximately US $ 11 million are spent for conservation in the narrow sense of
solely conserving germplasm 84 (Oetmann, 1996). Approximately 10% of all
German domestic expenditures for PGRF A conservation management which are
spent for the long-term storage of PGRF A in the narrow sense reflect the
imbalanced expenditure structure between pure storage and processing costs for
PGRF A. With approximately 500,000 accessions, the USA spends US $ 20,000
annually for the national conservation system, which does not imply major
conservation management activities. Hence, based on the average expenditures per
conserved accession, Germany and the USA spend approximately the same
amount on pure conservation activities. The further involvement in information
processing is, however, of very high importance for Germany and other European
countries. Hence, 45% of the expenditures is dedicated to improving the
accessibility and utilization of stored accessions by evaluation and prebreeding
activities. As has been shown at various points throughout this study, the
opportunity for utilization decreases significantly by simply storing PGRF A in
storage facilities. Hence, the accessions stored in genebanks and other facilities
are worth demanding only by including some information management, i.e.,
83 In the preparation process for the 4th International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic
Resources Oetman (1996) gathered the German expenditures from the various sources; for
this study they were then compiled differently.
84 The quoted US $ 11 million are not clearly marked in Table 6.4, they are mainly hidden in the
expenditures for breeding, but because of joint costing in these institutes, the plain
conservation expenditures could not be separated.
6 Two Country Examples of PGRFA Conservation Systems
conservation facilities provide more accessions to the "international market" than
they receive from foreign sources. IPK, for instance, has registered an annual
average of only 2,431 entries into the genebank since 1953 (Hammer et aI., 1994).
According to Gade (1995), 41% of the accessions received from outside the
genebank in the years 1991 to 1993, were from outside Germany. However, this
does not imply that the 59% of all new entries into the genebank were of German
origin. They are made up in part by newly collected material, coming, however,
predominantly from another German institute.
The expenditures for all activities related to the conservation management of
PGRFA in Germany are approaching US $ 113,215 million per yearB. These
expenditures involve very different costs, which have to be discussed in the
following section (see Table 6.4).
In analyzing Germany's expenditures for the conservation management of
PGRF A in 1995, one major point can be highlighted immediately - although it was
not possible to assess all expenditures on a federal and state level, as well as those
expenditures of all organizations involved in the conservation management. The
expenditures for pure conservation efforts constitute only a fraction of the overall
expenditures. Only approximately US $ 4 million are listed in Table 6.4 for the
conservation of germplasm in genebanks and other storage facilities. The two
individual genebanks, IPK and BGRC, are, however, responsible for only 60% of
the stored accessions in Germany; other material is stored in the working
collections of various institutes. It has been moderately estimated that
approximately US $ 11 million are spent for conservation in the narrow sense of
solely conserving germplasm 84 (Oetmann, 1996). Approximately 10% of all
German domestic expenditures for PGRF A conservation management which are
spent for the long-term storage of PGRF A in the narrow sense reflect the
imbalanced expenditure structure between pure storage and processing costs for
PGRF A. With approximately 500,000 accessions, the USA spends US $ 20,000
annually for the national conservation system, which does not imply major
conservation management activities. Hence, based on the average expenditures per
conserved accession, Germany and the USA spend approximately the same
amount on pure conservation activities. The further involvement in information
processing is, however, of very high importance for Germany and other European
countries. Hence, 45% of the expenditures is dedicated to improving the
accessibility and utilization of stored accessions by evaluation and prebreeding
activities. As has been shown at various points throughout this study, the
opportunity for utilization decreases significantly by simply storing PGRF A in
storage facilities. Hence, the accessions stored in genebanks and other facilities
are worth demanding only by including some information management, i.e.,
83 In the preparation process for the 4th International Technical Conference on Plant Genetic
Resources Oetman (1996) gathered the German expenditures from the various sources; for
this study they were then compiled differently.
84 The quoted US $ 11 million are not clearly marked in Table 6.4, they are mainly hidden in the
expenditures for breeding, but because of joint costing in these institutes, the plain
conservation expenditures could not be separated.