1. AFRICAN UNION UNION AFRICAINE
UNIÃO AFRICANA
Addis Ababa, ETHIOPIA P. O. Box 3243 Telephone: +251-11-5517700 Fax: +251-11-5517844
website: www.africa-union.org
Conference of African Union Ministers of Agriculture
Libreville, Gabon
November 27-December 1, 2006
AN AFRICAN POSITION ON
GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS
IN AGRICULTURE

2. AN AFRICAN POSITION ON GMOs IN AGRICULTURE
1. Introduction
The advent of genetic engineering in agriculture has clearly changed the content and nature of
the debate on how to respond to food insecurity and on how to achieve longer-term
agricultural growth and food security. However, two extreme positions appear to polarize the
debate on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs): the extreme pro-genetic engineering and
extreme anti-genetic engineering positions. The extreme pro-genetic engineering groups tend
to catalogue potential benefits of the technology and often dismiss any concerns about
potential risks. They tend to portray biotechnology as the panacea to combat food insecurity
in Africa. On the other extreme are the anti-biotechnology activists who see no evident
benefits and associate the technology with nothing but danger and risks. They would like the
development, commercialisation and application of the technology stopped.
The two extreme positions have tended to confuse many African policymakers and sections
of the public because of the lack of reliable information and guidance available to these
groups. There is uncertainty and confusion in many of the African governments’ responses to
a wide range of social, ethical, environmental, trade and economic issues associated with the
development and application of modern genetic engineering. The absence of an African
consensus and strategic approaches to address these emerging biotechnology issues has
allowed different interest groups to exploit uncertainty in policymaking, regardless of what
may be the objective situation for Africa. Both pro and anti biotech advocacy groups can
affect African decision making adversely, as they portray agricultural opportunities in
extremes, making it appear like it is an “either–or” situation.
Agricultural biotechnology can be used to help farmers in African countries to produce more
by developing new crop varieties that are drought-tolerant and resistant to insects and weeds.
Of course, thorough testing is necessary to ensure the safety of new crop varieties developed
through biotechnology. Questions about safety must be addressed head-on, for people in both
Africa and developed countries.
African governments have recognized the importance of regional cooperation to address
possibilities and the range of issues associated with biotechnology and genetic modification.
It is in this context that the African Union (AU) resolved to take a common approach to
address issues pertaining to modern biotechnology and biosafety by endorsing decision
EX.CL/Dec. 26 (III) that calls for an African common position on biotechnology. In
addressing this issue, the AU Commission organized a workshop at the AU headquarters in
Addis Ababa on October 17-19, 2006 to address the issues of GMOs in agriculture and try to
develop guidelines on the controversies, risks, challenges and myths surrounding the growth
and development of biotechnology in Africa. The workshop was attended by approximately
50 experts from various African countries and institutions including the Regional Economic
Communities (RECs,) research institutions, civil society organizations, farmers associations,
universities, the private sector and other stakeholders. Presentations from the RECs indicated
a diverse set of policy guidelines and approaches tailored to each of their needs. The
deliberations and recommendations of the workshop are presented in this report.
1

3. 2. Context and Scope
In many parts of the world, the adoption of genetically modified crops has been on a steady
rise since 1995 when these crops were first planted. Revolutionary advances in modern
biotechnology and especially genetic modification (GM) technology are being exploited into
a multi-million dollar industry especially in the field of agriculture and pharmaceuticals.
Some of the leading countries in this trend have been the USA, Argentina, Canada and Brazil
and there are new ones such as China and India. Since the initial commercialisation of
transgenic crops in 1996, global planted area of biotech crops has soared by more than fifty-
fold from 1.7 million hectares in six countries to 81 million hectares in 21 countries in 2004.
A summary of the global overview of GM crop statistics indicates that Africa is lagging
behind other continents in embracing this science to address its food security needs. It is clear
that this trend will continue and Africa needs to develop mechanisms to address these
developments.
The scope of this report is to provide guiding principles to Member States and Regional
Economic Communities (RECs) as they address the issues of GMOs in relation to agriculture.
The application of biotechnology in Africa in general has been discussed in its broad scope
by other African initiatives such as the High Level Panel on Biotechnology. In developing
these guiding principles or recommendations, the workshop participants identified the
following underlying issues as basic considerations:
• In Africa the majority of farmers are small holder farmers;
• These new technologies should focus on solving African problems as identified from the
African perspective and should not be imposed on Africa from elsewhere;
• The GE technologies should build on and complement local knowledge/technologies
that have been used to breed crops over many years and to develop technologies suited
to the local environment;
• The GE technologies should also focus on indigenous African crops such as yams,
sorghum, potatoes, etc. and not only on commercial crops such as maize and cotton;
• It is imperative to conserve and protect indigenous genetic resources;
• Biotechnology is an expensive technology and should therefore focus on where there’s a
comparative advantage and its development should be a selective process that targets the
most efficient sector;
• African governments and RECs should allocate adequate resources to this process.
3. African Initiatives and Processes on Biotechnology
There are currently numerous initiatives and processes being undertaken on the African
continent to address the issues of GMOs and biotechnology. In order to have a good
understanding of these initiatives and processes, presentations were made by the respective
institutions at the different levels (continental/AU and REC level). The presentations are
summarised below.
3.1 High Level African Panel on Biotechnology (APB)
In the context of addressing the AU decision that calls for an African common position on
biotechnology, the AU established a High Level Panel on Biotechnology to advise it on
matters of Biotechnology. This panel is composed of eminent African personalities from a
wide background. Below are the terms of reference for this panel.
2

4. Mandate of the APB:
The High Level African Panel on Biotechnology will advise the AU, its Member States and
its various organs, on current and emerging issues associated with the development and
application of modern biotechnology. Its specific remit is to provide the AU and NEPAD
with independent and strategic advice on developments in modern biotechnology and its
implications for agriculture, health and the environment. It will focus on intra-regional and
international issues of regulating the development and application of genetic modification
and its products.
The High Level Panel (APB) has held several meetings and has developed a draft report
entitled “Biotechnology in Africa’s Development”. The report presents the role of modern
biotechnology in the transformation of African economies. It examines how a wide range of
opportunities presented by the technology that can be tapped by African countries. It focuses
on how best to build the capacity needed to harness and apply the technology to improve
agricultural productivity, public health, increase industrial development and economic
competitiveness and promote environmental sustainability in Africa. The report also takes
into account the importance of promoting the conservation and sustainable utilization of
Africa’s biodiversity. The main message of this report is that regional economic integration in
Africa should embody the building and accumulation of capacities to harness and govern
modern biotechnology. Regional economic integration can be an institutional vehicle for
mobilizing, sharing and using existing scientific and technological capacities, including
human and financial resources as well as physical infrastructure for biotechnology R&D and
innovation.
3.2 African Strategy on Biosafety
The African Union Commission is also developing an African Strategy on Biosafety with the
main objective of:
• providing Member States with a framework for regional, sub regional and national
initiatives in bio-safety;
• guiding and promoting regional coordination and harmonization of biosafety
within the continent; and
• enhancing regional capacity on biosafety.
The Strategy aims at guiding modern biotechnology developments at national, sub-regional
and regional (Africa-wide) levels, as well as providing guidance on how Africa deals with the
rest of the world, especially during international negotiation forums of relevance to biosafety.
The Strategy targets the national and sub-regional levels for planned interventions to be
undertaken by the AU and its member states to ensure harmony in modern biotechnology and
biosafety. The main target for implementation of the strategy shall be the five sub-regions of
Africa. However, the existing Regional Economic Communities (RECs), where they are
already doing work related to biosafety, or interlinking trade and biosafety shall be used to
complement rather than undermine each other.
To ensure cost effectiveness and encourage South-South cooperation, the Strategy aims at
creating and strengthening regional centres of excellence in both modern biotechnology and
biosafety, at least one in each of the five sub-regions of Africa. These will play an important
role in risk assessment, risk management, capacity building, as well as GMO testing and
provision of any other relevant biosafety advice.
3

5. The strategy is centred on six pillars namely:
(i) Establishment and Strengthening of Institutional Frameworks;
(ii) Awareness Raising and Biosafety Information Exchange;
(iii) Capacity Building and Preparedness for Negotiations;
(iv) Policy and Legal Frameworks;
(v) International Cooperation;
(vi) Sustainability Mechanism.
Each of the above pillars has clearly defined actions to be undertaken for its implementation;
with proposals on who will undertake them and how they will be undertaken. To ensure that
the strategy remains relevant over the changing times and circumstances, provision is made
for its regular review to ensure it remains up to date.
3.3 Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) Initiatives
The Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) is one of the first RECs to develop
guidelines to address issues of GMOs and Biotechnology. Due to the 2002 regional food
crisis, the SADC Council of Ministers at their meeting of October 2002 in Luanda, Angola
directed the SADC Secretariat to establish a SADC Advisory Committee on Biotechnology
and Bio-safety (SACBB). This Committee was launched in 2003 and since its inauguration it
has advised SADC policy makers on several occasions and has also produced guidelines for
the region in a brochure entitled “SADC Guidelines on GMOs, Biotechnology and
Biosafety”. The Guidelines focus on 4 general areas:
(i) Handling of Food Aid;
(ii) Policy and Regulations;
(iii) Capacity Building; and
(iv) Public Awareness and Participation
3.4 Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) Initiatives
The Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa COMESA has also initiated a process
to address the issues of GMOs and biotechnology. In November 2002 in Kampala the
COMESA agricultural ministers agreed to create a regional policy on GMOs. COMESA then
approached the Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research for Eastern and Central
Africa (ASARECA) for technical support and guidance. This resulted in the formation of a
project called RABESA in 2003 to generate and analyse information that can inform
COMESA/ASARECA countries on regional biotechnology and biosafety policies especially
on how they may impact trade, food security and access to emergency food aid. This process
culminated in a COMESA Regional Workshop on Biotechnology and Biodiversity in May
2006 where the following draft Regional Position on Biotechnology and Biosafety was
adopted by the workshop. This position is yet to be endorsed by the relevant COMESA
policy organs.
GMO Entity Appropriate Option Reasons Advanced
Commercial planting centralized regional • standardized and more
assessment, national transparent
decision-making • cost effective
• sharing of resources,
information and
expertise
Commercial trade policy advice/information from • regional level
4

6. central regional clearing assessment is cost
house, national decision effective
• cooperation in assessing
issues
• assures national
commitment
• information sharing
• capacity building
Food aid policy guidelines developed at • facilitates transit of
regional level, decision to be food aid in
taken at the country level on neighbouring states
case by case basis • facilitates provision of
food to the needy
3.5 Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) Initiatives
A number of initiatives have been undertaken in the ECOWAS region in collaboration with
its technical partners, CORAF/WECARD (West African Centre for Agricultural Research
and Development) and CILSS (Comite Permanent Inter-Etats De Lutte Contre La
Secheresse). An initial regional Conference on “The Utilization of Science and Technology
to Increase Agricultural Productivity in Africa” was held in June 2004 in Ouagadougou,
Burkina Faso. The objective of this first meeting was aimed at making participants
understand biotechnology and its potential applications for improving African agriculture. A
subsequent conference of the Ministers in Charge of Science and Technology was held in
Abuja in November 2004 with the theme of “Agriculture and Biotechnology”. These
meetings and workshops culminated in the Ministerial Conference of ECOWAS States on
Biotechnology, in June 2005 in Bamako, Mali. The objective of the conference was to adopt
the recommendations proposed by the Ouagadougou Conference. The conference made
several recommendations under the following headings:
(i) The development and use of biotechnologies;
(ii) A regional approach for biosafety;
(iii) An information and communication strategy and policy in biotechnology;
(iv) The institutionalisation of a ministerial conference on biotechnology.
3.6 East African Community (EAC) Initiatives
The East African Community (EAC) Council of Ministers at its 9th regular meeting that was
held on 24th November 2004 established an EAC Partner States’ Regional Technical
Committee of Experts to address bio-safety issues on Genetically Modified Organisms
(GMOs) and recommend a common way forward for the development of an EAC regional
policy, legal and regulatory framework on GMOs especially as regards food security, trade,
public health and environmental issues in East Africa.
In response to the call by the EAC Council of Ministers for technical guidance on a common
GMOs biosafety policy for the region, the EAC organized a workshop under the theme “The
EAC Regional Stakeholders Consultative Workshop to Develop a Draft Common Regional
Policy on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs)” in September 2006, in Entebbe,
Uganda. The workshop was jointly organized by ASARECA, Program for Biosafety Systems
in East Africa (PBS-EA) and the East African Community. The main objectives of this
regional workshop were to review EAC National Biosafety Frameworks for Genetically
5

7. Modified Organisms (GMOs) and recommend the way forward for the development of an
EAC regional policy, legal and regulatory framework on GMOs with a focus on food safety,
trade, environmental and public health issues.
The workshop made various recommendations towards the formulation of a Common
Regional GMO Policy for East Africa under the following headings:
(i) Policy Harmonization in Biosafety;
(ii) Research and Development;
(iii) Regional Regulatory Approach.
3.7 African Model Law
Although there was no formal presentation on the African Model Law, it was discussed
during the various presentations. The African Union put in place the African Model Law on
Safety in Biotechnology to help member countries in drafting their national legislation, and is
developing a strategic framework to guide member states and the region in the development,
handling and use of modern biotechnology to ensure the safety of the rich natural resource
base (biodiversity) as well as the peoples’ health and socio-economic well-being.
Acknowledging the common priorities of African countries, the current status of development
of modern biotechnology and the controversial legal issues related to Biosafety, the revision
of the African Model Law on Safety in Biotechnology is therefore underway.
4. Recommendations for an African Position on GMOs
Following discussions on all the presentations made, the workshop participants adopted the
following recommendations:
4.1 Information Sharing, Access and Public Awareness and Participation
(i) Create an African Member State Database on biotechnology information (regulatory
policies, IPRs, etc.) for sharing and documenting best practises/lessons learned
through Bio-safety Clearing Houses.
(ii) Encourage Member States to provide information regularly to the institution
maintaining the database.
(iii) Establish a forum/advisory body on biotechnology that would meet regularly to
deliberate and advise the AU on biotechnology and bio-safety issues
(iv) Call on Member States to establish inter-ministerial (Agriculture, Science and
Technology, Environment, Trade etc.) task forces to coordinate and ensure coherence
in biotechnology policies at national, regional and sub-regional levels.
(v) Promote a Strategy for Public Awareness and Participation in decision-making
processes on bio-safety (in accordance with Art. 23 of the Cartagena Protocol on
Biosafety) to dispel the myths and controversies surrounding bio-safety and
biotechnologies.
(vi) Engage both those who support and oppose biotechnologies in the awareness
campaign.
(vii) Governments and civil societies should play a role in enlightening the public on
issues involved in biotechnology (encourage dialogue in modern biotechnology
issues)
(viii) AU facilitates mechanisms between and among the RECs for information sharing
towards a harmonized position
6

8. 4.2 Research and Development
(i) Encourage and support policies of member States on Research and Development on
biotechnology and bio-safety to develop local products and address local problems.
(ii) Encourage Member States to allocate funds for R&D on bio-safety and
biotechnology.
(iii) Call on the African Union to assist African regions and Member States in setting
policy priorities in biosafety and biotechnology.
(iv) Encourage the use of existing platforms (such as sub-regional and regional platforms)
in implementing biosafety and biotechnology initiatives.
(v) Encourage and enhance policies for technology development and transfer.
(vi) Foster the development of centres of excellence in bioscience R&D at the regional
levels.
4.3 Capacity Building
4.3.1 Scientific Capacity
(i) Encourage Member States to develop policies that enhance training in biosafety and
biotechnology.
(ii) Encourage/enhance policy development to facilitate scientific research and
compensate scientists adequately to retain them in Africa.
(iii) Enhance scientific capacity of institutions operating on issues of bio-safety and
biotechnology
4.3.2 Regulatory Institutions
(i) Develop policies for on-the-job training on the safe management of biotechnology.
(ii) Establish regional GMO testing laboratories by developing norms and standards.
(iii) Promote policies to enhance and encourage public-private partnerships in
biotechnology.
(iv) Encourage the development of policies that enhance Member States’ regulatory
capacity on issues of biosafety and biotechnology.
(v) Encourage Member States to have comprehensive risk assessment and risk
management plans in regulatory regimes before the introduction of modern
biotechnology and in compliance with the Cartagena Protocol on Bio-safety.
4.3.3 Food Safety (CPB and Codex Guidelines)
(i) Encourage Member States to strengthen and improve their food safety policies on
analysis, inspection and monitoring and mandatory labelling in accordance with the
standards of CODEX Alimentarius.
(ii) Encourage labelling of GMOs in the regulatory regimes of Member States
4.3.4 Trade Issues/International Treaties (capacity building.)
(i) Develop policies that enhance the internal, technical and legal capacities in
negotiation in the area of biosafety and biotechnology.
(ii) Call upon the AU to support the African Group at international negotiations to come
up with harmonized/common positions.
4.4 Intellectual Property Rights
(i) AU and Member States should support and enhance the capacity of ARIPO and OAPI
and especially national IP offices to deal with the patents protecting the components
used in Genetic Engineering and bio-piracy issues.
7

9. (ii) Africa does not support the patenting of life forms, in line with the African position at
the WTO that patenting of life forms should be prohibited.
(iii) Encourage the characterization of African genetic resources (including through DNA
fingerprinting) to allow their better utilization and protection from bio-piracy
(iv) The workshop recommended the hastening of the domestication of the African Model
law on community knowledge and community rights and access to genetic resources
4.5 Harmonization of Regional Economic Community Initiatives
(i) AU should encourage and facilitate dialogue between RECs on efforts/positions and
ensures harmonised policies on bio-safety and biotechnology.
(ii) AU should facilitate the recognition of RECs in international treaties, agreements and
conventions.
(iii) AU should establish task force(s) that will identify key issues of particular interest for
Africa and facilitate the formulation of a common position by Member States and by
RECs
4.6 Food Aid
(i) Encourage guidelines to be developed at the regional level but decision to be taken at
the country level on a case-by-case basis.
(ii) AU respects Member States’ position on GM food aid.
4.7 Trade Issues
(i) Advice and information on GMOs should be obtained through the Regional Clearing
House but decisions and implementation should be taken at the national level
(ii) The AU should set up mechanisms of identifying commonalities among the RECs on
the basis of which to harmonise and coordinate policies on bio-safety and
biotechnology.
(iii) AU should respect Member States’ decisions on trade issues on biotechnology and
biosafety.
(iv) Member States should respect the decisions/positions of neighbouring countries on
GMOs and should restrict their GMOs or products within their own borders (Art. 17
and 25 of the CPB), taking into account the importance of taking reasonable measures
to avoid damage to neighbouring countries where it can be avoided
(v) Encourage Member States and the RECs to institutionalise science based decision
making mechanisms, risk assessment and risk management to facilitate trade
4.8 Dispute Settlement/Compensation/Liability and Redress Rules
(i) Encourage recognition of the national mechanisms of dispute settlement within the
bio-safety frameworks of countries
(ii) Encourage Member States to participate in negotiations on liability and redress
(iii) AU member states should be encouraged to adopt a Common African Position on
liability and redress to the effect that damage and loss should be reasonably insured
against where feasible and that parties responsible for the damage and loss should be
under an obligation to provide meaningful compensation.
4.9 Biodiversity
(i) Encourage research on local resources
(ii) Encourage Member States to strengthen action on conservation of genetic resources.
(iii) There is a need to create protected areas or GMO free zones where the release of
GMOs in Africa will be prohibited. Communities, Local Governments, States, and
Regions should commence processes by which they can regulate or declare
8

10. themselves GMO free. Therefore Member States should develop policies to respect
community rights to declare GMO free and seed diverse zones in accordance with
CPB Art. 26
(iv) Agricultural policies should complement the Plant Genetic Resources for Food and
Agriculture
(v) Member States should be encouraged to characterise and make inventories of their
genetic resources so as to protect their plant biodiversity, the life styles of local and
indigenous communities and also to curb bio-piracy.
4.10 International Collaboration and Partnerships
There is a need for AU to play a role in coordinating international collaboration in particular
to create mechanisms to:
(i) Tap on African Diaspora to enhance capacity in modern biotechnology
(ii) Encourage international collaboration (north-south and south-south)
(iii) Encourage Public Private Partnership (PPP)
(iv) Access Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)
(v) Share information where there are needs of collaboration with international partners
(vi) Collaboration with Civil Society and Non Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
(vii) Consolidate and coordinate donors inputs including setting the African agenda with
them.
5. Conclusions
Among some of the concerns in these discussions was the low African use of modern
biotechnology, the misconceptions surrounding the potentials of biotechnology and the need
to establish bio-safety systems in Africa.
In its policy guidelines, AU should guide member states in the following areas
• Establish mechanism for public awareness
• Develop sustainable African strategy on bio-safety (build capacities and task forces)
• Create enabling conditions for application of biotechnology (encourage dialogue
among the various Ministries and all stakeholders involved)
• Establish mechanism to facilitate harmonization of regulatory systems
• Strengthen African capacity for effective participation in international negotiations
• The African National Bio-safety Frameworks of Member States can only be achieved
through effective collaboration among Policy makers, researchers, farmers, service
providers, civil society organizations, African leaders and development partners.
9