Plant Variety Protection Regime in Relation to Relevant International Obligations: Implications for Smallholder Farmers in Kenya

Munyi, P.

doi:10.1111/jwip.12031

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Farmers rights remain peripheral to the Kenyan PBRs system. 65 Under Article 20.1.h Seeds and Plant Varieties Act, the latter element-which makes up the core of the breeders' exemption and is one of the key distinguishing features with a mere research exemption like under patent law-66 has been omitted. In Kenya, seeds of a protected variety can be produced and stocked only for purposes of research and for developing new varieties in the breeder's own nursery.…”

Section: Farmers' Privilegementioning

confidence: 99%

How plant variety protection fails to benefit breeders to the detriment of plant innovation in Kenya's maize seed sector

Dycke

2023

World Intellectual Property

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The adoption by African countries of plant variety protection via the adherence to the union internationale pour la protection des obtentions végétales (UPOV) convention has received criticism because it may dispossess African farmers of their seeds. Little is known about the empirical workings of UPOV's plant breeders' rights (PBRs) regarding African food crops. I interviewed plant breeders and right holders in Kenya's maize seed sector. I found that few actors register maize PBRs because maize varieties are often hybrid and especially because alternative, more powerful forms of pseudointellectual property are available in Kenya. Accordingly, almost all of the few protected varieties have been developed by the same breeding team within the parastatal maize seed company.In short, the main problem I discovered with PBRs in the Kenyan maize seed sector is not that they dispossess farmers.It is rather that, although PBRs sometimes accrue to individual breeders, conservative employers like the parastatal do not regard breeders as creative innovators. They do not incentivise their employees and do not use PBRs to this effect. This is problematic in circumstances like Kenya's, where selected breeding teams and individuals are much more productive than others and where a quickly changing climate may require a higher varietal turnover of adapted, formally bred varieties.

show abstract

Section: Farmers' Privilegementioning

confidence: 99%

How plant variety protection fails to benefit breeders to the detriment of plant innovation in Kenya's maize seed sector

Dycke

2023

World Intellectual Property

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Also, least developed countries (LDCs), 34 of which are in Africa, have until 2021 to comply with the TRIPS provisions (or until the moment they cease to be LDCs). 2 Despite the apparent freedom under TRIPS for countries to adopt sui generis PVP frameworks and, in the case of LDCs, to delay PVP implementation, the UPOV system has emerged as the de facto system to extend IP protection to plant varieties in in Africa, in line with practices elsewhere in the developing world and also in the developed world (Munyi, 2015). As a result, what was initially a Eurocentric, developed-world system for PVP is now widely utilised in countries with vastly different economic, social and cultural conditions from those that exist in Europe.…”

Section: The Beginnings Of Plant Variet Y Protection (Pvp)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Farmers' and Breeders' Rights: Bridging Access to, and IP Protection of, Plant Varieties in Africa

Munyi¹,

Jonge²

2015

Afr. j. inf. commun. (Online)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies in Africa have shown that saving, using, exchanging and selling farm-saved seed is the main channel through which farmers access seed and planting material. Moreover, these saving and related practices are recognised in international law, mainly through the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (Plant Treaty), which many African countries have ratified. These practices are also recognised by, inter alia, obligations at the national level to protect traditional knowledge relevant to seeds and planting material. The standard being employed in developing plant variety protection (PVP) mechanisms in Africa, as with elsewhere in the world, is the 1991 revision of the Convention of the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV, 1991). This Convention has, since its inception, been developed with reference to developed-world farming practices. This article looks at how farmers' rights are enshrined in Africa's legal frameworks, and the extent to which the current process of developing regional PVP systems on the continent is taking farmers' rights into account. The article then makes recommendations on how a balance can be struck between farmers' and breeders' rights, while still complying with the UPOV 1991 framework.

show abstract

“…Compared to other African countries such as Morocco and Tunisia (and except for South Africa) Kenya has for the last 15 years had a fairly vibrant plant breeders' rights registration system (Note 1). As at 1 February 2013, 1,158 applications for grants of plant breeders' rights had been filed through the system, with ornamental crops accounting for over 60% of the applications, and food crops 34% (Munyi, 2015). The plant breeders' rights registration system notwithstanding, Kenya's domestic seeds market is relatively small.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant Breeders' Rights Licensing in Smallholder Farming: Observations From Kenya

Munyi¹,

Jonge²,

Louwaars³

2018

JPL

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Focusing on Kenya as an example of a market where food production is mostly for subsistence purposes, this article seeks to establish whether licensing of plant breeders’ rights is a mechanism that can facilitate access to seeds and planting material to smallholder farmers. Through a case study method and qualitative interviews of a wide range of stakeholders, it was found that licensing strategies that are employed in market conditions such as those prevailing in Kenya usually involve some form of market differentiation. This is in order to ensure that the targeted beneficiary is reached. It was also found that whatever licensing strategy is employed, each has some advantages and disadvantages. Further, not-for-profit technology brokers have emerged with a view to absorb some costs in the licensing process which are otherwise out of reach for smallholder farmers. Breeders also waive some of their rights with respect to protected varieties. The article concludes that the use of licensing as a tool to facilitate access to seeds and planting material for smallholder farmers in market conditions such as those prevailing in Kenya has received little attention and only involves very few commercial crops. Where breeders choose to waive some of their rights, they should let farmers know so as to create legal certainty on utilization of accessed varieties.

show abstract

Plant Variety Protection Regime in Relation to Relevant International Obligations: Implications for Smallholder Farmers in Kenya

Cited by 12 publications

References 12 publications

How plant variety protection fails to benefit breeders to the detriment of plant innovation in Kenya's maize seed sector

How plant variety protection fails to benefit breeders to the detriment of plant innovation in Kenya's maize seed sector

Farmers' and Breeders' Rights: Bridging Access to, and IP Protection of, Plant Varieties in Africa

Plant Breeders' Rights Licensing in Smallholder Farming: Observations From Kenya

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About