4.2 Actors in the Conservation and Exchange Activities of Plant Genetic
83
in the intra-species; in the future it will probably contribute to an increase in the
inter-species diversity - as all breeders do by releasing new varieties and new
crops.
The private seed sector, conventional and biotechnology industry, has realized
its reactive mode in the negotiations concerning the genetic resources conservation
in the past and changed to a more pro-active role to represent their interest on
international fora by increasing their presence at and direct input to UN meetings
(Dickson, 1996).
Other organizations and agencies are also involved in the conservation of
PGRFA. In many developing as well as industrialized countries, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), jointly with local people, are actively
conserving local plant genetic resources. For example, NGOs promote ex situ
conservation and utilization activities on the local or community level.
Communities and groups of farmers receive support in collecting their own
varieties and storing them in community-based genebanks, which are accessible at
any time. The MS Swaminathan Foundation in MadraslIndia, for instance,
manages a community based genebank for farmers in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka,
India. Local farmers in Zimbabwe are encouraged to conserve the farmers'
sorghum varieties (FAO, 1996h). Furthermore, NGOs have stimulated a
conservation competition between farmers in the genetic resources rich Andean
Regions of South America by utilizing traditional rural fairs at harvest times
(Tapia et aI., 1993). Or farmers are reintroducing traditional varieties or crops,
because of changes in the economic framework, e.g., the reintroduction of
crotalaria as green manure in East Zaire because of the lacking access to the
fertilizer market. But also in industrialized countries groups are engaged in the
conservation of the existing agrobiodiversity (Vellve, 1992, Dahl et aI., 1992).
Besides these grass root organizations, NGOs on the national and international
level draw attention to conservation problems, taking part in the international
political discussion and negotiation process, e.g., the Canadian Rural
Advancement Foundation International (RAFI) or the Spanish Genetic Resources
Action International (GRAIN).
NGOs play an increased important role in the negotiation process. Even though
their points of view over the public needs diverge from those of representatives
from the individual countries, their efforts have pushed the institutional process in
the past.
In addition to the above mentioned groups, including the backstopping
organizations and institutions behind them, e.g., politicians, genebank curators,
which contribute to the conservation and utilization in an active way by
maintaining PGRFA in situ or ex situ, some important international bodies exist:
the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Commission on Genetic
Resources for Food and Agriculture (CGRFA), hosted by FAO, the TradeRelated Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) under the World Trade
Organization (WTO) , and the International Union for the Protection of New
Varieties of Plants (UPOV).
Directly or indirectly, these legal bodies influence policy decisions concerning
the conservation and utilization of PGRFA for all member countries through
83
in the intra-species; in the future it will probably contribute to an increase in the
inter-species diversity - as all breeders do by releasing new varieties and new
crops.
The private seed sector, conventional and biotechnology industry, has realized
its reactive mode in the negotiations concerning the genetic resources conservation
in the past and changed to a more pro-active role to represent their interest on
international fora by increasing their presence at and direct input to UN meetings
(Dickson, 1996).
Other organizations and agencies are also involved in the conservation of
PGRFA. In many developing as well as industrialized countries, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), jointly with local people, are actively
conserving local plant genetic resources. For example, NGOs promote ex situ
conservation and utilization activities on the local or community level.
Communities and groups of farmers receive support in collecting their own
varieties and storing them in community-based genebanks, which are accessible at
any time. The MS Swaminathan Foundation in MadraslIndia, for instance,
manages a community based genebank for farmers in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka,
India. Local farmers in Zimbabwe are encouraged to conserve the farmers'
sorghum varieties (FAO, 1996h). Furthermore, NGOs have stimulated a
conservation competition between farmers in the genetic resources rich Andean
Regions of South America by utilizing traditional rural fairs at harvest times
(Tapia et aI., 1993). Or farmers are reintroducing traditional varieties or crops,
because of changes in the economic framework, e.g., the reintroduction of
crotalaria as green manure in East Zaire because of the lacking access to the
fertilizer market. But also in industrialized countries groups are engaged in the
conservation of the existing agrobiodiversity (Vellve, 1992, Dahl et aI., 1992).
Besides these grass root organizations, NGOs on the national and international
level draw attention to conservation problems, taking part in the international
political discussion and negotiation process, e.g., the Canadian Rural
Advancement Foundation International (RAFI) or the Spanish Genetic Resources
Action International (GRAIN).
NGOs play an increased important role in the negotiation process. Even though
their points of view over the public needs diverge from those of representatives
from the individual countries, their efforts have pushed the institutional process in
the past.
In addition to the above mentioned groups, including the backstopping
organizations and institutions behind them, e.g., politicians, genebank curators,
which contribute to the conservation and utilization in an active way by
maintaining PGRFA in situ or ex situ, some important international bodies exist:
the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the Commission on Genetic
Resources for Food and Agriculture (CGRFA), hosted by FAO, the TradeRelated Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) under the World Trade
Organization (WTO) , and the International Union for the Protection of New
Varieties of Plants (UPOV).
Directly or indirectly, these legal bodies influence policy decisions concerning
the conservation and utilization of PGRFA for all member countries through