Cargando…

Biosafety regulatory frameworks in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda and Sweden and their potential impact on international R&D collaborations

Gene technologies, such as transgenesis and new breeding techniques (NBTs), expand the toolbox for plant breeding. Many countries in Africa, however, have long been seen as “slow adopters” of gene technologies for several reasons, one being the lack of, or overly restrictive, biosafety regulatory fr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ongu, Isaac, Olayide, Priscilla, Alexandersson, Erik, Mugwanya Zawedde, Barbara, Eriksson, Dennis
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10072116/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36987578
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2023.2194221
_version_ 1785019318007758848
author Ongu, Isaac
Olayide, Priscilla
Alexandersson, Erik
Mugwanya Zawedde, Barbara
Eriksson, Dennis
author_facet Ongu, Isaac
Olayide, Priscilla
Alexandersson, Erik
Mugwanya Zawedde, Barbara
Eriksson, Dennis
author_sort Ongu, Isaac
collection PubMed
description Gene technologies, such as transgenesis and new breeding techniques (NBTs), expand the toolbox for plant breeding. Many countries in Africa, however, have long been seen as “slow adopters” of gene technologies for several reasons, one being the lack of, or overly restrictive, biosafety regulatory frameworks. This is sometimes attributed to the influence of the precautionary-oriented EU biosafety policies. This study analyses and compares the biosafety regulatory frameworks and their implementation in Kenya, Nigeria and Uganda, and in the EU member state Sweden. The focus is on (1) the structure of the biosafety regulatory frameworks including the scope of the legislation, (2) the duration and cost of regulatory authorization for field trials with genetically modified (GM) plants, and (3) the regulatory approach to NBT products, i.e. to what extent NBT products are subject to the provisions of the biosafety regulatory framework. The data was collected through studying relevant legal and policy documents as well as interviewing regulatory officers and researchers in the respective countries. We found that the regulatory procedures in the selected countries are relatively straightforward, while the costs and duration may present a challenge. The regulatory approach to NBT products differ between the selected African countries and Sweden, the latter which follows EU regulations. The results are discussed in terms of the impact the regulatory developments in these four jurisdictions may have on international R&D collaborations involving the use of gene technologies and we also weigh the results against the common conception that Europe exerts a heavy influence on African countries in this technology field.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10072116
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100721162023-04-05 Biosafety regulatory frameworks in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda and Sweden and their potential impact on international R&D collaborations Ongu, Isaac Olayide, Priscilla Alexandersson, Erik Mugwanya Zawedde, Barbara Eriksson, Dennis GM Crops Food Research Article Gene technologies, such as transgenesis and new breeding techniques (NBTs), expand the toolbox for plant breeding. Many countries in Africa, however, have long been seen as “slow adopters” of gene technologies for several reasons, one being the lack of, or overly restrictive, biosafety regulatory frameworks. This is sometimes attributed to the influence of the precautionary-oriented EU biosafety policies. This study analyses and compares the biosafety regulatory frameworks and their implementation in Kenya, Nigeria and Uganda, and in the EU member state Sweden. The focus is on (1) the structure of the biosafety regulatory frameworks including the scope of the legislation, (2) the duration and cost of regulatory authorization for field trials with genetically modified (GM) plants, and (3) the regulatory approach to NBT products, i.e. to what extent NBT products are subject to the provisions of the biosafety regulatory framework. The data was collected through studying relevant legal and policy documents as well as interviewing regulatory officers and researchers in the respective countries. We found that the regulatory procedures in the selected countries are relatively straightforward, while the costs and duration may present a challenge. The regulatory approach to NBT products differ between the selected African countries and Sweden, the latter which follows EU regulations. The results are discussed in terms of the impact the regulatory developments in these four jurisdictions may have on international R&D collaborations involving the use of gene technologies and we also weigh the results against the common conception that Europe exerts a heavy influence on African countries in this technology field. Taylor & Francis 2023-03-28 /pmc/articles/PMC10072116/ /pubmed/36987578 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2023.2194221 Text en © 2023 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent.
spellingShingle Research Article
Ongu, Isaac
Olayide, Priscilla
Alexandersson, Erik
Mugwanya Zawedde, Barbara
Eriksson, Dennis
Biosafety regulatory frameworks in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda and Sweden and their potential impact on international R&D collaborations
title Biosafety regulatory frameworks in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda and Sweden and their potential impact on international R&D collaborations
title_full Biosafety regulatory frameworks in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda and Sweden and their potential impact on international R&D collaborations
title_fullStr Biosafety regulatory frameworks in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda and Sweden and their potential impact on international R&D collaborations
title_full_unstemmed Biosafety regulatory frameworks in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda and Sweden and their potential impact on international R&D collaborations
title_short Biosafety regulatory frameworks in Kenya, Nigeria, Uganda and Sweden and their potential impact on international R&D collaborations
title_sort biosafety regulatory frameworks in kenya, nigeria, uganda and sweden and their potential impact on international r&d collaborations
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10072116/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36987578
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2023.2194221
work_keys_str_mv AT onguisaac biosafetyregulatoryframeworksinkenyanigeriaugandaandswedenandtheirpotentialimpactoninternationalrdcollaborations
AT olayidepriscilla biosafetyregulatoryframeworksinkenyanigeriaugandaandswedenandtheirpotentialimpactoninternationalrdcollaborations
AT alexanderssonerik biosafetyregulatoryframeworksinkenyanigeriaugandaandswedenandtheirpotentialimpactoninternationalrdcollaborations
AT mugwanyazaweddebarbara biosafetyregulatoryframeworksinkenyanigeriaugandaandswedenandtheirpotentialimpactoninternationalrdcollaborations
AT erikssondennis biosafetyregulatoryframeworksinkenyanigeriaugandaandswedenandtheirpotentialimpactoninternationalrdcollaborations