Ch. 1— Summary and Options for Congress • 25 



the issue could benefit from a more informed 

 and less impassioned approach. 



All countries benefit from the exchange of 

 genetic resources. Many of the major crops cur- 

 rently grown in various countries have origi- 

 nated elsewhere. Coffee, for example, is native 

 to the highlands of Ethiopia. Yet, today, it rep- 

 resents an important source of income for 

 farmers in other parts of Africa, Asia, and Latin 

 America. Maize, originally from Central Amer- 

 ica, is grown as a staple crop in North Amer- 

 ica and Africa. Countries continue to depend 

 on access to germplasm from outside their 

 borders to maintain or enhance agricultural 

 productivity. Political and economic consider- 

 ations, however, are now prompting national 

 governments to restrict access to their germ- 

 plasm. Behind these efforts is an implicit de- 

 sire by some countries to obtain greater com- 

 pensation for the genetic resources that are 

 currently made freely available. 



The International Board for Plant Genetic Re- 

 sources (IBPGR] is the main international in- 

 stitution dealing with the offsite conservation 

 of plant genetic diversity. Established in 1974, 

 it promotes the establishment of national pro- 

 grams and regional centers for the conserva- 

 tion of plant germplasm. It has provided train- 

 ing facilities, carried out research in techniques 

 of plant germplasm conservation, supported 

 numerous collection missions, and provided 

 limited financial assistance for conservation fa- 

 cilities. However, it does not operate any germ- 

 plasm storage facilities itself. 



Due in part to the success of IBPGR in focus- 

 ing attention on the need to conserve genetic 

 diversity, the issue of germplasm exchange has 

 become embroiled in political controversy. 

 Some critics regard the IBPGR as implicitly 

 working for agribusiness interests of industrial 

 nations. Central to the issue is a perception on 

 the part of many developing countries that they 

 have been freely giving genetic resources to in- 

 dustrial nations which, in turn, have profited 

 at their expense. 



This controversy led the United Nations Food 

 and Agricultural Organization (FAO) to spon- 

 sor an International Undertaking on Plant 



Genetic Resources. The undertaking proposed 

 an international germplasm conservation net- 

 work under the auspices of FAO. It declared 

 that each nation has a duty to make all plant 

 genetic materials— including advanced breed- 

 ing materials— freely available. IBPGR was to 

 continue its current work, but it would be mon- 

 itored by FAO. 



FAO then established the Commission on 

 Plant Genetic Resources to review progress in 

 germplasm conservation. The commission held 

 its first meeting in March 1985, with the United 

 States present only as an observer. Much of the 

 discussion focused on the concerns expressed 

 in the undertaking and on onsite conservation. 



The continuing controversy includes charges 

 that the current international system enables 

 countries to restrict access to germplasm in in- 

 ternational collections for political and eco- 

 nomic reasons. Also of concern to some par- 

 ties is the impact of plant patenting legislation. 



Current charges and arguments in the FAO 

 forum tend to oversimplify the complexity of 

 how germplasm is incorporated into plant va- 

 rieties and to distort the actual nature of genetic 

 exchange between and among industrial and 

 developing countries. Restrictions on export of 

 germplasm, for example, appear to be more 

 common for developing countries. Neverthe- 

 less, the perception of inequity in the current 

 situation is real, and it could result in increas- 

 ing national restrictions on access to and ex- 

 port of germplasm. Further, the issue of con- 

 trol over genetic resources could become a 

 significant stumbling block to establishing in- 

 ternational commitment and cooperation in the 

 maintenance of overall biological diversity. 



Option 7.1: Closely examine the actions avail- 

 able to the United States regarding the issue 

 of international exchange of genetic resources. 



Efforts to address the conservation and ex- 

 change of plant genetic resources in the FAO 

 forum have been controversial. It is not yet ap- 

 parent how the United States should act in this 

 regard. Congress could give increased atten- 

 tion to determining what options are available. 



