Unethical distribution to Japan of Yacon held by CIP

Commentary from GRAIN: Did someone say that UPOV (plant breeders' rights) does not restrict access to genetic resources?

UNETHICAL DISTRIBUTION TO JAPAN OF YACON (Smallantus sonchifolius) HELD IN TRUST BY CIP

by Zosimo Huaman

The little known crop called YACON (Smallantus sonchifolius) (Poepp. & Endl.) H. Robinson is cultivated in the Andean region for centuries. The area of origin of this crop is postulated to be along the eastern Andean slopes, from the Apurimac river basin (12° S) in Peru to the La Paz river basin (17° S) in Bolivia. The largest genetic diversity of this crop has been found in southeastern Peru, in the valleys around Cusco and east of Puno[1], where still exist many traditional varieties selected by Andean farmers. This crop produces sweet and crunchy storage roots that are usually eaten raw as a fruit in the Andes. Its high fructose content makes it a very interesting natural sweetening source with a high percentage of insulin[2]. The leaves are reported to have antidiabetic properties[1]. All these attributes of yacon make it one of the "Lost crops of the Incas with promise for worldwide cultivation"[2].

In November 1999, five traditional Peruvian varieties of yacon held in trust in the genebank at the International Potato Center (CIP) in Peru, were distributed to Japan violating ethical principles. These accessions are all from Peru and are identified as CIP 205002, 205004, 205009, 205028, and 205029.

In an email sent to CIP employees to justify this shipment, Dr. Wanda Collins (WC), Deputy Director General for Research, stated: "In November of 1999 CIP received a request, through INRENA, to supply germplasm of yacon to a visiting Japanese delegation. We replied that we could not release the germplasm directly to the Japanese without an import permit and a phytosanitary certificate. Those are CIP requirements for international distribution. We also told them that the yacon was of unknown health status and, while we have released such material in the past, we prefer not to provide material for international distribution from CIP if we don't know the health status. Thus we were unable to meet Japan's request for a direct international distribution. We told INRENA that we would be very pleased to provide the yacon directly to Japan as soon as we received an import permit and the phytosanitary certificate." This last sentence shows quite clearly that the genetic materials would be sent directly by CIP to Japan if those two documents accompanied the request. Therefore, WC violated the rule that "CIP will not ship germplasm that is not free of pathogens for which it routinely tests" as stated at the end of page 6 of the CIP document on "Genetic Resources, Biotechnology and Intellectual Property Rights"[3]. There is no publication where CIP advertises to have accessions of yacon free of viruses. WC admits that "This is indeed why we declined a request to ship directly to Japan" in an email sent to me very recently.

For more than 20 years, all the shipments of genetic resources from CIP were made with the knowledge of the Quarantine and Germplasm Committee. WC created the Germplasm Acquisition and Distribution Committee (GADC) and has been the Chairperson. Since she joined CIP, she had the final word on distribution and other issues related to genetic resources conserved at CIP. She also appointed Dr. Noel Pallais as the head of the unit in charge of the germplasm distribution and empowered him to approve routine distribution. Dr. Noel Pallais made public complains at CIP on the fact that yacon genetic resources that were delivered to INRENA (National Institute for Natural Resources in Peru) were in fact sent to Japan. He presented the document acknowledging the reception of these materials by Japanese officials.

In the email sent to me, WC said that "The attached documents are addressed to Peru and they acknowledge receipt from Peru; they do not mention CIP or receipt of any materials from CIP. This has already been pointed out by an official of the Japanese national genetic resources program". Therefore, there is no doubt that the yacon germplasm was sent to Japan.

As a former potato genebank manager at CIP, I was a member of the Quarantine and Germplasm Committee for many years. Because of my disagreements with the changes in CIP's policy related to genetic resources, I decided not to be part of the GADC because these GADC meetings were used only to inform us on the decisions taken by WC. In one of the monthly GADC meetings after the yacon shipment, Dr. Pallais raised the issue for discussion and WC refused it and challenged him to show any proof that the yacon accessions were sent to Japan. She insisted that for CIP records these materials went to INRENA. In the email sent to me, she said "Dr. Pallais failed to report the distribution of yacon to Peru in the annual 1999 report; nor did he mention it in either of the two GADC meetings in November following the distribution, both of which he attended. We have corrected these failures in the record-keeping of ADU". I hope the memories of other GADC members remain unchanged.

In the email sent to CIP staff, WC emphasized that for distribution of germplasm within Peru there is no need for the import permit, the phytosanitary certificate, and the signature of a Material Transfer Agreement. She appears to have found a way to keep her hands clean in this non-transparent distribution of yacon to Japan. She used the rule # 3 of the summary of protocols on genetic resources that states: "No material will be distributed from CIP outside Peru which has not been clean from all pathogens for which the Center routinely tests". The problem is that all the details of this shipment were discussed with the Director of INRENA, Dr. Josefina Takahashi, who is also the Peruvian representative of CIP's Board of Trustees. It is therefore, most unfortunate and shameful that those Peruvian genetic resources were sent violating ethical principles both at CIP and INRENA. WC said in her email to CIP staff that, "In both transfers, one from CIP to INRENA and one from INRENA to the Japanese recipient, the yacon material was transferred in complete conformity with all existing rules and regulations. There has been no wrong-doing on anyone's part, neither CIP's nor INRENA's and certainly not Japan's. Even had CIP originally agreed to the Japanese request and distributed the material directly to the delegation, there would not have been any violation of the FAO agreement, only of CIP's internal policy of requiring an import permit and a phytosanitary certificate. Japan has a legal right to request and receive any of our germplasm. I have been unable to make Dr. Pallais understand these points".

It is a standard requirement for the legal movement of germplasm worldwide to have an import permit from the recipient country and a phytosanitary certificate from the donor country. It is not "only of CIP's internal policy" to require such documents as WC indicates above. The Japanese authorities should show the documents that accompanied the yacon shipment. If INRENA did not include the import permit, the phytosanitary certificate, and the signed Material Transfer Agreement, could any one say that the yacon shipment to Japan was legal?

This yacon shipment is a clear violation of the CGIAR ethical principle on Trusteeship of Genetic Resources that indicates that: "As trustees of genetic resources the CGIAR Centers recognizes their responsibility to be impartial, transparent and fair in their administration of the trust, to respect and observe national regulations and international conventions, ...and in making it readily available for use for the public good."

The question is if this bypassing of ethical principles by CIP's management was to facilitate a valuable gift to an important CGIAR donor that is strongly interested in this potential new economically important crop. Drs. Masaru Niwa and Eiichi Inoue from the School of Agriculture at Ibaraki University, Japan, gave a seminar at CIP in Lima on September 2000. They indicated that the area cultivated with yacon in Japan has been greatly increased in recent years and this new crop was utilized as fresh vegetable, pickles, juice, etc. They also indicated that using the very few clones of this crop introduced in the 1980s, the National Shikoku Agriculture Experiment Station released the first commercial variety named "Sarada-Otome" on August 25, 2000. During the discussion of that seminar, I asked if it would be possible that Japan send germplasm of "Sarada-Otome" to be tested in Peruvian farmers' fields. The answer was negative because of breeder's rights. Is it fair that the countries where a crop plant was originated have to be denied access to this new derivatives? When are the industrialized countries going to accept similar value to farmer's rights?

I make a petition to the Japanese authorities, "The Association of Yacon Researchers", NGOs and the general public of Japan. Please contribute to establish a fair trade between industrialized countries and developing countries rich in biodiversity. We all have to protect the biodiversity for future generations. This will only be feasible if we complement current efforts to conserve the biodiversity both ex situ and in situ. Japan could greatly contribute to the in situ conservation of yacon genetic resources by providing germplasm of "Sarada-Otome" to Andean farmers who will produce in the Andes all the yacon needed in Japan. The breeder who developed this variety could have a share of the profits, and Japan could dedicate their land for other crops or uses. I strongly hope that such a magnificent example would initiate a new century with equal sharing of the benefits of using genetic resources.

CIP and the other CGIAR centers contribute a lot in increasing food security in developing countries and to conserve the genetic resources of the most economically important crops. This is possible thanks to the funding provided by the international community. The violation to any of the CGIAR ethical principles related to genetic resources will jeopardized its existence. The one on equity says: "The CGIAR works for the attainment of equity in the conservation, sustainable use and the sharing of the benefits derived from genetic resources."

Dr. Zosimo Huaman February 7, 2001 Lima, Peru zhuaman(at)hotmail.com

REFERENCES

[1] Grau A. And Rea J. 1997. Yacon (Smallantus sonchifolius) (Poepp. & Endl.) H. Robinson. In: Hermann N. and J. Heller, editors. Andean Roots and Tuber Crops: Ahipa, arracacha, maca and Yacon. Promoting the conservation and use of underutilized and neglected crops. 21. pp. 199-242. Institute of Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research, Gatersleben / International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, Rome, Italy.

[2] National Research Council. 1989. Lost Crops of the Incas: Little Known Plants of the Andes with Promise for Worldwide Cultivation. National Academy Press. Washington, D.C..

[3] International Potato Center . 1998. Genetic Resources, Biotechnology and Intellectual Property Rights. Office of the Deputy Director General for Research, International Potato Center, November, 1998