Developing a biosafety law: lessons from the Kenyan experience
Book Reviews
doi:10.1093/aob/mcq241
Published electronically: 25 November 2010
This document provides a narrative
of the passage of the Biosafety Bill,
2009, the Kenyan legislation that
covers the use of genetically
modified organisms (GMOs) in that country. The authors’
declared aim is ‘to document as accurately as possible the
process of developing the Biosafety Law through three
parliaments and two General Elections’.
The document is divided into eight chapters that start with
the period in 2000 when the then president of Kenya Daniel
arap Moi became the first head of state to sign the Biosafety
Protocol, a provision of the UN Convention on Biological
Diversity and a procedure designed to encourage investment
in agricultural biotechnology. The narrative then proceeds in
turn through the tortuous process of the various drafting
stages of the bill, the course of the attempts at legislation,
and its eventual approval.
The decade covered by this process involved numerous
workshops, interaction with supportive international agencies
and the Kenyan version of ‘realpolitik’. It describes in much
detail the personal recollection of those involved in negotiating through the battlefield of public opinion, political expediency, NGO opposition and media involvement. It
concludes with lessons that the process may provide to any
others in this position.
The course of events is very familiar to anyone who has
been involved in the various eras of transgenic controversy.
The comment that one MP had eaten raw transgenic maize
to prove that there was nothing to fear about the technology
has echoes of a certain British MP, his daughter and a hamburger (e.g. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/369625.stm).
They authors of this report conclude that ‘The need for
sustained political support to the whole process of deploying
biotech products from research to commercialisation cannot
be overstated’.
The overall tone of the document is very supportive of
modern biotechnology and it stresses the significant role to
be played by such science in aiding the battle against food
insecurity in developing countries. This is understandable
since this publication was prepared under the aegis of
ISAAA, the International Service for the Acquisition of
Agri-Biotech Applications, an organisation funded by a consortium of donors, many from the commercial sector, but
with some public institutions. Kenya is the only government
listed among the direct sponsors and is considered to be a
vi
leading nation in the exploitation of biotechnology. The
Kenyan Biotechnology Development Policy (2006) states
that:
‘The government will adopt productivity-enhancing agricultural biotechnologies that can substantially reverse the
fast deteriorating food security and nutrition, farm incomes,
spawn the agro-industry and reduce environmental
degradation.’
Opponents of transgenic methods in agriculture will not be
slow to point out the contrast of this document with that published by the IAASTD (International Assessment of
Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology
Development) in 2009. This report states:
‘Modern biotechnology has developed in too narrow a
context to meet its potential to contribute to the small and
subsistence farmer in particular. As tools the technologies
in and of themselves cannot achieve sustainability and development goals.’
Therein lies the division of views that seem fundamentally
irreconcilable. It is unlikely that the enthusiasm and predictions represented in this present report will change any individual’s views of biotechnology.
In summary, it is more likely that the audience for such a
detailed narrative will be limited to those with an academic
and specific interest in the political factors determining the
uptake of GM technology. Those aiming to exploit the technology already know the issues only too well.
Jim M. Dunwell
E-mail:
doi:10.1093/aob/mcq242
Atlas of the potential vegetation
of Ethiopia
Ib Friis, Sebsebe Demissew and
Paulo van Breugel. 2010.
Copenhagen: Royal Danish
Academy of Science and Letters.
400DKK (approx. £45, US$75;
paperback). 306 pp.
Floras and vegetation maps are the
basis of understanding the ecology
and botany of every country.
Engler published the first map of
the vegetation of Africa in 1882,
defining the separation of African vegetation into firstly the
forest regions, and secondly grasslands and wooded
grasslands, a basic distinction that not surprisingly has
remained intact. He refined his concepts over the years,
putting
the
work
into
an
evolutionary
and
phytogeographical context with his field research,
particularly in East Africa, publishing a particularly
important paper in Annals of Botany (Engler, 1904). Over
Developing a biosafety law:
lessons from the Kenyan
experience
M. Karembu, D. Otunge, D.
Wafula. 2010.
Nairobi, Kenya: ISAAA AfriCenter.
Free online publication (http://www
.isaaa.org/resources/publications/).
66 pp.
Annals of Botany 107: vi–vii,
Available online at www.aob.oxfordjournals.org
(...truncated)