182 7 Conclusions for PGRFA Conservation Policy and further Research Issues
Similar to the solution at national level, compensation will be the underlying
concept for any implementation of Farmers' Rights. This concept can be
understood as:
• the general compensation for farmers' past contribution by promoting modem
varieties for today's farmers (agricultural and general economic development),
• the targeted compensation for specific farmers' present contribution to maintain
specific (endemic) traditional varieties (e.g., controlled in situ conservation),
and
• the targeted incentives for specific farmers' future contributions to improve
traditional varieties (adapting landraces to changing conditions).
Hence, a compensation solution will be the most feasible. The crucial point of a
compensation solution, however, is the question whether and how the
compensation reaches the farmers. Furthermore, inevitable in the concept of
compensation, there will be the attempt of agrobiodiversity-poor and technology
poor countries to act as free riders.
7.4
Increasing Effectiveness Through a Market System,
Technology Development and Cooperation
Conservation costs may be reduced by adapting conservation techniques to the
different conservation objectives lOI . In situ conservation is undertaken by farmers
as a positive external effect as well as through high cost programs. Further
research is needed to analyze in situ conservation instruments, their costs and
above all their impact on the level of agrobiodiversily in the region. Are these
programs conceptualized to maintain a specific level of agrobiodiversity or to
increase it? How would agrobiodiversity develop without a program?
Reflecting the high costs for in situ conservation programs, and taking into
account the opportunity costs at a national level for the area under landraces, it
follows that the area under landraces should be the result of a market competition
between landraces and new varieties. For this it is necessary to abolish distorted
incentives, like subsidies for the new varieties as well as for fertilizers and other
inputs for the new varieties, while internalizing the degradation costs of natural
resources (soil and water) 102. The only necessary limitation in the system is the
condition that all varieties must be kept cultivated. If the area under one landrace
falls below the areal minimum safety standard, the CSC must intervene by
implementing some controlled in situ conservation programs. Furthermore, to
equalize the conditions for a market competition, it is suggested to support small101 For instance, the low-cost cryopreservation may be utilized for the long-term conservation
without any accessibility for medium- or short-term access. The access, in tum, may be
achieved by low-cost short- and medium-term conservation methods.
102 The internalization of degradation costs applies to new varieties as well as for landraces. It is
not per se garantueed that landraces degrade less the natural resources than HYV do.
Similar to the solution at national level, compensation will be the underlying
concept for any implementation of Farmers' Rights. This concept can be
understood as:
• the general compensation for farmers' past contribution by promoting modem
varieties for today's farmers (agricultural and general economic development),
• the targeted compensation for specific farmers' present contribution to maintain
specific (endemic) traditional varieties (e.g., controlled in situ conservation),
and
• the targeted incentives for specific farmers' future contributions to improve
traditional varieties (adapting landraces to changing conditions).
Hence, a compensation solution will be the most feasible. The crucial point of a
compensation solution, however, is the question whether and how the
compensation reaches the farmers. Furthermore, inevitable in the concept of
compensation, there will be the attempt of agrobiodiversity-poor and technology
poor countries to act as free riders.
7.4
Increasing Effectiveness Through a Market System,
Technology Development and Cooperation
Conservation costs may be reduced by adapting conservation techniques to the
different conservation objectives lOI . In situ conservation is undertaken by farmers
as a positive external effect as well as through high cost programs. Further
research is needed to analyze in situ conservation instruments, their costs and
above all their impact on the level of agrobiodiversily in the region. Are these
programs conceptualized to maintain a specific level of agrobiodiversity or to
increase it? How would agrobiodiversity develop without a program?
Reflecting the high costs for in situ conservation programs, and taking into
account the opportunity costs at a national level for the area under landraces, it
follows that the area under landraces should be the result of a market competition
between landraces and new varieties. For this it is necessary to abolish distorted
incentives, like subsidies for the new varieties as well as for fertilizers and other
inputs for the new varieties, while internalizing the degradation costs of natural
resources (soil and water) 102. The only necessary limitation in the system is the
condition that all varieties must be kept cultivated. If the area under one landrace
falls below the areal minimum safety standard, the CSC must intervene by
implementing some controlled in situ conservation programs. Furthermore, to
equalize the conditions for a market competition, it is suggested to support small101 For instance, the low-cost cryopreservation may be utilized for the long-term conservation
without any accessibility for medium- or short-term access. The access, in tum, may be
achieved by low-cost short- and medium-term conservation methods.
102 The internalization of degradation costs applies to new varieties as well as for landraces. It is
not per se garantueed that landraces degrade less the natural resources than HYV do.