IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ovdeia/295982.html

ALTERNATIVES FOR SEED REGULATORY REFORM An Analysis of Variety Testing, Variety Regulation and Seed Quality Control

Author

Listed:
  • Tripp, Robert
  • Louwaars, Niels
  • Burg, W
  • Virk, D
  • Witcombe, J

Abstract

This paper summarises the findings of a recently completed project which examined the conduct of seed regulation in developing countries and produced a set of guidelines for seed regulatory reform. The three areas of seed regulation included in the study were: public sector plant breeding (particularly the management of variety testing); variety regulation (registration, performance testing and release); and seed quality control (seed certification and seed testing). Adjustment to seed regulatory frameworks is necessary because of significant changes in national seed systems. These changes include: reductions in budget for public agricultural research; the failure of many seed parastatals; increasing concern about plant genetic diversity; pressure for the establishment of plant variety protection; the increasing contributions of commercial seed enterprises; and the emergence of innovative local level variety development and seed production initiatives. There are a variety of reasons why current public seed regulation is unsatisfactory. It is not efficiently organised, often uses inappropriate standards, does not offer opportunities for farmer and seed producer participation, and is not sufficiently transparent. At the same time there are a number of options for regulatory reform. In plant breeding, more emphasis should be placed on decentralising variety testing, breeding for particular niches, and making site selection, trial management and analysis more representative of farmers' conditions. In variety regulation, simpler registration procedures are required, and the demands of plant variety protection should not be allowed to bias or limit the development and use of public and farmer varieties. Variety performance testing for release should be made more flexible. In seed quality control, standards should be re-examined for their relevance to particular farming conditions, and much of the responsibility for monitoring seed quality should be passed to seed producers and merchants, accompanied by welldefined public oversight and enforcement mechanisms.

Suggested Citation

  • Tripp, Robert & Louwaars, Niels & Burg, W & Virk, D & Witcombe, J, 1997. "ALTERNATIVES FOR SEED REGULATORY REFORM An Analysis of Variety Testing, Variety Regulation and Seed Quality Control," Overseas Development Institute Archive 295982, Overseas Development Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:ovdeia:295982
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.295982
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/295982/files/odi062.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.295982?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tripp, Robert, 1995. "Seed Regulatory Frameworks And Resource-Poor Farmers: A Literature Review," Overseas Development Institute Archive 295962, Overseas Development Institute.
    2. Jacqueline A. Ashby & Louise Sperling, 1995. "Institutionalizing Participatory, Client‐Driven Research and Technology Development in Agriculture," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 26(4), pages 753-770, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Genesis T. Yengoh & Frederick Ato Armah & Edward Ebo Onumah, 2010. "Paths to Attaining Food Security: The Case of Cameroon," Challenges, MDPI, vol. 1(1), pages 1-22, August.
    2. Simtowe, Franklin & Kassie, Menale & Diagne, Aliou & Asfaw, Solomon & Shiferaw, Bekele & Silim, Said & Muange, Elijah, 2011. "Determinants of Agricultural Technology Adoption: The Case of Improved Pigeonpea Varieties in Tanzania," Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture, Humboldt-Universitaat zu Berlin, vol. 50(4), pages 1-21.
    3. Federica Cisilino & Alessandro Monteleone, 2020. "Designing Rural Policies for Sustainable Innovations through a Participatory Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-17, November.
    4. Awotide, Bola Amoke & Ogunniyi, Adebayo & Olagunju, Kehinde Oluseyi & Manda, Julius & Alene, Arega & Nguena, Christian Lambert & Manyong, Victor & Abdoulaye, Tahirou, 2021. "Does Adoption of Improved Agricultural Technologies Impact Welfare, Poverty and Food Security in the Sahelian Region of West Africa?," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315119, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    5. Grabowski, Philip & Kerr, John & Donovan, Cynthia & Mouzinho, Bordalo, 2015. "A Prospective Analysis of Participatory Research on Conservation Agriculture in Mozambique," Food Security Collaborative Working Papers 198703, Michigan State University, Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics.
    6. Kuntashula, Elias & Mafongoya, Paramu L., 2005. "Farmer participatory evaluation of agroforestry trees in eastern Zambia," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 39-53, April.
    7. Krista B. Isaacs & Sieglinde S. Snapp & Kimberly Chung & Kurt B. Waldman, 2016. "Assessing the value of diverse cropping systems under a new agricultural policy environment in Rwanda," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 8(3), pages 491-506, June.
    8. de Janvry, Alain & Sadoulet, Elisabeth, 2000. "Rural poverty in Latin America: Determinants and exit paths," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 389-409, August.
    9. Laxmi Prasad Pant, 2019. "Responsible innovation through conscious contestation at the interface of agricultural science, policy, and civil society," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 36(2), pages 183-197, June.
    10. Pedzisa, Tarisayi & Minde, Isaac J. & Twomlow, Steve, 2010. "The use of participatory processes in wide-scale dissemination of micro dosing and conservation agriculture in Zimbabwe," 2010 AAAE Third Conference/AEASA 48th Conference, September 19-23, 2010, Cape Town, South Africa 95779, African Association of Agricultural Economists (AAAE).
    11. Harvey James & Iddisah Sulemana, 2014. "Case studies on smallholder farmer voice: an introduction to a special symposium," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 31(4), pages 637-641, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:ovdeia:295982. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.