Status of Biotechnology Policies in South Africa Pamela Andanda* Abstract: Current progress with regard to the adoption, diffusion and regulation of biotechnology in Africa has mainly been in the area of agricultural biotechnology. Industrial and pharmaceutical sectors are still in their infancy. Most African countries rely on agriculture for economic growth as well as food security. Appropriate policies are necessary for progress in biotechnology and the development of such policies has been a great challenge for most African countries. To date, only a handful of African countries have policies and guidelines in place. In this paper, the policies that South Africa has developed for dealing with the issues related to adoption, diffusion and regulation of agricultural biotechnology are discussed for purposes of comparing the South African position with other African countries that have adopted biotechnology. Keywords: African countries, agricultural biotechnology, biotechnology policies, regulations, South Africa. Introduction The implementation of biosafety regimes that allow the safe harnessing while closely monitoring potential side effects is a priority across Africa. Notable efforts in this regard are currently at an advanced stage particularly in the agricultural sector: “agricultural ministers within the continent's largest trading bloc, the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), have endorsed a Regional Approach to Biotechnology and Biosafety Policy in Eastern and Southern Africa (RABESA)”.1 RABESA aims at tackling the issues that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) raise for trade and access to emergency food aid.2 Most African countries however face challenges in their attempts to develop and implement biosafety regimes because of lack of infrastructure, resources or capacity to implement the regimes. The prevailing situation in most African countries testifies to the fact that even if regional guidelines are agreed, the cost of regulation and testing of biotechnological products will be relatively high due to the above problems that face African countries.3 These challenges notwithstanding, framework policy documents have been adopted in the region. The frameworks consist of Africa’s Science and Technology Consolidated Plan of Action adopted by the New Partnership for Africa’s Development and the African Union; the report of the High-Level African Panel on Modern Biotechnology; the African Position on the Issue of Genetically Modified Organisms and Agriculture, adopted by the Conference of Agricultural Ministers of the African Union; and the draft African strategy on biosafety presented by the African Union’s Directorate of Human Resources, Science and Technology. Some of the core policy objectives that emerge from these framework documents are evidently geared towards fostering adoption and regulation of biotechnology.4 Two relevant objectives that can be mentioned in this regard are; building Africa’s capacities to develop and safely apply biotechnology in agriculture and ensuring that policies are science-based. These are some of the * Associate Professor of Law, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa. E-mail: [email protected] The article has been published in Asian Biotechnology and Development Review, 2009 Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 35-47. 1 objectives that have been agreed on as core guiding principles for policymaking at the regional level.5 Status of and Policies for Biotechnology in South Africa South Africa has a National Biotechnology Strategy (NBS) in place. This strategy is a policy framework, which is aimed at creating incentive for the biotechnology sector.6 South Africa was also the first African country to approve transgenic crops for commercial purposes and is the leader in agricultural biotechnology research and development on the continent.7 The country equally performs a substantial magnitude of Africa’s research and development in biotechnology since this area of research is considered a tool for addressing development challenges such as food security and improved health care.8 A study of public research pipeline in selected African countries established that there is widespread approval and use of insect-protected cotton. The reason for this trend is that “most regulatory authorities in developing countries have found it easier to approve this crop because they are not required to assess food safety—an area in which few developing country regulatory authorities feel competent”.9 South Africa stands out in this regard as an exception insofar as transgenic crops are already commercialized. The impressive progress can be attributed to South Africa’s “rich natural resources, such as diamonds and gold and well developed financial, legal, communications, energy and transport sectors”.10 These sectors provide biotechnology with more developed infrastructure. Adoption A report on the global status of genetically modified crops, which was released in 2008 predicted that the future adoption of such crops in developing countries in the period 2009 to 2015 will depend mainly on two major issues: “first, establishment and effective operation of appropriate, responsible and cost/time-effective regulatory systems; second, strong political will and support for the adoption of biotech crops that can contribute to a more affordable and secure supply of food, feed, and fiber”.11 Appropriate policies are very important for ensuring public acceptance of biotechnology and political good will is closely related to policies insofar as it influences the acceptance of the technology among the people. South Africa has made strides in agricultural biotechnology. For instance, insect resistant cotton, herbicide tolerant cotton, herbicide tolerant Soya, insect resistant white and yellow maize have been approved for commercial cultivation. This position is in great contrast with other African countries that have only approved insect resistant cotton because, as mentioned in the introduction to this paper, these countries don’t feel competent to handle issues of food safety. The problems in most African countries are “lack of advanced scientific expertise regarding biotechnology…” and “the harnessing of this expertise and the strengthening of institutional structures so that they are suitable for the implementation of a comprehensive policy regime”.12 The progress that South Africa has made is commendable in view of the fact that during the apartheid era, agricultural biotechnology was a neglected area “except for some basic studies in plant improvement”.13 During the eighties, however, efforts were made to develop expertise and institutions were established for this purpose.14 The NBS has 2 facilitated the adoption of biotechnology. The strategy has attempted to guarantee that stringent biosafety regulatory systems, which ensure that the technology is utilized in a manner that causes minimum disruption to the environment while addressing the country’s sustainable development goals and imperatives.15 The NBS has been useful for closing the gap between research activities and commercialization. It equally addresses the issue of human resource development.16 With regard to human resource development, which as mentioned above is a problem in most African countries, South Africa recognizes the biotechnology industry’s potential to address some of its historical and socio-economic imbalances. In this regard the industry is being used to attract young scholars to the field of science and technology through skilled job creation and international partnering for skills transfer.17 The biotechnology sector in South Africa however has some weaknesses, which are slowing down the adoption of modern biotechnology. The problems that have been identified by Wolson are: institutional arrangements that are not conducive to promoting sufficiently effective linkages between researchers in different disciplines and/or organizations, limited employment opportunities in the local biotechnology industry for graduates as well as brain drain.18 Diffusion Effective dissemination of information to the public is essential for the diffusion of agricultural biotechnology. Dissemination of information to the public is not developed in most African countries.19 Most frameworks and regulations that are being developed or are already in place in a number of African countries “do not articulate explicitly the issue of dissemination of information regarding biotechnology risks and benefits”.20 This position is very surprising because Article 5 of the African Model Law on Modern Biotechnology, which African countries should be following in establishing their regulatory regimes, clearly provides for public participation in decision-making.21 South Africa has attempted to address this problem through the regulations that have been made under section 20 of the Genetically Modified Organisms Act, 1997 (GMO Act), which requires applicants to notify the public of a proposed release of GMOs prior to the application for permit for such release. Interestingly, issues have been raised that the Act and the subsequent amendment Bill were passed into law without proper public consultations.22 The Act equally has other limitations that are discussed in the section under regulation. South Africa has also launched the Public Understanding of Biotechnology Programme “to promote understanding of the potential of biotechnology [and] ensure broad public awareness and engagement in public debate”.23 The effectiveness of the programme