Agricultural Biotechnology for Africa. AfricanScientists and Farmers Must Feed Their Own People

Jesse Machuka

Few would disagree that the many claims andcounterclaims concerning what biotechnology can orcannot do to solve Africa’s food insecurity problemhave mainly been made by non-Africans. It is nowonder that Florence Wambugu’s (1999) excellentarticle titled “Why Africa needs agricultural biotech”is now widely cited by those who support the viewthat developing countries, particularly in SubSaharanAfrica (SSA), stand to gain the most from modernbiotechnology applications. The article explained in anutshell some of the potential benefits Africa standsto gain by embracing biotechnology. Although opin-ions differ regarding the role biotechnology can playin African development, all (hopefully!) must agreeabout the urgency to eradicate the perpetual cycle ofhunger, malnutrition, and death in a world of plenty.It is an acknowledged fact that Africa is endowedwith tremendous natural (including genetic) and hu-man wealth that has yet to be harnessed to the benefitof its people. Sadly, some of this reservoir of re-sources have been disintegrating and the trend isbound to accelerate unless urgent measures are takento stop and reverse this drift. Since farming is themost important source of income and sustenance forabout three quarters of the population of SSA, thereis no doubt that agricultural biotechnology (agbio-tech) can make very substantial contributions towardincreasing food production by rural resource-poorfarmers, while preserving declining resources suchas forests, soil, water, and arable land (Bunders andBroerse, 1991). However, application of modern bio-technology tools is not likely to significantly reducethe contributions that conventional disciplines suchas soil science, breeding, plant health management,agronomy, agricultural economics, and social sci-ences make to enhance crop production.

In villages, constraints to crop production includepests, diseases, weeds, environmental degradation,soil nutrient depletion, low fertilizer inputs, inade-quate food processing amenities, poor roads to mar-kets, and general lack of information to make science-based decisions that underlie farming methodologiesand systems. For some of these constraints, biotech-nology is the most promising recourse to alleviatethem. For example, an insect known as Maruca pod-borer is the major constraint restricting increasedgrain legume production in Africa, often causing upto 100% crop failure during severe attacks on impor-tant crops such as cowpea (Fig. 1). Many decades ofconventional breeding efforts have failed to control

this pest. However, recent research in U.S. universi-ties and at the International Institute of Tropical Ag-riculture based in Ibadan, Nigeria, shows that thispest can be controlled by applying biotechnologytools. This is just one of the myriad problems facingfood production systems in Africa for which biotech-nology can provide at least some solutions. Althoughbiotechnology has potential downsides, the major“concerns” in Africa are not so much about justifyingits role in agricultural production—the “why” ques-tion. It is conceivable that the millions of dollarsbeing wasted each year by antibiotech activists else-where could go a long way to help build badlyneeded capacity for agbiotech research in Africa! Thekey issues revolve around questions of where, when,how, and who will do biotechnology for Africa’sbenefit? If we are thinking of ultimate answers, thenthere is probably only one answer: biotechnology forAfrica should mostly be done in Africa and mostly byAfricans themselves, now. And yes, this is beingrealistic, and it can be done, if there is consensus andgoodwill.

Despite many years of agricultural and other “de-velopment” aid and promises by different agenciesrelated to increased food security and poverty erad-ication, those of us who live in Africa do not haveconfidence that things are getting any better. Becauseof this history, some are either pessimistic or skepti-cal, but the majority remain cautious and optimistic,that modern biotechnology opens new opportunitiesto address constraints that have led to declining har-vests in farmers’ fields in the midst of an expandingpopulation. Richard Manning (2000) makes a goodpoint when he suggests that one way to feed theincreasing world population is to help “third worldscientists to feed their own people, while ensuringsensitivity to culture and environment that wemissed in the first green revolution” (http://www.mcknight.org/crop-frontier.htm). For SSA, thepertinent question is, how does the internationalcommunity of public and private institutions anddonors, governments, scientists, and other actorshelp African scientists (and farmers!) to feed theirown people? It is crucial that scientific informationreaches farmers in the rural areas who have space topractice farming and that other actors such as agri-cultural scientists and extensionists interact withfarmers to attain acceptance and use of new technol-ogies for sustainable food production and develop-ment. In this regard, we must have it in mind that life

16 Plant Physiology, May 2001, Vol. 126, pp. 16–19, www.plantphysiol.org © 2001 American Society of Plant Physiologists www.plantphysiol.orgon June 16, 2020 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright © 2001 American Society of Plant Biologists. All rights reserved.

science technologies that offer hope to farmers, suchas agbiotech, belong to the farmer. We must alsoensure that the technology not only reaches farmersbut that they understand it and are empowered touse it. Furthermore, our starting point is not the“ignorant peasant” but the practices, techniques, ex-perience, and knowledge of the African farmer builtover the centuries (Duprez and DeLeener, 1988).

A good example of how biotechnology can reachrural farmers involves a special program by the Bio-technology Development Co-operation of the Neth-erlands Government, the Kenyan Ministry of Re-search, Science and Technology, and the small-scalefarming system stakeholders. The program structureis designed to ensure that biotechnology reaches thesmall farmer (end-user) through a bottom-up ap-proach steered by the Kenya Agricultural Biotechnol-ogy Platform. The composition of farmers includesmale and female farmers, oxen owners, different agegroups from different subvillages, etc. Projects underthe Kenya Agricultural Biotechnology Platform fund-ing bring together collaborators who include scien-tists from research institutions such as universities,national agricultural research centers, and farmers. AFarming Systems Research Program ensures thatfarmers participate in the research as partners withscientists, extensionists, and other actors and enablesscientists also to utilize indigenous knowledge inresearch and development. This prevents “cut andpaste” approaches that may be foreign market-drivenand which tend to provide short-term, quick-fix so-lutions to unique problems faced by small-scalefarmers in Africa who have developed their ownunique crops, cropping, and farming systems thatcannot be changed without their full and carefulinvolvement. Since 1992, Farmers Research Groupsand Farmers Extension Groups, established along the

lines of Farming Systems Research Programs, havebeen in existence in the Lake Zone of Tanzania forpurposes of farmer participatory research. This expe-rience shows that such participatory methods in-crease farmers’ inputs in the decision-making processas well as in the dissemination of research productsthrough their involvement in field trials, farmers’and “on-station” field days, PRA surveys, andfarmer-to-farmer diffusion of information throughVillage Extension Workers rather than institutionalextension (Fig. 2). Since Farmers Research Groupsrepresent different geographic zones and hence dif-ferent agro-ecological and farming systems, linkagemechanisms that bring together their experiencesneed to be established to allow horizontal and verti-cal dissemination of technologies as well as collabo-ration in the SSA region. Obviously, this is not theonly way that research results from the laboratoryreach farmers’ fields, but it illustrates the fact thatapplied agbiotech research can similarly be targetedand tied to meet specific needs of rural farmers, bothin the short- and long-term, in the face of scant re-sources. With African farmers and scientists workingtogether to set the research agenda, there is hope thatthe research will focus on uniquely African (“or-phan”) crops such as millet and sorghum that arevery important in marginal, famine-prone regionssuch as the Sahel and Horn of Africa. Root and tubercrops such as yam, sweet potato, and cassava mayalso begin to receive the attention they deserve.

Although Africa lags far behind other regionswhen it comes to public information and awarenessof biotechnology issues, excellent work is being doneby organizations such as the Nairobi-based AfricanBiotechnology Stakeholders Forum and SouthAfrican-based AfricaBIO to educate the general pub-lic in biotechnology. Opportunities abound for scien-

Figure 1. Podborer larvae infest legume pods. Inset, Podborer larva on cowpea callus in bioassay to test efficacy of cowpeapest resistance characters.

Agricultural Biotechnology for Africa

Plant Physiol. Vol. 126, 2001 17 www.plantphysiol.orgon June 16, 2020 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright © 2001 American Society of Plant Biologists. All rights reserved.

tists in Africa to get involved in these efforts that areurgently needed if Africans are going to decide forthemselves what biotechnology can do for themrather than let others decide for them, especiallyanti-genetically modified organism activists! There isalso urgency to educate policy makers in Africangovernments and the private sector concerning theneed to support and invest in biotechnology Re-search and Development (R&D). At the same time,the international donor community needs to begin totrust Africans and allow them to manage their re-search agenda for themselves. They can take the cuefrom very successful initiatives undertaken by theRockefeller Foundation in Africa. There are enoughAfrican scientists around to make a difference onfarmers fields if resources are properly channeled foragricultural R&D. African scientists and science man-agers in government and other institutions as well asfarmers, on the other hand, need to be efficient andfaithful in the way they manage research programsand funds if they are going to be trusted with moneyby national and international donors. The currentsuccess in tissue culture-aided production and mul-tiplication of disease-free planting materials for cas-

sava, yam, banana, plantain, citrus, and flowers incountries such as Kenya and Ghana is attracting pri-vate sector companies who are seeing the potential toinvest in successful new biotechnologies.

On November 8–11, 2000, the Strategic Alliance forBiotechnology Research in African Development(SABRAD) held a workshop in Accra, Ghana, thatbrought together more than 150 participants fromsouthern, East, Central, and West Africa as well aspartners from the U.S. 1890 Land Grant Universities,U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Agricul-tural Organization of the United Nations, UnitedNations Environment Program, International Agri-cultural Research Centers, other non-governmentalorganizations, private companies, and journalists. In-ternational Agricultural Research Centers were rep-resented by the Mexican-based International Maizeand Wheat Improvement Centre and InternationalInstitute of Tropical Agriculture. The theme of thisfirst SABRAD Workshop was “Enabling Biotechnol-ogy for African Agriculture.” Increasing educationand awareness and formulation of regulatory (poli-cy) frameworks that would allow access to modernbiotechnology for R&D were identified as key prior-

Figure 2. The bottom up approach: Farmers and scientists discuss “crazy top” disease (inset) in maize caused by the downymildew pathogen Peronosclerospora sorghi in Ogbomoso, southwestern Nigeria.

Machuka

18 Plant Physiol. Vol. 126, 2001 www.plantphysiol.orgon June 16, 2020 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright © 2001 American Society of Plant Biologists. All rights reserved.

ities for enabling biotechnology for African develop-ment that targets resource-poor rural farmers. Theone thing that was unique at the Accra meeting wasthat Africans themselves were at the center of discus-sions to work out plans for enabling biotechnology totake root in their respective countries. The actionplans agreed upon will be implemented through net-working between regions. The ultimate socio-economic impact is food self-sufficiency and im-proved living conditions of resource-poor farmerswho were identified as the target recipients for prod-ucts generated from biotechnology applications.

We live in a world that has become an increasinglyinterdependent “global village” due to advances ininformation and transportation technology. In thisglobal village, millions have plenty of food to throwaway, while millions of others die daily because theyhave nothing to eat. It is not always true that thosewith surplus food do not care about those who die innear and far away places! In Africa itself, there aremany that have plenty of food, acquired either gen-uinely or by stealing public wealth, and who stillwatch their hungry neighbors die helplessly. Al-

though Africans are thankful for development andrelief aid, they are uncomfortable about their condi-tion of continuous dependence on handouts thatcome in many forms, including food and expatriateforeign aid, with no permanent solutions apparentlyin sight. The SABRAD initiative is one step in theright direction that deserves support from all thosewho want to help African scientists and farmers tofeed their own people.

LITERATURE CITED

Bunders FG, Broerse EW (1991) Appropriate Biotechnol-ogy in Small-Scale Agriculture: How to Reorient Re-search and Development. CAB International, Walling-ton, Oxon, UK

Duprez H, DeLeener P (1988) Agriculture in African RuralCommunities. Macmillan and Technical Centre for Ag-ricultural and Rural Co-operation. CTA, London

Manning R (2000) Food’s Frontier: The Next Green Revo-lution. North Point Press, New York

Wambugu F (1999) Why Africa needs agricultural biotech.Nature 400: 15–16

Jesse MachukaBiotechnology Research Unit

International Institute of Tropical Agriculturec/o L.W. Lambourn & Company

Carolyn House26 Dingwall Road

Croydon CR9 3EE, United Kingdom

Agricultural Biotechnology for Africa

Plant Physiol. Vol. 126, 2001 19 www.plantphysiol.orgon June 16, 2020 - Published by Downloaded from Copyright © 2001 American Society of Plant Biologists. All rights reserved.