7 Conclusions for PGRFA Conservation Policy
and Further Research Issues
Although agrobiodiversity is a subsystem of biodiversity, differences exist
between the two, for instance, in the underlying causes for extinction as well as in
the transaction chains between collection and ultimate producer and in the
revenue-generating potential of products. Hence, economic issues of the
conservation of agrobiodiversity must be treated separately from those of
biodiversity in general.
7.1
The Conservation and Service Center as a Focal Point for
PGRFA Conservation Management
It has been often stated that PGRF A in farmers' fields is " ... being lost at a rapidly
increasing rate. " (Esquinas-Alcazar, 1996, p. 3). These statements are based on
studies identifying the loss of specific varieties at particular sites; for instance, the
extinction of vegetable varieties of asparagus, beets, onion and others in the USA
between 1903 and 1983 with extinction rates between 87% and 98% (Fowler and
Mooney, 1990). This study illustrates, however, the fundamental problem of
defining agrobiodiversity. In principle, agrobiodiversity can be defined as the
diversity on a genetic level, variety level, and species level. Because of lack of
technology needed for the measurement of genetic diversity, most studies
differentiate agrobiodiversity on an intra-species level. Taking the amount of
varieties as the basis for the decline of agrobiodiversity, there is a change in
agrobiodiversity. For the most part, the area under a diverse set of crops and
varieties is decreasing. The actual loss of varieties such as those mentioned above,
cannot, however, be proven in many places because of lack of information. If
information is available, it is often inconsistenf5. Detailed studies for identifying
genetic diversity at species level do not always prove the thesis of a rapid decrease
in agrobiodiversity (see Smale, 1997, Tarp, 1995). The situation of PGRFA in
9S For example, FAD (1993a) reports that 75% of India's agricultural area which once
accommodated up to 30,0000 rice varieties is now taken up by only 10 varieties, but that on
the remaining 25% still all varieties exist. The contrary is reported in the Indian Country
Report to FAD, according to which only 16,000 rice varieties are still cultivated by farmers in
India (ICR, 1996).
and Further Research Issues
Although agrobiodiversity is a subsystem of biodiversity, differences exist
between the two, for instance, in the underlying causes for extinction as well as in
the transaction chains between collection and ultimate producer and in the
revenue-generating potential of products. Hence, economic issues of the
conservation of agrobiodiversity must be treated separately from those of
biodiversity in general.
7.1
The Conservation and Service Center as a Focal Point for
PGRFA Conservation Management
It has been often stated that PGRF A in farmers' fields is " ... being lost at a rapidly
increasing rate. " (Esquinas-Alcazar, 1996, p. 3). These statements are based on
studies identifying the loss of specific varieties at particular sites; for instance, the
extinction of vegetable varieties of asparagus, beets, onion and others in the USA
between 1903 and 1983 with extinction rates between 87% and 98% (Fowler and
Mooney, 1990). This study illustrates, however, the fundamental problem of
defining agrobiodiversity. In principle, agrobiodiversity can be defined as the
diversity on a genetic level, variety level, and species level. Because of lack of
technology needed for the measurement of genetic diversity, most studies
differentiate agrobiodiversity on an intra-species level. Taking the amount of
varieties as the basis for the decline of agrobiodiversity, there is a change in
agrobiodiversity. For the most part, the area under a diverse set of crops and
varieties is decreasing. The actual loss of varieties such as those mentioned above,
cannot, however, be proven in many places because of lack of information. If
information is available, it is often inconsistenf5. Detailed studies for identifying
genetic diversity at species level do not always prove the thesis of a rapid decrease
in agrobiodiversity (see Smale, 1997, Tarp, 1995). The situation of PGRFA in
9S For example, FAD (1993a) reports that 75% of India's agricultural area which once
accommodated up to 30,0000 rice varieties is now taken up by only 10 varieties, but that on
the remaining 25% still all varieties exist. The contrary is reported in the Indian Country
Report to FAD, according to which only 16,000 rice varieties are still cultivated by farmers in
India (ICR, 1996).