2.4 Methods for Conservation of PGRFA
33
could deliver several million dollars to some source countries under bilateral
arrangements (Wright, 1996). Whereas, because of the small annual turnover of
the commercial seed industry amounting to approximately US $ 15 billion (LEIDLO, 1994), a redistribution to the providers of genetic resources would be
insignificant. In the pharmaceutical industry competition for access to genetic
resources may lead to an exchange system of bilateral contracts between large
corporations and national governments, whereas the agricultural sector - because
of its structure and the high transaction costs entailed in this - appears to be
moving towards a further consolidation of the existing multilateral system
(Cooper et al., 1994)13.
As can be seen in Chapter 2.4.2, the wild relatives of PGRFA are midway
between the genetic diversity of wild and domesticated plants and may be seen as
overlap. They are relatives or the original of the domesticated plants, and can be
found mainly in the centers of origin of PGRF A. Concerning the conservation
possibilities, however, they have to be handled more like genetic resources of
wild plants. In situ conservation needs to protect the habitat against human
agricultural activities. Consequently, by discussing the conservation of PGRFA,
their wild relatives must be treated as a part of the genetic resources of wild plants
in general.
Because of the important differences between agrobiodiversity and biodiversity
it has been recommended to differentiate between both and to treat
agrobiodiversity as defined and biodiversity as a synonym for plant genetic
resources excluding PGRF A. Consequently this study will concentrate on the
analyses and evaluation of conservation methods of PGRF A, touching only
briefly the wild relatives of PGRF A.
2.4
Methods for Conservation of PGRFA
There is, however, a fundamental divergence of views on what objectives should
be the focus of the conservation of genetic diversity. Ethical aims oriented at
preserving all existing biodiversity stand in opposition to anthropocentric
objectives which consider genetic diversity only worth maintaining to the extent
that it serves human kind at present or in the future. Conservation policies will be
pursued with quite different sets of instruments depending on whether maximal or
optimal conservation has been chosen.
The present political discussion, in the "Commission for Genetic Resources for
Food and Agriculture" (CGRF A), for instance, is characterized by a mutual
agreement on the conservation of the diversity of PGRF A. The question whether
to optimize or maximize the conservation is, however, not yet on the agenda. It
13 The different exchange systems mentioned are discussed in Chap. 4.4.
33
could deliver several million dollars to some source countries under bilateral
arrangements (Wright, 1996). Whereas, because of the small annual turnover of
the commercial seed industry amounting to approximately US $ 15 billion (LEIDLO, 1994), a redistribution to the providers of genetic resources would be
insignificant. In the pharmaceutical industry competition for access to genetic
resources may lead to an exchange system of bilateral contracts between large
corporations and national governments, whereas the agricultural sector - because
of its structure and the high transaction costs entailed in this - appears to be
moving towards a further consolidation of the existing multilateral system
(Cooper et al., 1994)13.
As can be seen in Chapter 2.4.2, the wild relatives of PGRFA are midway
between the genetic diversity of wild and domesticated plants and may be seen as
overlap. They are relatives or the original of the domesticated plants, and can be
found mainly in the centers of origin of PGRF A. Concerning the conservation
possibilities, however, they have to be handled more like genetic resources of
wild plants. In situ conservation needs to protect the habitat against human
agricultural activities. Consequently, by discussing the conservation of PGRFA,
their wild relatives must be treated as a part of the genetic resources of wild plants
in general.
Because of the important differences between agrobiodiversity and biodiversity
it has been recommended to differentiate between both and to treat
agrobiodiversity as defined and biodiversity as a synonym for plant genetic
resources excluding PGRF A. Consequently this study will concentrate on the
analyses and evaluation of conservation methods of PGRF A, touching only
briefly the wild relatives of PGRF A.
2.4
Methods for Conservation of PGRFA
There is, however, a fundamental divergence of views on what objectives should
be the focus of the conservation of genetic diversity. Ethical aims oriented at
preserving all existing biodiversity stand in opposition to anthropocentric
objectives which consider genetic diversity only worth maintaining to the extent
that it serves human kind at present or in the future. Conservation policies will be
pursued with quite different sets of instruments depending on whether maximal or
optimal conservation has been chosen.
The present political discussion, in the "Commission for Genetic Resources for
Food and Agriculture" (CGRF A), for instance, is characterized by a mutual
agreement on the conservation of the diversity of PGRF A. The question whether
to optimize or maximize the conservation is, however, not yet on the agenda. It
13 The different exchange systems mentioned are discussed in Chap. 4.4.