This presentation was used in the GFAR webinar on "Farmers’ Rights: How Complementarity between Researchers and Farmers Impact the Conservation of Genetic Diversity, Food Security and Livelihoods of the Poor” The announcement blogpost was published here: https://blog.gfar.net/2017/08/31/gfar-webinar-communications-success-stories/ You can find the full recording of this webinar here: https://youtu.be/N16hHmL8xNM

1. GFAR-Secretariat@fao.org
GFAR Webinar
Farmers’ Rights: Complementarity
between Researchers and Farmers

2. Presenters
• Juanita Chaves (GFAR)
• Jorge Andrade (CIP)
• Rose Nankya (Bioversity International)
• Alejandro Argumedo (Asociación ANDES)
• Jeremiah Baarbé (GODAN)
• Q & A
Moderators: Charles Plummer/Peter Casier (GFAR)

3. FARMERS’ RIGHTS: HOW COMPLEMENTARITY BETWEEN
RESEARCHERS AND FARMERS IMPACT THE
CONSERVATION OF GENETIC DIVERSITY, FOOD SECURITY
AND LIVELIHOODS OF THE POOR
JUANITA CHAVES POSADA
GFAR SECRETARIAT
19 SEPTEMBER, 2017

4. BACKGROUND
• GFAR previous webinar: Farmers’ Rights: Achieving
Complementarity Between the Formal and Informal Seed
Systems (30 May, 2017)
• Article 9 of the International Treaty (responsibility for realizing
Farmers’ Rights rest with national governments)

5. OBJECTIVE
Exchange best practices and information on how
to achieve complementarity between the formal
and informal systems to improve food security,
conservation of plant genetic diversity and the
livelihood of smallholder farmers.

6. EXPECTED OUTCOMES
• Exchange of information, success stories and best
practices
• Identify challenges and possible solutions
• Motivate participants, especially researchers to
identify ways and tools to exchange their
experiences and best practices towards achieving
complementarity between the formal and informal
systems

7. JUANITA.CHAVES@FAO.ORG
Farmers at the field day, Ethiopia
By Bioversity International

8. 19 SEP 2017
Informal and formal potato seed
systems in Peru: A technical
perspective for improving seed
quality
JORGE ANDRADE-PIEDRA • WEBINAR ON FARMERS’ RIGHTS

9. Outline
• Background
• Potato in Peru
• Seed degeneration
• Integrated seed health strategy
• Host resistance
• On-farm seed management
• Clean seed
• Main message

10. 10
Background
Low scale farmers
High biodiversity
High climatic and soil variability

11. Potato boom in Peru
Total production (t/year):
•3.3 million (2000)
•4.7 millio (2014)
Consumption (kg/person/year)
has increased:
•74.6 (2007)
•82.4 (2011)
Yield (t/ha) has increased:
•11.5 (2000)
•14.8 (2014)
Use of certified seed has
remained very low (<0.05%)

12. Potato planting material (seed)
• Critical input for production
• Reduction of yield gap
• Dissemination of new varieties
• Vegetative propagation:
• Bulky (1-2 t/ha)
• Costly (30-40% of production cost)
• Perishable (1 to 4 months)
• Prone to degeneration
F. Montesdeoca

13. FungiBacteriaViruses
Insects
Increase in pest incidence or severity, associated with reduction in yield or
quality over successive cycles of vegetative propagation
Seed degeneration
Nematodes
Thomas-Sharma et al., 2015

14. Integrated seed health strategy
Resistant
varieties
On-farm
management
Clean seed
Breeding Farmers’ capacity
development
Certification
Clean seed
replacemen
t paradigm
Thomas-Sharma et al., 2015

15. Resistant
varieties
On-farm
management
Clean seed
Breeding Farmers’ capacity
development
Certification
Integrated
seed health
strategy
Thomas-Sharma et al., 2015
Integrated seed health strategy

16. Country
Formal seed
system (%)
Informal seed
system (%)
Reference
Afghanistan 0 100 Kadian et al., 2007
Bangladesh 5 95 Ilangantileke et al., 2001
Bhutan 2 98 Kadian et al., 2007
Bolivia 2 98 Hidalgo et al., 2011
China 20 80 Muthoni et al., 2013
Colombia 2-10 90-98 FPAPA, 2010; Guzmán-Barney et al., 2012
Ecuador 1-3 97-99 Thiele, 1999; ESPAC, 2012
Ethiopia 1 99 Gildemacher et al., 2009
India 20 80 Kadian et al., 2007
Indonesia 6 94 Muthoni et al., 2013
Kenya 2 98 Gildemacher et al., 2009
Pakistan 5 95 Muthoni et al., 2013
Peru 0.5 99.5 Hidalgo et al., 2011
Uganda 0.1 99.9 Gildemacher et al., 2009
Formal and informal seed systems
Thomas-Sharma et al., 2015

17. 1. Host resistance
Sub tropical
lowlands
Temperate Tropical
highlands
Dry
mediterranean
LB Moth
Frost PVY,PVX,PLRV
PVY,PVX,PLRV
HeatPCN
Alt + LB
SalinityAndean weevil
Drought
LB
PCN
Drought
Frost
PVY,PVX,PLRV
Moth
LB
Heat
BW
Drought
Salinity
LB: late blight
Alt:Alternaria sp.
BW: bacterial wilt
PCN: potato cyst nematode Mendoza, 1994
Main agroecologies and stresses
PVY,PVX,PLRV

18. Pedigree Tuber morphology Resistance
Ord CIP Number Code
Female
parent
Male
parent
Skin
color
Flesh
color
Shape eye depth PVY PVX LB
Abiot stress
Tolerance
1 CIP309003.11 VHT-003.011 C91.612/REICHE LD-73.17 cream cream oblong shallow R R R
2 CIP309047.28 VHT-047.028 LD-54.20 C93.154 cream white oblong shallow R R MR
3 CIP309074.123 VHT-074.123 LD-10.34 92.187 cream cream oblong shallow R R MR
4 CIP309074.129 VHT4-07.129 LD-10.34 92.187 cream cream oblong shallow R S R
5
CIP309080.60 VHT-080.060 LD-10.34 LD-57.20 cream cream
long
oblong
shallow R R
MR
6 CIP309088.120 VHT-088.120 LD-30.6 LD-95.24 cream cream oblong shallow R R HR
7
CIP309093.43 VHT-093.043 LD-32.25 C93.154 cream cream
long
oblong
shallow R R
MR
Drought
8 CIP309093.50 VHT-093.050 LD-32.25 C93.154 cream cream oblong shallow R R MR
9 CIP309096.118 VHT-096.118 LD-32.25 LD-39.32 cream cream oblong shallow R R MR Drought
10 CIP309103.85 VHT-103.085 LD-32.8 ZAREVO cream cream oblong shallow R R MR
11
CIP309126.64 VHT-126.064 LD-49.50 LD-39.32 cream cream
long
oblong
shallow R R
R
12
CIP309131.16 VHT-131.016 LD-73.31 C93.154 cream yellow
long
oblong
shallow R R
MR
13 CIP398017.53 391002.6 392639.31 Cream Cream Oval shallow ER R Heat
14 CIP304079.10 393075.54 Granola Cream Cream Oval shallow ER ER R Heat
15 CIP302533.40 393371.159 396272.43 Cream Cream Elliptic shallow ER ER R Heat
16 CIP304081.44 393075.54 Monalisa Cream Cream Oval shallow ER R Heat
Example, clones sent to Guatemala in 2017

19. 1. Select the best
plot
2. Select the best plants
2. On-farm seed management: Select the best
Orrego et al. 2011,
Gildemacher et al., 2011, 2012

20. 3. Select the best tubers from the best plants
4. Store the tubers
30-40% yield
increase

21. Genetic
Class
Pre-Basic
Categ.
Básic I - II
Categ.
Registered
I - II
Categ.
Certified
I - II
Categ.
Authorized
I - II
To be sold to farmersTo be sold to farmers
Reglamento de la Ley General de Semillas, PerúReglamento de la Ley General de Semillas, Perú
Non-
Certified
Class
Certified
Class
NARS: INIA
SeedSeed
producersproducers
3. Clean seed: Certification

22. New regulations for seed potato production in
Peru
• 2008: Update of seed law
• 2012: Regulations for potato seed
production
• 2014-2015: discussions to
improve regulations
• Workshops (Lima, Huancayo,
Andahuaylas, Cajamarca,
Cusco)
• 2 categories in the Non-
Certified class: declared and
traditional
• Waiting for final approval…
(nearly 2 years)

23. Rapidmultiplication technologies for minituber production
Conventional: 5 – 8 tub/pl
Sandponics: 8 – 10 tub/pl
Deep water: 25 – 30 tub/pl
Aeroponics: 50 – 100 tub/pl

24. Main messages
• Peru is the largest potato producer in South America.
• The informal seed system in Peru provides most of the
seed for potato production, but seed quality is low.
• Seed degeneration is the main cause of poor quality
seed.
• CIP proposes an integrated seed health approach that
combines host resistance, on-farm seed management
and certified seed.
• Investments should focus primarily on breeding and
farmers’ capacity building for on-farm seed
management, and to a lesser degree on producing
certified seed.

25. Thank you
Jorge Andrade-Piedra
j.andrade@cgiar.org

26. Community Seed Banking for Enhanced Conservation and Use of Crop
Varietal Diversity
Rose Nankya, Devra I. Jarvis, Isabel L. Noriega and John W. Mulumba
GFAR WEBINAR PRESENTATION 19/9/2017

27. Background
• Local seed exchange networks that
occur outside the formal breeding
sector influence the diversity and
evolution of PGRFA
• Some of the key issues determining
the use of seed by farmers are
availability, quantity, quality and
price.
•Community seedbanks effective in
providing seed and diversity to
farmers

28. General approach taken to achieve cooperation
• Identify key implementation partner(s) and
contact them
• Development of Memoranda of understanding to
make commitments, roles and responsibilities
clear
• Situation analysis in the project sites
• Participatory approach of beneficiary groups
• Understand different perspectives of stakeholders
and promote a win- win scenario
• Constant touch with partners

29. Establishment of community seedbanks
• In Uganda, Bioversity partnered with
National Agriculture Research
Organization specifically the Plant
Genetic Resources Center
• Carried out seed systems studies using
participatory diagnostics - focus group
discussions and household surveys
• Had continuous interaction with farmers
and leaders at different levels; explained
objectives of the research to them
• Recruited field assistants from within the
target communities
• This approach created confidence and
trust in the communities; they co-
operated and supported the research
and the interventions that followed

30. Objectives of the seed systems studies
To understand :
•the seed and varieties distribution
•Constraints to accessing seed and
varieties
•Seed selection practices
•Linkage of seed systems to
the crop diversity on-farm

31. Some findings from Seed Systems Studies
• Farmers got most seed from informal sources:
 in Rubaya; 2013 (87%), in 2008 (91%)
 in Kabwohe; 2013 (85%), in 2008 (99%).
• Farmers got seed from more than one source without quality
control
• There was a lot of exchange between farmers
• We can assume that some of the improved varieties that
farmers accessed had been developed using materials from the
CGIAR centers

32. Common bean seed quantities and the percentage contributed by
each source in 2008 and 2013 in Rubaya
Quantity in kg / % of Seed

33. Farmers got seed from more than one source in 2008 in
Rubaya
NEIGHBOUR =23
4
16
3
SELF = 27
VERY LOCAL MARKET = 28
NON LOCAL MARKET
=7
PARENT=3
SEED COMPANY
=1
4
1
2
26
2
11 1410
LOCAL AGRICULTURAL
EXTENSION =13
FRIENDS OUTSIDE
THE VILLAGE =3
1
1
RELATIVE IN THE VILLAGE =3
2
11
2

34. Some farmers still got seed from more than one source in 2013 in
Rubaya
2
Fellow Farmers
Very Local
Market
Rukore
2
Local
Agriculture
Extension
Kagyera
Neighbor 3
1
1
1
111
2
15
13
4
Self
Seed Company
1
1
NARO
Friends outside
village
1
Parents
1
Seed Fairs
1
10
1
4

35. Key constraints to accessing seed as pointed out by farmers
Seed being expensive to buy
and transport
Varieties not available
Seed quality not good
Some varieties getting tired
when grown every season
High turnover of varieties

36. What are community seed banks?
Community driven efforts through which
farmers:
Select, produce, improve and at times
market seeds
Pool diverse varieties
Ensure some quality
 Store seed in the short term to serve
individual farmers or several communities
Can revive rare and extinct varieties
Promote and protect farmers’ rights

37. Functions of community seed banks
 Avail seed at right time on a loan
basis
Control the quality of seed
Avail diversity of varieties
Offer choices for farmers
Bring seed nearer to the people
Conserve varieties
Link farmers to the National gene
banks and breeders
Revive rare or extinct varieties
Improve social cohesion
Empower women
Increase general farmer capacities. eg
in seed production etc

38. Common tasks of community seedbanks
i) Securing diversity
through:
Varieties collection
Variety
characterization also
using traditional
knowledge
Seed production
Storage
distribution

39. iii)Seed Quality mangement
Only good quality seed is
accepted at the bank
Monitoring at farm level
Seed treatment while at the
bank with organic materials
 Moisture content testing
 Germination tests
ii) Empowering farmers to
embrace good quality seed
production practices

40. iv) Promotion of farmers rights
 Saving, using and
exchanging seed
 Promoting sharing of
traditional knowledge
Equitable sharing of
benefits
Participation in decision
making

41. KIZIBA SEED BANK SEED QUANTIES AND NO.OF BENEFICIARIES SINCE JUNE 2010

42. Achievements
1500 farmers have benefited so far
Distributes a ton of seed in a season
Increased productivity
Started a business arm to produce
Quality Declared Seed
Opened with 27 varieties, now has 69
varieties
Facilitated another farmer group to
establish their seedbank in Sheema
town council

43. Benefits to the CGIAR and general research fraternity
• Since seedbanks are linked to the National genebanks, they
are good channels for increasing PGRFA materials available
for research easily e.g for developing new varieties
• Can be an easy channel of linking/ working with farmers for
a research intervention e.g testing new varieties,
participatory breeding etc
• Are a source of data and information on seed systems,
diversity issues etc

44. Lessons learnt
• Seedbanks may not work for all crops
• Success of community seedbanking is influenced by
social, cultural and economic factors
• Important to first understand the dynamics of the seed
system to gauge whether community seedbanking is
the most appropriate intervention in that context
• Important to think about and incorporate sustainability
mechanisms in the process of establishing the
seedbanks
• Good to think through the research and developmental
questions to be addressed through seedbanking

45. Challenges
 Community seed banks
going into seed
production business
may threaten existence
of landraces
 Registration of
landraces not a priority
in many countries
 Sustainability
 Market favoring few
varieties

46. Conclusion
Community seed banks provide seed security, enable
continued evolution and adaptation of crop diversity
in situ, provide choices; enhance resilience to climate
change and other shocks, promote farmers’ rights.
Despite some challenges, they remain a viable option
for improving access and use of crop diversity for food
security and enhancing resilience

47. References
1.Nankya, R., Adokorach ,J. Mulumba JW. 2012. Seed systems, genetic vulnerability
and disease movement in Uganda. pp: 287-297. In: Jarvis, DI, C Fadda, P De Santis and
J Thompson, editors.2012. Damage, diversity and genetic vulnerability: The role of crop
genetic diversity in the agricultural production system to reduce pest and disease
damage, Proceedings of an International Symposium 15-17 February, 2011, Rabat,
Morocco. Bioversity International, Rome Italy.
2 Mulumba, J. W.;Nankya, R.; Catherine Kiwuka, C.; Adokorach, J. Kyomugisha, M.;
Fadda, C. and Devra, I. J. Kiziba community genebank, Uganda.; in, Veernoy, R. et al
(eds) 2014. Community Seed Banks: Origins, Evolution and Prospects Pages 165 -171;
http://www.routledge.com/u/routledge/SeedBanks/,
http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415708067/.
4. Mulumba JW, R Nankya, J Adokorach, C Kiwuka, C Fadda, P De Santis, DI Jarvis.
2012. A risk minimizing argument for traditional crop varietal diversity use to reduce
pest and disease damage in agricultural ecosystem of Uganda. Agriculture, Ecosystem
and the Environment, 157: 70–86.
5. Aseete, P., Nankya, R., Mulumba, J.W. An Analysis of the common bean and
banana seed/ planting materials value chains and systems in Nakaseke, Kabwohe
and Rubaya sites in Uganda. Technical Report, 2014.
6. http://agrobiodiversityplatform.org/cropbiodiversity/

48. Acknowledgement
FARMERS

50. Farmers’ Rights
and Social
Learning
Lessons from the
CIP – Potato Park
Repatriation
Agreement
Alejandro Argumedo
Asociación ANDES
Cusco, 19 September 2017
GFAR Collective Action Webinar on Farmers’ Rights

51. Who I am and
My
Presentation
• Who I am
• Cusco - Peru
• Asociación ANDES
• Content of Presentation

52. Farmers’
Rights are
Biocultural
Rights
• Andean Indigenous Farmers and
Biocultural Rights
• Article 9 of the IT, Article 8(j)
and the Nagoya Protocol
• Collective Biocultural Heritage

53. Potato Park:
Key Information
Objectives:
•Improve the wellbeing and food
security of the Potato Park
communities through responses
(based on the best of Western
science and Traditional Knowledge)
to key agronomic, socioeconomic
and environmental pressures and
limitations affecting indigenous
peoples and build a resilient food
and farming system

54. The Potato Park
Methods and Key
activities
• Biocultural Approaches to Policy and Practices
• TK-based Integrated Landscape Approach for the in situ
conservation and SU of PGRFA, systematically organized
as Biocultural Heritage Territory
• Intervention targeted at potato populations (association
with other native Andean species)
• Main Activities:
• Conservation of Genetic Diversity of Potatoes in a
Center of Origin and Diversity (Infra/intra specific)
• Conservation NUS and WCR
• Conservation of Ecosystem Services
• Agroecology-based Sustainable Food Production
• (Agro) Biodiversity-based Economic Activities and
Endogenous Development
• Enhancement of Local Human and Institutional
Capacities for the C&SU of Indigenous Peoples’
Biocultural Heritage
• Cross fertilization between science and IK (Farmer-
scientist collaboration)
• Coordination and Cooperation with Government
Sectors

55. The Potato Park –
CIP Repatriation
Agreement
• History
• Objectives
• Key elements

56. The Potato Park –
CIP Repatriation
Agreement
• 410 potato landraces
repatriated
• Collaborative research on:
• climate change
• integrated pest
management
• participatory plant
breeding
• participatory GIS
• Wild crop relatives
• In-situ management
• Seed Policy

57. Lessons Learned (1):
Engagement
• Active engagement of community members, including
women and youth, in the design and implementation of
research activities.
• Access to new knowledge by CIP and by communities
• Comparison and validation of knowledge has led to
improved understanding of problems and solutions, helped
to build trust, and led to greater awareness and valuing of
the knowledge and practices of other groups.
• Use of indigenous research methodologies and
communications systems and formats compatible with
indigenous knowledge.

58. Lessons Learned (2):
Iterative learning
• Collective, iterative learning in order to
co-create knowledge in the research
activities conducted under the
agreement.
• Effective collaborative learning between
CIP staff, ANDES and Potato Park
communities on climate conditions and
trends, the movement of pests and
diseases in relation to crops and
altitudinal ranges, and pest control using
traditional and modern methods.
• The agreement is flexible to allow new
findings, ideas and understanding to be
incorporated, supporting the iterative
learning processes.
• Collective learning among the different
communities of the Potato Park and
ANDES was fostered through the
identification and analysis of customary
norms and values that guide sharing of
resources and knowledge within and
between communities, through
consensus building and collaborative
development of the agreement.

59. Lessons Learned (3):
Capacity development
• Providing initial capacity building to communities to
negotiate agreements is crucial.
• Capacity building is a two-way process between scientists
and farmers.
• Farmers provide capacity building to farmers in other
communities on:
• Development of biocultural protocols
• Regoverning local food systems and the commons
• Self-discovery learning and participatory action
research

60. Lessons Learned (4):
Challenging institutions
• Scientists now recognize the value of traditional
knowledge and collaborative research with
communities, and community members beyond those
directly involved with the project have adopted
conservation plans.
• Shift the values and practices of other public and
private institutions not directly involved
• Opening of spaces for ANDES and the Potato Park
communities to work with government agencies in
Peru, international processes, and scientists from other
institutions and universities.

61. Conclusions
• Active community participation in research processes, from design to analysis.
• Equitable research partnership between indigenous farmers and scientists has linked
science and traditional knowledge, and global and local knowledge, for a better
understanding of climate change and food security problems and solutions.
• Recognition and awareness of the role of farmers in conserving and improving plant
genetic resources
• Leading role in implementation of National Seed Law and the national catalogue of
local/native crops
• Repatriation agreement has provided a legal framework for protecting the rights of
farmers over their traditional knowledge and natural resources
• Support to the national government in the implementation of Agrobiodiversity Zones
• Support to national and international indigenous networks on methods and tools for the
conservation of genetic diversity, protection of IK, and the rights of farmers over their
seeds and indigenous knowledge
• Trust (Low Sharing of information from CIP to communities)
• No institutional funding for the agreement and limited spread of the effects of
institutional challenging to other CIP offices.

63. Agricultural data is a
vital resource for
ensuring food security.

64. Open data is data
that can be freely
used, re-used and
redistributed by
anyone - subject
only, at most, to
the requirement to
attribute and
(Open Data Handbook)

66. Ownership rights are a major
factor in access and use of
open data … stakeholders who
are most vulnerable—small-
scale farmers … have the least
legal protection.
(de Beer, 2016: 4, 14)(de Beer, 2016: 4, 14)

67. Ownership mechanisms

69. The data commons is
a governance
structure where
all participants
share responsibility
for and engage
equitably in the
production of data.

70. Contributors need

71. A data commons
must address the
needs of
contributors.
Although
contributors do not
own their data,
their needs can be

72. Firms that license data
collection are ... characterized by
differing business models, legal
sophistication, methods and
access to data, and relationships
with contributors and users.
• Sophisticated
contract
• Privacy and
control
• Commercial
use allowed
• Owned by
governments
• Stakeholders
need to see
value of
shared data
• Ownership by
design
• Market used
to show
value of
open data

73. A data commons is based
on governance
mechanisms that enable
access.
• License copyright in
data and databases.
• Range of licenses.
• Three layer design
increases use.
• Licenses copyright in
compilations of data.
• Option to require
attribution or
relicensing of
derivatives.

74. We propose a set
of licenses that ...
can help
collectors manage
their relationships
with contributors
and consumers.

75. Dual License Model

76. Characteristics of the License

77. Growing traction
Certification marks
are commonly used
to encourage
participation and
ensure benefit
sharing ... the mark
indicates best
practices used
throughout the
value chain.

78. Jeremiah Baarbe, Meghan Blom, Jeremy de Beer. “A
Data Commons for Food Security”
(Working Paper 7, Ottawa, ON: Open AIR, 2017)
Funding for this research was provided by the
Canada First Research Excellence Fund through
the Global Institute for Food Security, the
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council
(SSHRC) and the International Development
Research Centre (IDRC) via the Open African
Innovation Research (Open AIR) network.
www.openair.
org.za
@afrinnov
ation
Jeremiah.baarbe@g
mail.com

79. Questions/Remarks