BookPDF Available

Managing Agricultural Biotechnology - Addressing Research Program Needs and Policy Implications

Authors:
Joel Ivan Cohen at Duke University
Joel Ivan Cohen
Download full-text PDF
Read full-text
Download citation

Abstract

As new technologies for improving agricultural production are constantly being developed, there is a great need to manage their implementation more effectively, to thereby enhance their impact. Over the past few years ISNAR, in collaboration with partners in developing countries, advanced research institutes, and international research centers, has been holding policy seminars and building a base of expertise for more effective management of agricultural biotechnology programs. This book covers the key managerial and policy issues that research directors, program managers, and policymakers face when building capacity and competency in biotechnology. The book includes syntheses and review chapters, as well as a number of country case studies - including Chile, Costa Rica, India, Indonesia, Japan, the Philippines, Singapore, and the United States. It consists of 24 chapters written by leading authorities in North and Latin America, Europe, Asia, and Australia. It is written in an accessible style that will appeal to practicing research managers as well as to academics in the disciplines of biotechnology, animal and plant breeding, and agricultural policy and development.
Content uploaded by Joel Ivan Cohen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Joel Ivan Cohen on Sep 14, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
Managing Agricultural Biotechnology – Addressing Research Program Needs and Policy
Implications. Edited by Joel I. Cohen, 1999. CABI International.
Digital Download and Search available from IFPRI at:
https://ebrary.ifpri.org/digital/collection/p15738coll11/id/18/
Table of contents for Managing agricultural biotechnology : addressing research program
needs and policy implications :
Contributors
Foreword
Preface
Acknowledgments
Acronyms
Introduction and Overview, Joel I. Cohen
SECTION I Addressing Management and Policy Issues
1. Identifying Needs and Priorities: A Decision-Making Framework for Agricultural
Biotechnology, Joel I. Cohen, Cesar A. Falconi, and John Komen
2. The Debate on Genetically Modified Organisms: Relevance for the South, Robert
Tripp
3. Agricultural Biotechnology Research Indicators and Managerial Considerations in
Four Developing Countries, Cesar A. Falconi
SECTION II Setting and Implementing Priorities
4. Methods for Priority Setting in Agricultural Biotechnology Research, Cesar A.
Falconi
5. Setting Research Priorities for the Chilean Biotechnology Program, Thomas
Braunschweig, Willem Janssen, Carlos Munoz, and Peter Reider
6. Managing Biotechnology in AARD, Indonesia: Priorities, Funding, and
Implementation, Sugiono Moeljopawiro
SECTION III Maximizing Benefits from Resources
7. Issues in Human Resource Management and Development, Bruce W. Holloway
8. Managing Bioprospecting and Biotechnology for Conservation and Sustainable Use
of Biological Diversity, Ana Sittenfeld and Annie Lovejoy
9. Managing Genetic Resources and Biotechnology at IRRI's Rice Genebank, Michael
T. Jackson
10. International Collaboration in Agricultural Biotechnology, John Komen
11. Public- and Private-Sector Biotechnology Research and the Role of International
Collaboration, Joel I. Cohen
12. Indo-Swiss Collaboration in Biotechnology: Lessons Learned and Future
Strategies, Katharina Jenny and Ernst Schaltegger
SECTION IV Ensuring Environmental Responsibility
13. Biosafety Management: Key to the Environmentally Responsible Use of
Biotechnology, Patricia L. Traynor
14. Formulating Guidelines for Field-Testing in the Philippines, Emerenciana B.
Duran
15. Addressing Public Acceptance Issues for Biotechnology: Experiences from Japan,
Yutaka Tabei
16. Balancing Needs for Productivity and Sustainability: Genetic Engineering of Rice
at IRRI, John Bennett
17. Managing Target Pest Adaptation: The Case of Bt Transgenic Plant Deployment,
Mark E. Whalon and Deborah L. Norris
SECTION V Managing IPR, Proprietary Science, and Technology Transfer
18. Intellectual Property Rights and Agricultural Biotechnology, Michael Balkeney,
Joel I. Cohen, and Stephen Crespi
19. Agricultural Research and the Management of Intellectual Property, Michael
Blakeney
20. Managing Intellectual Property in Embrapa: A Qestion of Policy and a Change of
Heart, Maria Jose Amstalden Sampaio and Elza A.B. Brito da Cunha
21. Managing Proprietary Science and Institutional Inventories for Agricultural
Biotechnology, Joel I. Cohen, Cesar Falconi, John Komen, Silvia Salazar, and
Michael Blakeney
22. International Collaboration: Intellectual Property Management and Partner-
Country Perspectives, Catherine L. Ives, Karim M. Maredia, and Frederic H. Erbisch
23. Industrial Research and Business Development: Experiences from the Singapore
Institute of Molecular Agrobiology, Tai-Sen Soong
24. Introducing Tansgenic Crops in India: A Joint Venture Approach, Ellora Mubashir
APPENDIX Accessing Electronic Information John Komen and Patricia Traynor
Glossary
Index
... Among these are the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR, e.g. Cohen, 1999; McLean et al., 2002; Persley et al., 1993), the ICGEB and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP; http://www.unep.ch/biosafety ). ...
... Several organisations are instrumental in helping countries to generate the capacity to establish such systems. Among these are the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR) of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR, e.g. Cohen, 1999; McLean et al., 2002; Persley et al., 1993), the ICGEB and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP; http://www.unep.ch/biosafety ). ...
The release of genetically modified crops into the environment
Article
  • Jan 2003
  • PLANT J
In the past 6 years, the global area of commercially grown, genetically modified (GM) crops has increased more than 30-fold to over 52 million hectares. The number of countries involved has more than doubled. Especially in developing countries, the GM crop area is anticipated to increase rapidly in the coming years. Despite this high adoption rate and future promises, there is a multitude of concerns about the impact of GM crops on the environment. Regulatory approaches in Europe and North America are essentially different. In the EU, it is based on the process of making GM crops; in the US, on the characteristics of the GM product. Many other countries are in the process of establishing regulation based on either system or a mixture. Despite these differences, the information required for risk assessment tends to be similar. Each risk assessment considers the possibility, probability and consequence of harm on a case-by-case basis. For GM crops, the impact of non-use should be added to this evaluation. It is important that the regulation of risk should not turn into the risk of regulation. The best and most appropriate baseline for comparison when performing risk assessment on GM crops is the impact of plants developed by traditional breeding. The latter is an integral and accepted part of agriculture.
View
... Among the several rice biotechnology applications currently in use (see Figure 1), one that has much appeal for rice pest management in tropical irrigated Asia is to genetically engineer Indica rice with novel genes that confer pest-resistant traits (Panda and Khush 1995). A rice plant is transgenic pest-resistant when its hereditary DNA has been modified by the addition of DNA from a source other than parental germplasm using recombinant DNA techniques so that the plant will exhibit a pest-resistant trait (definition derived from Evenson 1996, Cohen 1999, Fernandez-Cornejo and McBride 2000. Transgenic crops are also often referred to as genetically modified (GM) crops (James 2000). ...
View
... However, in the case of biodiversity, the presence of scientific fact alone has not been enough to change actions or approaches to avoid the acidification of the oceans, reduce the accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, or curtail the current human-caused species extinction rates (4). As with many developments in biotechnology, science alone is not shaping public opinion or legislation (3), and students are exposed to genetic screening and counseling for which ethical codes or ethical choices are still being established. We can expect the same to be true for preservation and conservation of endangered species. ...
Ethical Values and Biological Diversity: A Preliminary Assessment Approach
Article
Full-text available
  • Dec 2014
As part of a short biodiversity unit, a survey was developed for students to express their ethical values regarding conservation of biodiversity or protection of species. The unit spanned four class periods, combining species diversity science, the plight of endangered species and their protection, a living reptile program presented in the classroom, poster art supporting protection of a specific species, and the ethics survey. 2014 Author(s). Published by the American Society for Microbiology. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ and https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode), which grants the public the nonexclusive right to copy, distribute, or display the published work.
View
... Strategies and capacities for managing intellectual property in ways that not only protect the rights of technology developers but also promote technology transfer and, more importantly, pro-poor agricultural technology development and diffusion within developing countries are lacking. The up-front costs of obtaining IPR protection and building national competence are known (Blakeney, Cohen, and Crespi 1999). Harder to predict are the size and distribution of benefits from such investments. ...
View
... For this meeting, biotechnology was defined as products arising from cellular or molecular biology and the resulting techniques produced by these disciplines for improving the genetic makeup and agronomic management of crops and animals (Cohen 1999). This definition allowed a focus on products arising from both traditional and modern biotechnology. ...
Biotechnology and sustainable livelihoods: Findings and recommendations of an international consultation
Article
Full-text available
  • Jan 2002
In June 2001, ISNAR's Biotechnology Service (IBS) organized a consultation meeting for research scientists, centers of the Consultative Group on International Agriculutural Research (CGIAR), and donor and development agencies, to analyze various approaches and discuss case studies regarding the socioeconomic impact of biotechnology on the poor 1 in developing countries. The consultation introduced the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework, developed by the UK Department for International Development (DFID), to further assess agricultural biotechnology inputs. Participants also defined selection criteria to identify future case studies examining the impacts of biotechnology on the livelihood of poor producers in developing countries. These contributions became part of the proposed project "Biotechnology and Sustainable Livelihoods—Examining Risks and Benefits," which will be implemented jointly by ISNAR, the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI), and other cooperating international and national organizations. The purpose of the project is to quantify and qualify the actual or potential impact of agricultural biotechnology on the livelihood of rural farmers in developing countries, to improve the institutional capacity in developing countries to conduct this kind of research, and to generate first-hand information from selected study sites. 1 There are several views as to what constitutes poverty. In this Briefing Paper, we focus on subgroups of communi-ties able to take advantage of biotechnology innovations. In this sense, we are not talking about the "poorest of the poor," nor about urban or rural nonagriculturist poor communities. 2 ISNAR 2 FAO (2000) projections indicate that the world's population in 2030 may vary between 7.4 and 8.85 billion. This would imply a global demand for cereal production of between 2.54–3.03 billion tons. These estimates are a simplification because they assume constant levels of cereal consump-tion and ignore the complex links between population growth, income, and food production. 3 Adapted from Dyson (1999). 4 ISNAR's Biotechnology Service (www.isnar.cgiar.org/ibs.htm) is an independent advisor on policy and management issues related to agricul-tural biotechnology. 5 Biotechnology and Rural Livelihood—Enhancing the Benefits, June 25–28, 2001. Consultation proceedings are forthcoming.
View
... 3 Thirdly, rights of sovereign nations from where biological resources are being collected by developing and developed countries for bio prospecting. 4 Fourthly, whether genetically modified food is safe for health, and does it take into consideration environmental safety or not. Lastly, can we use agriculture biotechnology as option of food security? ...
Patenting of agriculture biotechnology and food security: Options and challenges
Article
  • Jan 2012
When corporations develop new agricultural biotechnology products or processes or new crop varieties, they often seek legal rights over the intellectual property these innovations represent. However, intellectual property protection in agriculture is considered controversial because it directly confronts pre-existing systems of agriculture management that were mostly based on free exchange and on public sector involvement. There are five main issues with respect to agriculture and intellectual property. Firstly, question of patenting of life forms whose expansion constitute one of the main vehicle for the increasing role of patents in agriculture. Secondly, it has to take into consideration plant breeder's rights and farmers' rights, the two agriculture specific framework that have progressively proposed as alternatives to a system based on the free sharing of knowledge and germplasm. Thirdly, rights of sovereign nations from where biological resources are being collected by developing and developed countries for bio prospecting. Fourthly, whether genetically modified food is safe for health, and does it take into consideration environmental safety or not. Lastly, can we use agriculture biotechnology as option for food security?
View
... Why is USAID so invested in biotechnology's success in Africa? The senior biotechnology specialist who coordinated much of USAID's Agricultural Biotechnology for Sustainable Productivity project (the precursor to ABSP II and PBS) suggests that the agency supported biotechnology as a key component of sustainable agriculture, which fit within USAID's broader mandate of facilitating public-private partnerships that would allow poorer countries to gain access to technical expertise and encourage the transfer of biotechnology tools (Cohen 1999). Biotech companies were made equal partners in developing and implementing these programs, enticed by the possibility of developing pathways for new market access (Lewis 2000, 197–199). ...
Biotechnology and Bio-hegemony in Uganda: Unraveling the Social Relations Underpinning the Promotion of Genetically Modified Crops into New African Markets
Article
Full-text available
  • Jul 2013
This paper aims to uncover the social relations used to promote genetically modified (GM) crops into new African markets. It unravels the network of corporate actors, development agencies, policy officials, and research scientists that support the unquestioned dominance of GM in Uganda, which houses one of the largest experimental program dedicated to agricultural biotechnology on the continent. Gramscian insights reveal how these constellations of power align to support biotechnology at the expense of other technological possibilities, and how this consensus maintains its position of dominance while remaining largely unquestioned and unchallenged.
View
... Intellectual property rights became one of the hot issues in the debate on the role of agricultural biotechnology for developing countries. As many authors have already demonstrated, there are obvious solutions to prevent negative consequences from the concentration of intellectual property rights on research in developing countries (see Cohen, 1999). The real property right problems for developing countries have nothing to do with agricultural biotechnology but are very basic. ...
Biotechnology and vitamin A deficiency in developing countries. A comparative economic assessment of Golden Rice.
Article
Five interventions to combat vitamin A deficiency in developing countries are compared in a model with different income groups: gardening and education programs, food fortification, vitamin A supplementation, Golden Rice and Golden Rice ++ (i.e. a new variety of Golden Rice with more provitamin A and higher yields for rice farmers). In the model, the entitlement approach is linked to Malthusian variables and a micronutrient threshold level under which the productivity of agricultural labourers is reduced. For each income category, the ranking order of the five interventions is different. Supplementation is the most cost-effective intervention. For the lowest income group, Golden Rice is a more attractive strategy than gardening and fortification. For the higher income groups, gardening and fortification are more effective in terms of vitamin A delivery. With the inclusion of all the costs to make each intervention effective and operational during the period 2003-2020, the overall cost-effectiveness of Golden Rice strongly exceeds that of gardening and fortification. Since supplementation is not a sustainable long-term option like gardening, fortification or new rice varieties, this intervention should be complemented with other strategies to reduce micronutrient deficiencies and the need for supplementation. We found that the combination of supplementation with Golden Rice and with Golden Rice ++ is more cost-effective than the combination of supplementation with fortification and supplementation with gardening.
View
Postharvest Biotechnology of Fruits and Vegetables
Chapter
  • Sep 2024
From early life, fruits and vegetables have provided a major part of human food intake, while starchy roots, tubers and grains have been the major sources of energy. At the turn of the twentieth century, supporting the growing human population became one of the most challenging concerns; therefore, systematic efforts in plant breeding focused not only on increasing the yield and protecting crops but also on good practices of harvesting, handling, transportation and storage of fresh crops, as losses vary from 20% to 45% from the farm to the table.
View
The intellectual property strategy of international agricultural research centres
Article
Full-text available
This paper discusses the main problems, principles, concepts, and solutions that characterise the intellectually property (IP) challenges that the CGIAR Research Centres face. The Centres' IP challenges must be seen against the background of five revolutions. Due to the biotechnology, information and communication technology, and intellectual property revolutions, a management revolution is necessary for the Centres to follow up on their initial success in the Green Revolution. The requisite management revolution would implement the principles of systemic thinking, relational thinking, analysis of incentive problems, bundle thinking, and portfolio thinking. These principles can be applied to IP-related challenges, including technology access and freedom-to-operate issues, relations with the private sector, secrecy versus openness, decisions on IP protection, exclusivity versus non-exclusivity in partnerships, the proper level of investment in IP expertise and information systems, and higher-level initiatives.
View
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.