Beyond the Genome: Genetically Modified Crops in Africa and the Implications for Genome Editing

Abstract

Genome editing — a plant‐breeding technology that facilitates the manipulation of genetic traits within living organisms — has captured the imagination of scholars and professionals working on agricultural development in Africa. Echoing the arrival of genetically modified (GM) crops decades ago, genome editing is being heralded as a technology with the potential to revolutionize breeding based on enhanced precision, reduced cost and increased speed. This article makes two interventions. First, it identifies the discursive continuity linking genome editing and the earlier technology of genetic modification. Second, it offers a suite of recommendations regarding how lessons learned from GM crops might be integrated into future breeding programmes focused on genome editing. Ultimately, the authors argue that donors, policy makers and scientists should move beyond the genome towards systems‐level thinking by prioritizing the co‐development of technologies with farmers; using plant material that is unencumbered by intellectual property restrictions and therefore accessible to resource‐poor farmers; and acknowledging that seeds are components of complex and dynamic agroecological production systems. If these lessons are not heeded, genome‐editing projects are in danger of repeating mistakes of the past.

The Adoption of Genetically Modified Crops in Africa: the Public’s Current Perception, the Regulatory Obstacles, and Ethical Challenges

“… 39 While some countries may oppose the adoption of GMOs in order to safeguard their own markets or customary farming methods, others may seek partnerships with countries that produce GMOs by aligning their policies with partner standards to facilitate trade. 6 , 64 Moreover, effective adoption of GM crops depends on domestic political stability. 62 , 65 While insecure political environments can cause policy uncertainty and delays, transparent regulations and institutional capacity guarantee seamless implementation.…”

“… 22 , 66 , 67 Potential power concentration in the agriculture industry is a major ethical concern, as large corporations control large portions of the seed market and agricultural procedures. 1 , 64 , 68 Furthermore, the effect on indigenous knowledge systems and customary farming methods presents moral dilemmas for the preservation of cultural heritage. 16 , 69 , 70 Concerns also include social justice issues, such as preventing economic inequality and providing small-scale farmers with fair access to GMO technologies.…”

“…The possibility of a greater reliance on outside sources for technology and seeds may intensify economic disparities in the agriculture industry. 64 , 68 The equitable distribution of the advantages of GM crops adoption across a range of agricultural landscapes is based upon the careful evaluation of inclusive policies, equitable access to resources, and mechanisms that empower small-scale farmers. There is an urgent need for a sensible strategy that upholds moral standards and maximizes the possible advantages of GM crops in Africa.…”

Bridging the gap? Public–private partnerships and genetically modified crop development for smallholder farmers in Africa

“…To assist in developing similar partnerships, intermediary organizations, first the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), and then the African Agricultural Technology Fund (AATF), were founded (Boadi & Bokanga, 2007;James, 1997;Schurman, 2017). Since then, several PPPs have been formed to create GM crop varieties designed specifically for African smallholder farmers, a trend that appears to be continuing with the use of gene editing for crop development (Rock et al, 2023;Schnurr, 2019).…”

Are intellectual property policies for gene‐edited crops fit for purpose? The perspectives of German scientists

“…Perhaps the most controversial socio‐economic dimension of agricultural biotechnology is intellectual property. Whether discussing transgenic breeding or the newer gene‐editing breeding techniques, skeptics of the technology will inevitably argue that those benefits are unlikely to be achieved, in part, because of intellectual property policies (Lindberg, Bain, & Selfa, 2023; Rock et al, 2023; Montenegro de Wit, 2020; Macnaghten & Habets, 2020). Acknowledging these concerns, an editorial in Nature notes that an alternative approach to managing intellectual property for gene‐edited crops is possible because so many of the gene‐editing patents are held by universities.…”