Agrobiodiversity is crops, livestock, foodways, microbes, pollinators, wild relatives …
Garden Organic in the UK is offering free seed-saving webinars in November, as part of their “Sowing your seeds” project, funded by the National Lottery Heritage Fund:
Sounds like fun.
The Multilateral System (MLS) of the Plant Treaty must deliver the fair and predictable monetary benefits it promised. If, that is, we want crop diversity to continue to be available with minimal friction to all who want to use it to help ensure the world’s food security.
That at least has been the premise of the past two years of negotiations by the Plant Treaty’s Ad Hoc Open-ended Working Group to Enhance the Functioning of the Multilateral System. With the 11th Session of the Governing Body coming up in November in Lima, Peru, the report of the Working Group is now up on the Plant Treaty’s website. 1
What does it say? Are we there yet?
Well, it’s not easy reading, but let me give you what I see as the key points. Summarizing such a dense and technical document in a few sentences is tricky, so I hope I don’t misrepresent anything. Please let me know if I have, and I will make any corrections needed.
Countries agree that a subscription model would generate more, and more predictable, user contributions than the current pay-per-use approach. There also seems to be a shared view that more crops should be brought under the MLS (beyond the ones currently listed in Annex 1), to reflect importance and interdependence. But also that countries should be allowed to carve out exemptions. And finally, there is general agreement that benefits derived from the use of Digital Sequence Information (DSI) must be addressed in the MLS framework. Somehow.
Still unclear, however, are the level, timing, and conditions of payments under the subscription model. And indeed debate continues over whether pay-per-use should remain available as an option, and under what terms. There are also different views on how DSI contributions could be embedded in the subscription system; and around how to amend Annex 1, whether to include all PGRFA or adopt a phased approach. The view of the seed sector was recently well summarized in Seed World. A predictably somewhat different view comes from Third World Network.
So, though there’s definitely been a lot of progress, without bold decisions and compromises in Lima (and thereafter), the reform package could still fall short of the needs of farmers and future generations. Fingers crossed.
It’s the 25th birthday of Kew’s Millennium Seed Bank (MSB) at Wakehurst in West Sussex.
Understandably, it’s getting a lot of — very well-deserved — coverage. I’ll link to some of the more interesting pieces as they come out over the next few days.
Here’s to the next 25!
The European Commission has waded into the whole opportunity crops thing with its “Neglected and Underutilised Species (NUS): Potential for Food and Nutrition Security – a Knowledge Review.”
Only, as you can see, it’s not calling them opportunity crops, but rather opting to go retro with NUS, though there is a nice round-up of the diversity of the terminology:
There are different names in the literature related to neglected and underutilised species (NUS). Although they have a slightly different focus, they are often used interchangeably: indigenous and traditional food crops, orphan crops, forgotten foods/crops, minor crops, under-used/under-exploited crops, under-developed crops, promising crops, lost crops, alternative crops/food, traditional food crops, niche crops, future smart food, opportunity crops. In the humanitarian context, especially regarding the formulation of Ready to use therapeutic or supplement food (RUTF/RUSF), the term NUS is rarely used, while literature mainly refers to local crops.
There are also useful discussions of the drivers of neglect and underuse, and of the different benefits of NUS cultivation and consumption. The list of international initiatives is not comprehensive, but a good start. And genebanks get a name check…
To conserve and valorise genetic resources it is essential that NUS seeds are conserved in-situ (community seed banks) and ex-situ (gene banks). Additionally, genetic conservation measures should be designed, that also address the risk of over-exploitation when using wild plants. This requires a multifaceted approach, including local taxonomic research to better understand the species in question and a deeper insights on the genomes of ALV2. Further, detailed characterizations and assessments of NUS related to their benefits for resilience to climate change, cultural richness and sustainable livelihoods is needed.
Furthermore, it is important to intensify breeding programmes, develop adequate seed systems and measures for continuous quality seed production and distribution; and strengthen and upgrade smallholder seed systems. To promote sustainable use, it is recommended to engage farmers and grassroots movements in all domestication efforts. Furthermore, research should also focus on resilience to pests and diseases, modernising production methods, and addressing post-harvest inefficiencies.
…so what’s not to like?
Well, what I missed was some sort of indication that this is not exactly the first time we’ve been through this. Everything is thoroughly backed up with references (I’ve removed the citations from the excerpts above for clarity, but they’re there in the PDF). However, none of the publications listed is older than 2019. I hope we don’t repeat history. We had an International Centre for Underutilized Crops there for a while, after all. You all remember that, right?
LATER: There’s a webinar on the knowledge review on 15 October. Assuming they get the sign-up page working…