www.elikadura21.eus

ELFUTURODELAALIMENTACIÓNYRETOSDELAAGRICULTURAPARAELSIGLOXXI:Debatessobrequién,cómoyconquéimplicacionessociales,económicasyecológicasalimentaráelmundo.

THEFUTUREOFFOODANDCHALLENGESFOR

AGRICULTUREINTHE21stCENTURY:Debatesaboutwho,howandwithwhatsocial,economicandecological

implicationswewillfeedtheworld.ELIKADURARENETORKIZUNAETANEKAZARITZARENERRONKAKXXI.MENDERAKO:Munduanork,nolaetazer-nolakoinplikaziosozial,ekonomikoetaekologikorekinelikatukoduenizangodaeztabaidagaia

Sovereignty,HumanSecurityandGlobalisation:TheCaseofSeed

SovereigntyinSub-SaharanAfricaClareO’GradyWalshe

Paper#24

Apirila–Abril–April24,25,262017

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

1

Sovereignty,HumanSecurityandGlobalisation:TheCaseofSeedSovereigntyinSub-SaharanAfrica

ClareO’GradyWalshe

(Notforcitation)

Introduction

Globalisationhaschallengedtraditional,state-centred,domestic-orientednotionsof sovereignty. New actors, such as international organisations, transnationalactors, multi-national corporations, non-governmental organisations, andphilanthrocapitalists have emerged to challenge the traditional conception ofstatesovereigntyoverdomesticpolicymaking.Howcanwebestunderstandthechallenges posed by these new actors to the traditionalways of thinking aboutdomesticstatesovereignty?Iusethreedominantandcompetinginterpretationsof sovereignty in the contemporary globalisedworld – hyperglobalism, realism,andtransformationalismasaheuristicdevice toexaminewhich, ifany,of theseinterpretations best captures domestic decision-making processes. To do so, Iexamine seed sovereignty in Sub-Saharan Africa. Using in-depth unstructuredinterviewsandacomparativecase-studymethod,ItracethedevelopmentofthemostrecentseedslawinEthiopia(SeedProclamation782/2013)andKenya(Seedand Plant Varieties (Amendment) Act 2012. These laws vary in the degree towhich theyenshrinedomestic state sovereigntyover seedpolicy.Whatexplainsthedifferencesbetweenthem?Whatwerethemotivationsofthedifferentactors(State,IOs,TNAs,NGOsandfarmers)ineachcaseinbringingforwardanewseedlaw? I find that domestic sovereignty is increasingly shared between local,national, regional, and global authorities, but in different ways in differentcountriesanddifferent localities.Myresearchsuggests that transformationalismisausefulframeworkforassessingchangesinseedpracticesinsub-SaharanAfricaandthatithasthepotentialtobeappliedmoregenerally.

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

2

Introduction

The food sovereignty movement, despite its ambiguous etymological heritage(Grey and Patel 2014; Edelman 2014), and concerns regarding the contested‘binary nature’ of the distinction between food security and food sovereignty(Clapp2014; Jarosz 2014;Murphy2014), hasmade significant inroads in recentyears in politicising the discourse around food control and governance (LVC;McKeon 2015, Patel 2009; De Schutter 2009;McMichael and Schneider 2011).Thishasfocussedattentionbackonthecentralissuesofpower,control,risksandbenefits (Tansey 2011, Scoones and Thompson 2011) in the seed/food politicalspace. Itoccursamidst calls for the reassertionof citizen, farmerandecologicalrightsforsovereignspacesofrepossessionandrecovery(Kloppenburg2013;Shiva2013;IAASTD2009;UNSpecialRapporteuronFoodOlivierDeSchutter2009;LVCNyeleni Declaration 20071) as a counter-hegemonic force to the neo-liberalglobalising effects (McKeon 2015) of ‘shadow sovereigns’ (George 2015) in theagribusiness sector.While a considerable amount ofwork has been conducted,there are cross-disciplinary calls for empirical studies of food/seed politics, (DeJonge 2014; Murphy 2014; Rahmato 2014; Kloppenburg 2013; Scoones andThompson 2011, Alemu 2011, Di Falco 2009; Abay et al, 2009, 2011).Myworkprovidesanempiricalstudyofthissort.

I have chosen to focus on one key aspect of food sovereignty, namely seedsovereignty,recognisedasthe‘fourthresource’byLVCin2001,alongsideland,airandwater(LVC2001).ForKloppenburg(2010),“Seed isthecriticalnexuswherecontemporarybattlesover the technical, socialandenvironmental conditionsofproductionandconsumptionconvergeandaremademanifest.Whocontrolstheseed gains a substantial control over the shape of the entire food system”(Kloppenburg 2010, p, 368). UN Special Rapporteur for food, Olivier de Shutter(2009)sharpenedthefocusonthedirectrelationshipbetweenseedpoliciesandfoodsecurityespecially invulnerablecommunities intheGlobalSouth,whenhepointedly raised concerns about the ‘risk of Intellectual Property (IP) relatedmonopolyrightsneglectingpoorfarmers’needs,underminingtraditionalsystemsof seed saving and exchange, and losing biodiversity to the “uniformisationencouragedbythespreadofcommercialvarieties”(DeSchutter2009,p.2quotedinTheBerneDeclaration2014,p.14).Manyauthorsandorganisations, including(Munyi et al 2016; Munyi 2015; ACB 2015; Grain 2015; World Bank 20132;Louwaarsetal2013;Alemu2011;McMichaelandSchneider2011;IAASTD2009;Altieri 2009) added their voice to concerns regarding the risk attached tojeopardisingfarmers’seedsystems.

However, seed, as the ‘irreducible core of agriculture’ (Kloppenburg 2013), hadbecome a transworld mobile technological ‘artefact’ with the onslaught of theAgreement on Agriculture (AoA) in the Uruguay round in themid-1990s and aheretofore unmoveable sector (Murphy 2010)3 was ‘deterritorialised’ (Scholte2008) and opened to the vagaries of a global market. This effectively 1https://nyeleni.org/spip.php?article290[accessedonline10thApril2017]2http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTNWDR2013/Resources/8258024-1352909193861/8936935-1356011448215/8986901-1380046989056/WDR-2014_Complete_Report.pdf3MurphyquotedinMagdoffandTokhar,2010.FreeTradeinAgriculture:ABadIdeaWhoseTimeisDone.Chapter5,pp.103-121.

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

3

“institutionalised the process of agricultural liberalisation on a global scale byrestricting the rights of sovereign states to regulate food and agriculture” (HoltGimenez&Shattuck2011,p.111).Seedsovereigntywasnowdirectlychallengedby this global agreement as seed TNCs prepared for corporate capture andenclosureoftheirplantgeneticresources(PGRs)/seeds.TheseTNCsnowbackedbyglobalisinglaw,whichtheysuccessfullylobbiedfor(Downes2004),throughtheintellectualpropertyregimesof the ‘Union Internationalepour laprotectiondesobtentions végétales’ (UPOV 91)4 and the TRIPs agreement of WTO (Dutfield2011;Tansey2011;Downes2004)benefittedenormouslyfromthenewlegislativeregime, enjoying huge profits and increasing concentration of power throughmergers and acquisitions since (APBREBES 20175; ETC 2010; ACB 2017, 2015;Grain2015).

In recent times there has been an intensification, and further concentrationthrough a concerted agenda for ‘harmonisation’ of seed laws and policy,particularly in theGlobalSouth (Munyietal2015;Grain2005,2015;ACB2015;TheBerneDeclaration2014;ETC2010).Africa’s‘developmentcrisis’isconsideredto be at the heart of a market-led globalisation, characterised by ‘massiveinequalities in power, skewed regulative processes of state systems, economicfragilityandspatialdifferentiation’(Harrison2010,p.6),wherepoorcountriesaremandated to further liberalise their policies on trade and free flow of capital(Mathaai 2010), despite being home to some of the world’s most vulnerablepeople (UNDP Report 2007-2008), and despite considerable genetic resourcewealth,amongstothercoveted‘commodities’.

InsomecasesAfricanstructuresarefacilitatingthesechanges,suchasTheAfricanUnion and the Pan-African Parliament, while at a sub-regional level COMESA,SADC,ARIPOandOAPIarealsoworkingtocreatenewrulesfortheexchangeandtradeofseeds(ACB2015;Grain2015,p.3),whilenationalParliamentsarepassingnew seed laws, oftentimeswithout consultationwith thepeoplemost affected.African countries have been experiencing varying degrees of change in theirindigenousseedsystems,seedbodiesandseedorganisations,withtheadventofaplethoraofnewseed-relatedbodiesandenterprisesemergingandanumberofsignificant new ‘key actors’ arising both internally and externally across thecontinent (Grain2015;McKeon2015;Munyi2015;TheBerneDeclaration2014;Scoones and Thompson2011;McMichael& Schneider 2011;Odame&Muange2011; Chisinga 2011; Alemu 2011; McCann 2011; Tansey 2011). The region isexperiencing a significant and rapid juridification in the seed space, with thepotential to change agricultural practices in a profound way, with profoundconsequencesforseedsovereignty.

This raises the vexed question of the state as a key ‘actor’ in our deliberationsabout sovereignty as elucidated byMurphy (2014), when she opines that “thestate is not an easy or obvious champion of the seven pillars food sovereigntyactivists promote” (Murphy 2014, p.227), stressing the need for research toproblematise its rolemore.Thiswas thecontext inwhich Ichosetoconstructa 4Formedin1961‘itwasconceivedanddesignedbyEuropeancommercialbreedinginterests’andinstitutedintellectualpropertyrightsforplantsandplantbreeders(BerneDeclaration2014,p.11).5http://www.apbrebes.org/news/bayer-monsanto-merger-implications-south-africa%E2%80%99s-agricultural-future-and-its-smallholder?pk_campaign=NL27

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

4

study, focusing on the most recent seed laws in two Sub-Saharan Africancountries, Ethiopia Seed Proclamation (782/2013)6 and Kenya Seed and PlantVarieties Amendment Act (SPVAA 2012) 7, to identify and examine therelationship between the key actors in the seed space and their role andmotivationindeterminationsaffectingdomesticseedpolicysovereigntyindistinctlocales.

TestingCompetingTheoriesusingaComparativeMethod

I adapt and test Held and McGrew’s (2007, McGrew 2011) three competingtheories of globalisation, namely hyperglobalism, realism andtransformationalism, at the key sites (seed laws and seed policy), where thisinterpenetrationoftheprocessesofglobalisationcanbeunpackedandanalysed–Sub-SaharanAfrica.Here,itbecomespossibletoidentifytheactorsinvolved,thecoercive/persuasivenatureofpoweratplay,thewinnersandlosers(ScoonesandThompson2011),andthepatternsof inclusionandexclusion.Crucially, itallowsus to assess the degree of agency of the actors, particularly in relation to seedpolicysovereigntyinthefaceofglobalforces.

In this context, I constructedmy research design to facilitate testing the threecompeting theories of globalisation, using the theories as a lens to formulatebroadquestionssuchas-doesseedsovereigntylieatthedomesticlevelorisseedsovereigntydeterminedatthegloballevel?

I chose toadoptacomparativemethod inorder toexaminedifferentoutcomesunderdifferentconditions.Usingacombinationofqualitativemethodstoensurethat my comparative case studies were as robust as possible, I carried outextensive unstructured interviews with all relevant seed actors during myfieldworkinbothEthiopiaandKenya,combinedwithextensivedatasourcingofallavailablelegalandpolicydocuments,parliamentaryrecordsandrelatedmaterial.

Iampredominantlyinterestedinactorsandwhoendsupmakingthedecisionsinrelationtoseedsovereignty.Ichooseexampleswheretherehavebeendifferentoutcomes. I also needed to control for certain factors, such as climate, timeperiod, geography, agroecological conditions, rainfall, culture, ethnicity,institutionsandcolonialhistory.InkeepingwiththisIneededtochoosecountrieswhich were as closely matched as possible, with many similarities, but withdifferingoutcomesintermsofseedsovereignty,wheretheresearchisbestabletoexplainthevariation.

Context is important tomyresearchdesign.Forceswithinandoutsidecountriesare relevant indetermining thecomplexitiesof theprocessof seedsovereignty.That is why it is important to go beyond what some scholars call the myth of‘methodologicalnationalism’–theassumptionthatcommonalityoforigincreates‘commonindividuals’, ignoringthe‘particular, localarticulationsofrenegotiationthat can occur, in reconceptualised notions of territory’ (Nowicka and Cieslik,2014).This isparticularly important tomyresearchwherecontestedtheoriesofglobalisationarecentralandwhereterritorialityisconsideredakeyanddefining 6FederalNegaritGazette,No.27,15thFebruary2013,p.6808-6825)7TheSeedandPlantVarietiesAct,1972(asamendedin2002)ActNo.2of2002(Cap326)

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

5

elementof thisperiod. Italsosimultaneouslyservesasabufferagainstpossibleresearcher bias, given the inherent need for contrasting cases within thecomparativemethod.

Discussion

Thispaperexplorestheextenttowhichdomesticstatescanformulatesovereigndomesticpolicyinthefaceofglobalisation,focussingonseedlawsandpoliciesinKenyaandEthiopia.Itaddressesthemotivationsofnationalandlocal-levelactorsaswellastransnationalactorsindeterminingdomesticseedpolicysovereigntyinthecontextofintensifyingglobalforces.

Variouswritershavetriedtosummarisethedifferentpositionsintheglobalisationdebate over the past number of decades. Held and McGrew’s (2007) bookGlobalisation /Anti-Globalisation, Beyond the Great Divide (2007) is the firstdetailed academic work which organises the scholarship on globalisation. Theyidentify threemain theoreticalpositionsonglobalisation,namelyhyperglobalist,realist/sceptical,andpost-sceptical/transformationalistpositions.

I simplify their theoretical configuration into a simple linear spectrum, whichfacilitates the identification of the three different theories/interpretations ofglobalisationandseedpolicysovereignty(SeeFigure1).

Thisallowedmetodifferentiatebetweentheauthorsintheseedspaceasfollows:

a) The authors who primarily regard globalisation as a distinctly ‘new’phenomenon which is having considerable effect, particularly on statesovereignty,withasignificantlyincreasedroleforinternationalorganisationsandtransnationalactorsinseedpolicyarenas,notably,thehyperglobalists

b) Those authors who regard globalisation as not ‘new’, arguing that the stateremainstheprimaryactor-itssovereigntyoveritsplantgeneticresourcesremaincentraldespiteglobalisingforces–thesceptics/realists

c) Authors who take a middle view arguing that there are varying effects ofglobalisation on states exercising seed policy sovereignty – thetransformationalists.

Whilst it shouldbeacknowledged that someauthorsoverlapbetweenpositionson some issues and in some circumstances, this differentiation is a usefulanalytical heuristic device which makes it easier to access the varied positions

FIGURE1:THEGLOBALISATIONSPECTRUM

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

6

withintheliteratureonglobalisation,andgreatlyassiststhecomparativemethod.Itisneitherconclusivenorabsolute.

Central to the debate about whether the state is being eroded or not is theincreasing role of other players in global political arenas, namely internationalorganisations (IOs), such as UPOV, the World Bank or the World TradeOrganisation (WTO), or transnational actors (TNAs), such as transnationalcorporations(TNCs)ornon-governmentalorganisations(NGOs).Iexamineeachofthethreeperspectives,hyperglobalist,realist/scepticandtransformationalistwithregardtothesethreeaspects,namely1)thedomesticstate2)(IOs)3)(TNAs).Foreachofthethreebasicpositions,Iidentifythedifferentstancestakenoneachofthesethreeissues.SeeFigure2.

State IOs TNAs

Hyperglobalists Deterritorialised IOsset

worldwiderules

Theyoperate

worldwide

Realists State-centred IOsoperateby

state-to-state

bargaining

Vehiclesfor

stateinterests?

Transformationalists Somestatesare

strongerthan

others–US

hegemony,

ChineseinAfrica

InIOssome

statesaremore

importantthan

others

Somearemore

dominantthan

others

FIGURE2:COMPETINGTHEORIESOFGLOBALISATION

While international organisations obviously play a big part in all aspects ofglobalisation,not least in the seed space, it is important to stress that I amnottrying to find out how or why these bodiesmake the decisions they do at theinternationallevel,ratherhowtheyinfluenceseedpracticesatthedomesticlevel.

In short, I am aiming to see whether the exercise of seed sovereignty at thenational and local level corresponds to hyperglobalist, realist, ortransformationalistviewsoftheworld.

Iproposethatonbalance,itismorelikelythatstatepolicysovereigntyisneitherbeingerodedashyperglobalistssuggest,norreassertingitspoweranddominanceas the primary actor as proponents of the sceptical/realist school of thoughtclaim.Rather, I suggest that thecurrentperiod,maybebestunderstoodfromatransformationalistperspective,whicharguesthatglobalisationhas‘noparticular‘telos’ as Held and McGrew (2007) suggest, that it is transforming the state’spolicyrole,noterodingit,operatingatmultiplelevelsandnotunidirectional,thatit has positive and negative flows, and is contradictory, contingent andambiguous,resultinginamultiplicityofnew,highlydifferentiated,conflictualand

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

7

complex outcomes in different locales. There are indications of hyperglobalism,but this appears tobe far fromconcreteanduniversal. The state is adapting tosharing the space of power and therefore sovereignty with other keytransnational actors in a globalising world, leading to both integration andfragmentation occurring simultaneously and with mixed results in differentjurisdictions. Transformationalist theory provides a practicable framework toaddressthecontradictoryelementsoftheinterpenetrativeprocesseswhichoccurwhenglobalforcesinteractwithlocalrealities.

FromFoodSecuritytoSeedSovereignty

Patel(2009)notedthattheintroductionoffoodsovereigntyintothedefinitionaldebate about food security has altered the dynamic of the discussion since,forcingadiscussionaboutpower,controlandgovernanceoffoodsystems,statingthat ‘it ispossible tobe foodsecure inaprisonoradictatorship’ (Patel2009,p665).Similarlytheconceptofseedsovereigntychallengestheideathatfreedomfromseedwant issufficientby itself. It ispossibletohaveseedsecuritywithoutexercisingseedsovereignty.

Adetaileddefinitionofthetermseedsovereigntyhasonlyenteredtheacademiclexicon in recent years, with the publication of Kloppenburg’s paper entitledSeeds,Sovereignty,andtheViaCampesina:Plants,Property,andthePromiseofOpenSourceBiology(2008),basedonanalysisofthehistoricalwork intheseedspace,notablybyLVCandIndianNGO,Navdanya8.

Ina laterpublicationentitledRe-purposingtheMaster’sTools:TheOpenSourceSeed Initiative and the Struggle for Seed Sovereignty (2013), Kloppenburgcondenses the four principal and constitutive elements ofwhat he terms ‘seedsovereignty’basedontheirwork,asfollows:

Therighttosaveandreplantseed

Therighttoshareseed

Therighttouseseedtobreednewvarieties

Therighttoparticipateinshapingpoliciesforseed(Kloppenburg2013,p.13).

Hegoesontoidentifyfourkeyareas,orwhathecalls‘foundationalprinciplesofseedsovereignty’.Theseare:

Communityseedsavingandexchange–‘insitu’-dynamicconservationoffarmer

cultivars

Agroecologyandparticipatoryplantbreeding(PPB)

Legalsovereigntyovertheseed–aconcretejuridicalmandate

Opennesstoallies(ibidpp.15-17).

Seedsovereignty,thereforeisnotabouthowmanyarebeingfedorthenutritionlevelsofthefoodpeopleareeating,thoughtheseareallimportantissuesintheir

8MeaningNineSeeds,NavdanyawasestablishedbyVandanaShivain1987toprotectandenhanceindigenousseedandcropvarietiesfromcorporatecaptureinagriculture

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

8

own right. It is how those people aremaking choices in relation to the kind ofseed/food they are sowing, reaping and eating – the degree of autonomy theyhaveinthatprocess,andwhytheyaremakingthechoicestheydo.

Theimplicationofthisforsovereigntyisimportantnotjustconceptually,butalsobecause,asweshallsee,therearemanythreatstoseedsovereigntynowglobally.Italsohighlightshowinterventionsintheseedspace,beitintheformofseedaid,or poverty reduction programmes or other interventions, where seeds arebrought infrom‘outside’,havethepotentialtounderminetheseedsovereigntyofahostcountry.

TheoriesofGlobalisationandSeedSovereignty

State IOs TNAs

Hyperglobalists Deterritorialisation

–Transboundary

natureofseed

mobility

Erosionof

State/publicrolein

seed

policy/programme

UPOV,WTO,

TRIPS,AoAset

rulesbackedby

WorldBank,

IMF.

Harmonisation

oflaws

Coredutiesand

functions

derogatedto

others–

especially.TNCs.

Global

penetration

mergersand

acquisitions

Corporatecontrol

–Monsanto,Du

Pont,Gates,AGRA

andothers

Realists Statestillmain

driverofpolicy

choicesandpolicy

implementation

IOsdowhatbig

statestellthem

–

TNAsstilllookto

strong‘Northern’

stateswho

determine

outcomes

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

9

Transformationalists ‘Multipleequilibria’

Statea

disaggregated

playerbutstillhas

aroleincertain

aspects

Glocalisation–

localinitiatives

Ambiguities

withinWorld

BankandFAOre

IAASTDreport

Contradictions

withinUNrole

andsubstance

CBD,IPCC

Multidimensional

notunidirectional

technological

innovationcango

eitherway

Homogeneityand

heterogeneity

FIGURE3THREEPERSPECTIVESONGLOBALISATIONANDSEEDSOVEREIGNTY

Cross-nationalcomparisonofseedlawsinKenyaandEthiopia

Both Ethiopia and Kenya share certain potentially important characteristics,similaritieswhicharecriticallyimportantingettingtheclosest‘match’toincreasecausalinferenceinthefindings.Forexample,agricultureisthebackboneofbotheconomies,with83%ofEthiopianslivinginruralareasandengagedinagriculture(UNDAF 2011)9 and 61.1% for Kenya, (World Bank 2015)10. Both countries arelargely dependent on output from small-scale rain-fed farming and livestockproduction.Itabulatesomeofthemainsimilaritiesbelow.

Kenya Ethiopia

ExternalDebt $US16.77bn $17.02bn

GDP(basedonPPP) $139.4bn $134.7bn

ValueofExports $6.27bn $4.14bn

Agricultureas%GDP 28.9% 46%

NetODA $3.236bn $3.8bn

Povertylevelperheadof

Population

45.9%

38.9%

>25years 61% 64%

1TABLE1

9www.unfpa.org[accessedonlineapril10th2017]10http://kenya.opendataforafrica.org/ejikndd/kenya-agriculture-sheet

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

10

Statistics based on figures from:World Bank 2015, (World Bank 2013)11, 2012;CIA2014;OECD2011;UNDP2011

GeographicallysituatedinSub-SaharanAfrica(SSA),theybothhavebroadlysimilarclimatic conditions, with the SSA region being significantly exposed to theincreasing effects of climate change and forecasts for increased food insecurity,potentiallyaffectingupto250millionpeopleby2020,withwomenfaringworst(IPCC2014,2007;UNFAO2011;Toulmin2009;UNHDP2008).

Seedaidspecificallyhasbecomeanotable featureof theseedsystemsofmanyAfricancountriesovermanydecades.ForexampletheUNFAOhas implemented400seedreliefprojectsinAfricabetween2001and2003.PartsofEasternKenyahavereceivedseedaidalmostcontinuouslysincetheearly1990s,whileareasofthe central and northern highlands of Ethiopia are reported to have receivedsomekindofseedaidsince1974(Sperlingetal2008),which is in itself,amuchcontestedaspectoftheseeddiscourse(ScoonesandThompson2011).

Both countries, in keeping with the 33 million subsistence farmers across SSA,maintainvibrant informalseedeconomies,whicharepresently largelyreliantonopen pollinated varieties (OPVs) of landrace (i.e. locally adapted geneticallydiverse) varieties of farmer selected seed, in-situ, non-commoditised agrariansystems of exchange, with figures as high as 97% for Ethiopian informal seedsystems (Alemu2011,Abay2011,Di Falco andChavas 2009). This is a centrallyimportantpointtothisresearchandafundamental issueinthemuchcontestedliteraturegloballyonseedandfoodsovereignty,particularlyregardingintellectualpropertylawsandrightsastheyareemerging,andastheyarebeingappliedinanAfricancontext.AsScoonesandThompsonoutline,quotingGRAIN,“Soanytalkofseeds today, if it is not specifically about local or farmer’ seeds, implies privateseeds–seedsthatfarmershavetobuythatcomewithtightrestrictionsontheiruse”(GRAIN2008,quotedinScoonesandThompson2011,p.6).

Bothcountrieshaverecentlyinitiatedambitiousprogrammesfortheiragriculturalsectors – Ethiopia’s Growth and Transformation Plan (GTP) 2011-2015 (now instage2-GTP22015-2019),andtheGovernmentofKenya‘Vision30’,StrategyforRevitalisingAgriculture(SRA)-atenyearactionplan2004-2014,followedbythe“AgriculturalSectorDevelopmentStrategy(ASDS)2010-2020”.Newseedlawsandregulationshavebecomecentraltobothcountriesdrivetomakechangeswithinseedpracticesintheiragriculturalsectors,partofwiderplanstomovetomiddleincomecountrystatusby2025inthecaseofEthiopia(EthiopianATA2013,2015),andpartofamarketliberalisingeconomicagendaalreadyspanningmanydecadesinthecaseofKenya.

Ethiopia and Kenya are identified in the literature as important areas wherechanges currently happening in the seed space are central to an intensifyingdiscourseregardingpower,control, risksandbenefits (Tansey2011). Inordertodeterminetheextentofeachcountry’sseedsovereigntyIneededtoconstructaspecificcross-countrycomparativestudythatwouldallowclearerinsightintotheempirical evidence of seed policy and practice. Therefore, choosing Kenya andEthiopiaallowsmetocontrol fora lotofeconomic,social,political,culturaland

11http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/DT.ODA.ALLD.CD.

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

11

environmental factors. In this context, I chose to study the two most recentimportant pieces of seed legislation, namely Kenya’s Seeds and Plants Varieties(Amendment) Act (SPVAA) 2012 (Gazetted 4th January 201312) and Ethiopia’sSeedProclamation782/201313.

Thekeyquestions informingmy case study thereforebecame:Whowroteeachlaw? Howwas it drafted?What was themotivation behind the content of thelaw?Iamlookingforthekeyactorsinvolvedinbringingeachnewlawtofruition?Whowasincludedintheprocessofdeterminingitscontents?Whowasexcludedfromtheprocess?Icouldthenchartkeyactorsandeventsthatledtochangesinseed legislation in each jurisdiction. Therefore in order to test the globalisationtheoriesagainstthekeyactorsIhadidentifiedIexpectedtofindcertainresponsesdepending on whether the respondent could be considered largely ahyperglobalist,arealistoratransformationalist.Certainobviouscriteriawhichfiteachtheoreticalschoolwouldmakeobservable implicationseasier tocategoriseandthusassessandinterprettowhatextentactorscanexerciseseedsovereigntyin the face of a myriad of pressures in the seed space. I would expecthyperglobaliststoidentifywhereglobalcorporateinterestsaretakingprecedenceoverstateorother interests,realistswouldbeableto identifykeyreferencestothe state maintaining overriding power and control in decision making andtransformationalists pointing to diverse multidirectional forces at work, whereglobal and national interests inform outcomes asmuch as other actors such asTNAs of varying hues. This allowed me to tabulate and thereafter assess theextent of influencebeing exerted in the context of actual changesmade to thedifferentseedlawsinthiscase.

1:KenyaSPVAA2012

Kenya’s SeedandPlantVarieties (Amendment)Act (SPVAA2012)asenactedbythe Parliament of Kenya on January 4th 2013. SPVAA 2012 marked the firstamendmentofKenyanseedlawinadecade.Itissignificantasitisthefirstseedlaw enacted by the State there following, first, the TRIPs Agreement of (2002),second, the establishment in 2006 of Alliance for a Green revolution in Africa(AGRA), with headquarters in Nairobi, it is an alliance between the gianttransnational ‘philanthrocapitalist’ foundations, the Rockefeller Foundation andtheBill andMelindaGates Foundations (BMGF), and, third, the enactment of anewKenyanseedpolicy(2010)14.Thesethreeeventsencompassthethreemaincategories of actor previously identified namely the international organisations,transnational actors, and domestic/state actors. An examination of Kenya, arecognised key interlocutor for the Global South in general and the Africancontinentspecifically,providesagoodtestofthetheoreticalpremiseunderlyingthedifferentperspectivesonglobalisationinthisperiod,allowinganassessmentof the role and motivations of the different actors in determining outcomesaffectingseedsovereignty.

12TheSeedandPlantVarietiesAct,1972(asamendedin2002)ActNo.2of2002(Cap326)13FederalNegaritGazette,No.27,15thFebruary2013,p.6808-6825)14RepublicofKenya,MinistryofAgriculture,NationalSeedPolicy,June2010.

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

12

Beginning with an analysis of the key legal documents, laws and policies IidentifiedthemajorchangesinthefinalSPVAA(2012),whichsignificantlyalteredseedpolicysovereignty.IthentracedthepassageofthelawthroughparliamentandbeganaprocessofclarifyingtheroadtotheenactmentofSPVAA2012.

ThenewKenyanlawisanexampleofahyperglobalisedseedlaw.

Therearethreekeyareaswhichhighlight theextentofhowglobalisedthisnewseedlawis.

1.Itadherestothestrictestglobalcommerciallydrivenformalseedrules,namelyUPOV91,despitehavingnoobligationunderinternationallawtodoso.15

2. It grants proprietorial rights over ‘improved’ uniform seeds to transnationalcorporateinterests.

3. It dislocates key domestic actors, notably Kephis, a government parastatalagency with responsibility for regulating seed, which was reconstituted in theprocessofthelawbeingenacted.

SPVAA2012deliversawidebreadthofbreeders’rights,whilefarmers’rightsaregreatlydiminished.SpecificallyitisnotedbyMunyietal(2016)that“remarkably,Kenya’s2012SPVAAmendment,whichwas implementedwith theaim tomakeKenya’sPBRlawcompliantwithUPOV1991doesnotincludetheprivateandnon-commercial use exemption as required by UPOV (Munyi and de Jonge 2015,p.170). Thus, the new law leaves little room for small-holder farmers to beallowedto freelyuse farm-savedseedofprotectedvarieties” (ibid).All thecorefeatures of seed sovereignty as defined earlier, such as seed saving andexchanging across family and community, re-use of farm-saved seed andmaintenance of informal supply and distribution channels, which is widelypracticed throughout Kenya’s vast subsistence farming population (80%), formanyseed/cropvarietiesandwhichwaspreviouslyallowablewithnorestrictions,nowwillbe subject to someveryexplicitprovisionsandconditions.ThispartofSPVAA 2012 puts plant breeders’ rights directly in conflict with farmers’ rights,andunsurprisingly isthesubjectofprotracteddisputenow,notleastbecauseofits contradictionwith thenewlyagreedNationalConstitution2010 (Article113(b))16.

ThedislocationofKephis, thenationalseedregulator is importantas itwasfirstsetupwhen the seed industrywas liberalised in1996 inKenya.Now it isbeinggivenmore power through SPVAA 2012 to enforce the Act, yet simultaneouslysomeofitsfunctionscannowbeprivatised,whereforthe“purposesofenforcingthe Act, the Service may authorise competent private or public persons to

15Firstly,WTOAgreementonTRIPs(TRIPs,Article27.3(b)towhichKenyaisapartyrequiresMemberStatestoprovideIPprotectionforplantvarieties,butallowsGovernmentsawidelatitudeinitsdetermination(Dutfield2011,p.7).Secondly,KenyaisalreadyamemberofUPOV78,whichallowswiderscoperegardingPBRsandisconsideredabetteroptionforAfricancountriesthanthestricterUPOV91,whichwasdesignedwith‘developed’agriculturalsystemsinmind.DespiteSPVAA2012beingcompliantwithUPOV91,Kenyahasyettodepositaninstrumentofaccession(Munyietal2016http://www.euppublishing.com/doi/10.3366/ajicl.2016.0142)andsoisstillattimeofwritingboundonlybyUPOV78.1611(3)(b)providesthat”Parliamentshallenactlegislationtorecogniseandprotecttheownershipofindigenousseedsandplantvarieties,theirgeneticanddiversecharacteristics,andtheirusebythecommunitiesofKenya”(TheConstitutionofKenya2010).

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

13

performspecifiedfunctionsunderthisActon itsbehalf”(SPVAA2012,Section53B 1 a) b). In this way Kephis, whilst it is being promoted as the nationaldesignated authority, it is nonetheless being divested of power, through thisopeninguptoprivate interests inkeyareassignallinga looseningofdirectstateinvolvementinkeyseedregulatoryfunctions,whichwaskeenlysoughtbyprivatesector interests (USDA 2008, STAK 2007). Its enactment is an indication of theambiguity surrounding Kenya’s public sector role in negotiating a dilution of itsownpowerandcontrol.

SPVAA also introduces stricter plant variety protection (PVP) rules forcommercially-driven certification purposes as well as the legislative frameworklegitimisingtheopeningupofnationalseedsystemstocorporateandgeneticallyengineered seeds and ‘research’, as well as the deletion of any reference toagroecologyinthenewseedlaw(Section6ofSPVAA2012amendingSection8ofCap326).

Between2005and2011,whenthefinalBillwaspublishedwhichwouldbecomethe new Seed and Plant Varieties Act (SPVAA 2012), two task forces (2005 and2006)were established by theMinistry of Agriculture, two subsidiary pieces oflegislation(2009)werepassedbytheMinisterforAgriculture,whichincludedthesetting up of four important statutory committees (2009), and a National SeedPolicy (2010) was published following the deliberations of a select Seed PolicyCommittee,allofwhichinfluencedthefinaloutcome.

Themandateofthetwoseparate,‘shadow’taskforcesconstitutedbytheKenyanGovernment’sAgriculturalMinistry in 2005 and20061718, and championedbytwokeyMinistersofAgriculture,RutoandKosgei,wastoreviewthe2002SPVlaw(Cap326)anddevelopanewone,asoutlinedbyoneofthekeyactorsinvolvedinbothprocesses, namely the SeedTradeAssociationofKenya (STAK2007). STAKwasalreadyakeyactorintheKenyanseedspace,astheadvocateforseedTNCs,Monsanto, Syngenta, Kenyan Seed Company (KSC) and other commercial seedplayersoperatinginthenowburgeoningformalseedsector19inKenyaaswellastheSecretariatforEASCOM20.Separateentirelyfromthese‘shadow’taskforces,an‘official’NationalSeedPolicyCommitteewasformed,which includedawidergroupofactors,andproducedtheofficialNationalSeedPolicyDocumentinJune2010.Thereisnoindicationthatindividualmembershipbetweenthecommittee

17Inthatperiod2005-2012,threedifferentMinistersforAgricultureoversawtheeventsthatculminatedinanewseedlawSPVAA2012.TheywereKiprutoArapKirwa(2003-2007),WilliamRuto(2008-2010)andSallyKosgei(2010-2013).18RutoandSallyKosgeiexchangedportfoliosinApril2010,RutohavingbeensuspendedbyPrimeMinisterRailaOdingaonFebruary14th2010followingareportbyPricewaterhouseCoopersregardingamaizescam.KosgeibecameMinisterforAgriculture.AfewmonthslaterRutowasdemotedtoMinisterforHigherEducation,apostheheldonlyuntil19thOctober2010,whenhewasfinallyrelievedofhisministerialdutiesaltogether,afteracourtruledthathemuststandtrialoverallegationsofcorruption,basedonthenewKenyanConstitution2010.ThiswasseparatetotheICCcaseagainstRuto,whoisnowDeputyPresidentofKenyawhichwasdroppedonApril5th2016duetoinsufficientevidence.19Theformalseedsectorexpandedatarapidpacesinceliberalisation,goingfromjustthreeseedcompaniesinthe1980s,to18inthe1990sandpostliberalisationescalatingto78by2010,90in2012(AFSTABaselineStudyonSeedSectorinKenya,September2010).20USAIDfundedEastAfricaSeedCommittee

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

14

andtheshadowtask forcesoverlapped, thoughwedoknowthatSTAKwereonbothtaskforcesaswellastheSeedPolicyCommittee(STAK2007,p.2,NSP2010,Annex1,p.36).

ThesecondtaskforcewasconstitutedbytheMinistryofAgriculturein2006,witha specificmandate to revise sections of the Seeds and Plant Varieties Act (Cap326) “witha view to removingany clauses thatprevent full liberalisationof theseedindustryinKenya”(STAK2007),andwithanunderlyingobjectivetobringinspecificPlantBreedersRightslegislationalso.ThisisakeyfeatureofUPOV91andis central to theagendaof the commercial/private sector,whowere seeking tostimulatemarket liberalisation of Kenya and East Africa’s seed system, through‘improvedseed’,includingGMtechnologies,apositionnowbeingchampionedbynewly established giant ‘philanthrocapitalist’ organisation Alliance for a GreenRevolutioninAfrica(AGRA),whichhadjustestablisheditsheadquartersinNairobionJuly16th2006,andimmediatelybecameamajorseedplayerinKenya.

ThissecondTaskforcewassteeredbykeypersonnelfromthepolicydepartmentwithin the Ministry of Agriculture, namely Paul Chepkwony, S.K. Angore andMosotiAndama,backedbyotherMinistrypersonnel fromvariousdivisions, theMinistry’s legal officer, J.K Gichuru, the research and extension liaison and thehorticulture department. The newly established (2004) cross-ministerial, inter-stakeholder, donor-funded body, the Agricultural Sector Co-ordination unit(ASCU),was representedbyGicheruMucangi,while Kephiswas representedbyGladysMaina.TheothernotableadditionsincludeFrancisNdambuki,Chairpersonof PBAK21, andObongoNyachae, CEOof STAK, butwhowas also nowheadofregionalseedharmonisationbodyandEASCOMaswellaschairoftheAfricaSeedTrade Association (AFSTA) Seed Harmonisation Committee. Both Ndambuki(PBAK)andNyachae(STAK)fromthispointonbecometwokeyinfluencingactorsin the process, and are represented on every relevant body pertaining to theformulation of SPVAA 2012. The inclusion and exclusion of key actors at thiscritical juncture is clearly a notable determinant in later outcomes, given theirstatedobjectivesandtheirprecisemandatetodraftthenewseedlaw.Itisworthnoting that one farmer organisation, The Kenyan National Federation ofAgriculturalProducers(KENFAP),wasrepresentedontheSeedPolicycommittee,whichdraftedtheNationalSeedPolicydocument(2010),butwasexcludedfromthesecondtaskforce(STAK2007,p.2),whichhadnofarmerorganisationandnocivilsocietyorganisationrepresentedatthetable.

The2006taskforcemeetinginMombasafromSeptember25-282006becameadefiningmoment for changingKenya’s seed legislation.Thesolepurposeof thismeeting was to review Kenya’s Seed law (Cap 326), “including review andharmonisation of the Seeds Regulations and Plant Breeders Rights Regulations(STAK2007,p.2). Itwasthisgrouping,accordingtoSTAK,thatpreparedthefirstdraftoftheSeedsandPlantVarieties(Amendment)Bill2007andTheSeedsandPlant Varieties (Seeds and Plant Breeders’ Rights) Regulations 2007, containing‘someoftherecommendationsofstakeholders’,andwasthereafter‘presentedtotheMinisterforAgricultureforfurtheraction’(ibid).STAKhighlightkeyfeaturesintheDraftSeedBill,wherechangewasbeingcalledforwhich“wouldmakeKenya’s

21PBAKwasformedoutofaconferenceco-hostedbySTAKandUPOVin1993,andofficiallyregisteredin1996tolobbyfortheenactmentofPlantBreedersRights/IPRprovisionsinKenya

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

15

PlantVarietyProtection legislation tobecompliantwith the InternationalUnionfor Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) 1991 Convention” (ibid, p.3).Most significantly,no farmergrouporcivil societyorganisationwas includedonthese ‘shadow’ task forces’. Itwasdominatedbyglobalseed forces throughtherepresentative bodies for commercial seed companies like Monsanto andSyngenta, with close links to a key state actor and geopolitical ally, the UnitedStates.

ItisclearthatSPVAA2012asenactedinJanuary2013,markedacriticalmomentofinstitutionalandlegalchangefortheKenyanStatewhichhasalteredthepowerstructure and sovereign control of the country’s seed sector in favour ofliberalisation and increased private sector engagement. It has created a moreporousenablingenvironment, facilitatingcommercial intervention inopeningupseedmarkets, andhas introduced globalising legal instrumentswhich inevitablyaffectthepracticeofseedsovereigntyasconstitutedbythemajority80%ofthesmallholder farming population who rely on complex, dynamic andheterogeneous‘farmermanaged’(ACB2015)‘informal’seedsystems.

2:EthiopianSeedProclamation782/2013

Extendingthestudybeyondonecountryprovidedessentialvarianceatthiscriticalstage.Onecouldeasilyassumethatallcountrieswereexperiencingsimilarlevelsof globalisation, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, where conditions aresomewhat similar and external forces equally influential. However, turning toEthiopia provided some unexpected responses, and different outcomes, albeitcontradictoryandinmanycaseshighlyproblematic,butwhichprovideimportantandusefulinsightswhichrequirefurtherstudyanddeeperanalysis.

Ethiopia’smostrecentSeedProclamation782/201322,whichwassignedintolawbyPresidentGirmaWoldegiorgison15thFebruary201323, is the firstdomesticseed law in over a decade, replacing Seed Proclamation 206/2000. It is also,significantly, the first seed law since the establishment of the AgriculturalTransformationAgency(ATA)inDecember2010.TheATAemergedoutofa“two-yearextensivediagnosticstudyofEthiopia’sagriculturesector,ledbytheMinistryofAgricultureand facilitatedby theBill andMelindaGatesFoundation (BMGF)”(ATA Progress Report 2015). This new body was subsequently fundedpredominantly by BMGF, alongside The World Bank, the Royal NetherlandsEmbassy,andtheDepartmentofForeignAffairs,TradeandDevelopment(DFATD)–Canada.ThisisalsothefirstseedlawsincetheWorldBank’sproposalforafar-reaching Agricultural Growth Programme (AGP) in 2009, which was officiallylaunchedin2011.ThisAGPwasdesigned“specificallytargetingtheEthiopianseedsystem through technical support and investment” (Alemu 2011, p.70) andwasdeeply connectedwith commanding a newdirection for themulti-lateral donor 22FederalNegaritGazette,No.27,15thFebruary2013,p.6808-6825)23InApril2015,thenewSeedRegulationsweresubmittedtotheCouncilofMinisters,(VandenBroek2015,p.16),whicharenowawaitingdevelopmentandapprovalofdirectivesandtechnicalguidelinesinordertofullyimplementSeedProclamation782/2013andtheCouncilofMinistersSeedRegulation(AGRA2016).

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

16

agencies in tandem with the Ethiopian Government’s own new Growth andTransformationPlan (GTP)24.ThroughAGPtheWorldBankdelineatedUSAIDastheacknowledgedpartneroperatingina‘parallelmechanism’withresponsibilityfor strategic interventions in the seed space (World Bank 2010)25. These keyplayers all quickly established close collaboration with the newly establishedATA26 and its Transformation Agenda, considerably altering the landscape forpolicyinterventioninEthiopia’sseedsector.

However, the new Ethiopian seed law is distinctly less globalised on three keycounts.

Firstly, there is clear recognition of differentiated seed practices, where threedistinctlydifferentlevelsofseedqualityarerecognised,namelycertifiedseedforthe formal seed system, quality declared seed for the commercial but lessstringent seed system, and a total exemption for its small holder farmingpopulationallowingtheirinformalseedsystemofexchangeandsaletocontinuewithout deference to plant breeders’ royalties and the restrictions imposed inotherjurisdictionsonthecontinentatthistime.

Secondly,givingdirectrecognitiontothesmallholderfarmers,bywayofacriticalexemptionfromcompliancewithothercertificationrequirementsofthenewseedlawsignalsareluctancetoforegoallsovereigntyoverEthiopia’sseedheritagetoaglobalising rule systems,despite considerable intentby keyglobalplayers todootherwise.Itstates

“ThisProclamationmaynotbeapplicableto:

Theuseoffarm-savedseedbyanyperson;

The exchange or sale of farm-saved seed among smallholder farmers or agro-pastoralists;

Seedtobeusedforresearchpurposes;and

Forestryseed."(Part1,Section3.2of782/2013)

ThenewSeedProclamation782/2013therebyexemptsthemajoritysmallholderfarming population (97%) (Alemu 2011), from compliance with the strictglobalisedUPOV91rulessystemwhich isbeingapplied forselectedcommercialcrop varieties, and central tenets of seed sovereignty as defined earlier are 24GTPisthesuccessortopreviousgovernmentprogrammesSustainableDevelopmentandPovertyReductionProgramme(2002-2007)andPlanforAcceleratedandSustainableDevelopmenttoEndPoverty(PASDEP)(2006-2010),whichindicatedashifttowardsamarket-economyandprivatesectorinclusion.25WorldBank2010AGPProposal:http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/634931468036896288/pdf/532900PAD0REPL1Official0Use0Only191.pdf(accessedonlineAugust162016)

26ATAisgovernedbyanAgriculturalTransformationCouncilwithanExecutiveCommitteechairedbythePrimeMinisterandincludingamongstothers5membersoftheEthiopianCouncilofMinisters,andformerGatesFoundationExecutiveKhalidBomba.TheATAactsastheSecretariattothenewCouncilwithakeyobjective“toidentifysystemicconstraintsofagriculturaldevelopment.”(PartThree,Article9,RegulationNo.198/2010).

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

17

allowedtocontinueamongstEthiopia’smajorityfarmingpopulation.Theinclusionof a much clearer exemption in the revised Seed Proclamation 782/2013 isunusualinthepresenttrancheof‘enabling’legislativeseedchangesoccurringonthe continent, and is in stark contrast to themore stringent contemporaneousKenyan lawSPVAA2012,which invokedtheso-calledfarmers’privilege,aUPOV2009derivativeterm,withitsinclusionoftheterm“withinreasonablelimitsandsubjecttosafeguardingthelegitimateinterestsofthebreeder…”(Section17.1(E)SPVAA2012)whichwasdesignedtoprotectbreedersbyrestrictingfarmers’rightsto sell a commercial seedwithout recompense through royalty payment to thebreeder. 782/2013 uses no such terminology and the exemption appearsunequivocallyinfavouroftheinformalseedsystemandthefarmerswhorelyonitfor food security and income generation. This signals a stronger role for theGovernment of Ethiopia, or at least the ruling Ethiopian Peoples’ RevolutionaryDemocraticFront(EPRDF)27partyinGovernment,inestablishingitselfasamorepowerfuldomestic/Stateactor in relation to its sovereigntyover its seedduringtheformulationofthenewseedlaw.

Tracing the passage of the new seed law, from2006with the establishment ofAGRAanditsProgrammeforAfrica’sSeedSystem(PASS)intheregion,throughtoits endorsement by the House of People’s Representatives in 2013, reveals themainactorswhoinfluencedthenewlaw.Itbecameclearthattheentireprocesswas led and driven by a select seed regulatory division within the Ministry ofAgriculture (MoA), (Interview with MoA 11th November 2015) with constantreferraltotheofficeofthePrimeMinister28andtheexpertsinhisoffice.

Significantly, in the Ethiopian case, they first sought advice from their owndomesticexperts,notablytheEthiopian InstituteofAgriculturalResearch(EIAR),Institute of Biodiversity Conservation (IBC/(EBI)29 , Ethiopian Standards Agency(ESA)andEthiopianSeedEnterprise(ESE),allpublicinstitutionswithpivotalrolesas stakeholders in the seed space at a federal level (Interview with EBI, 12November 2015). Though they are not consulted again and farmers and civilsociety groups are not consulted at all, nevertheless it is at this point that the‘emphasis’onsmallholder farmersand their seed/agriculturalpracticesemergesand remained a defining feature of the subsequent Seed Proclamation, despiteglobalising pressure from varied Dutch interests and the involvement of a keyIntergovernmental Organisation (IGO)the International Development Laworganisation(IDLO)duringthecentralperiodofdraftingbetweenNovember2009and September 201030. SP 782/2013 provides a most differentiated if not 27Followingtheelectionin2010,EPRDFcontrols99.6%oftheHouseofPeople’sRepresentatives(HoPRs),thehighestlegislativeauthority,whichallowedthemtoformandleadtheexecutive,theCouncilofMinistersandthePrimeMinister,therebyallowingEPRDFtocontrolboththeexecutiveandlegislativewingsofgovernment(Lefort2013inHassenaetal2016,p.93)28MelesZenawiandafterhisdeathin2012hissuccessorHailemariamDessalegn29IBCnowknownasEBIhaditselfbeenestablishedbyProclamationNo.120/1998andwasthebrainchildofinternationallyacclaimedEthiopianscientistandgeneticistatMoA,MelakuWorede.IthousesAfrica’soldestgenebankwithmorethan73,000accessionsofdifferentseedspeciesandcontinuesapracticeof‘conservationthroughuse’,germplasmexchangebetweenthebankandfarmersthroughoutallregionsofEthiopia.30IDLOdescribesitselfas“theonlyintergovernmentalorganisationexclusivelydevotedtopromotingtheruleoflaw”BasedinRomesinceitsformationin1988,IDLO“enablesgovernmentsandempowerspeopletoreformlawsandstrengtheninstitutionstopromotepeace,justice,sustainabledevelopmentandeconomicopportunity”(ibid).ItcountsamongitsfunderstheBillandMelindaGatesFoundationaswellaslistingWilliamGatesSenior,co-chairofBMGFasamemberofitsfivestrongInternationalAdvisoryCouncil.http://www.idlo.int/[accessedonlineNovember11th2015]

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

18

‘peculiar’ (Alemu 2011) seed law in an African context in this period. It givessomethingandsimultaneouslytakessomethingawayfrommostactorsinvolvedintheprocess,excepttheexecutiveand‘USinterests’(Clapham2009)31.Itappearsthat the Ethiopian Government at this time sought to allow the strictest rulesystemtoapply for thecommercial seedsector,namely IOUPOV91and in thecriticalperiod following theirowndisputed landslideelectoral victory in201032finalised the seed law choosing to embark on an almost exclusive collaborationwith US dominated interests, curiously excluding other actors at this juncture(Hassenaetal2016),whilstatthesametimeorchestratingtheprocesstoensureadifferentiatedseedsystemwouldbeenshrinedintheEthiopianlaw,insistingonanunequivocal exemption for the farmers’ seeds aswell as a laxer certificationroute forQualityDeclaredSeed.TheEthiopianState ‘adroitly’administeredandmanagedtheirownexit fromcertainareasofsovereignseedcontrol,concedingpower toa transnationalactor (BMGF) throughATA (which isdominatedby theexecutiveon theTransformationCouncil), itskeystateally,namelyUSA,and itsmain IO funder, theWorldBank.Nevertheless certain alternativeandpluralisticoutcomes in terms of seed sovereignty were realised in this case, albeit by anauthoritarian Government in a less than transparent fashion and without fullpublic consultation. However, a differentiated law will inevitably lead to adifferentiated practice of seed sovereignty in distinct locales throughout theregions of Ethiopia, which gives cause for further empirical study. Such‘overlapping sovereignties’ (Patel 2009), and plural pathways (Scoones andThompson 2011) give some ground to the theoretical premise thattransformationalists assert is thenatureof anemergent, contingentparadoxicalglobalisation,whichappearstofindahomeintheambiguous‘developmental’33authoritarianStateofEthiopia.

Conclusion

Inconclusion,thispaperhighlightsthatdifferentiatedseedpracticesareemerginginthefaceofglobalpressuresindifferentlocations.ThenewKenyanseedlawishighly globalised, but the neighbouring Ethiopian seed law is less so.Transformationalists say that Globalisation is essentially multi-dimensional andnot unidirectional. The transformationalist perspective asserts that nationalsovereignty remains the ‘principal juridical attribute’ but is increasingly dividedandsharedbetweenlocal,national,regionalandglobalauthorities.Thisisborneoutbytheresearchinthiscase.Whatemergesare‘overlappingsovereignties’incomplex new arrangements and heightened conflict and insecurity at all levelsaccompanying thesenew ‘transgovernmental relations’. Theevidencepoints to

31ChristopherClaphamhighlightshowEthiopia’sswiftbackingoftheUS‘globalwaronterror’gaveit‘scopetopromoteitsownagenda,effectivelypresenteditselfasaforceforstabilityintheregionandinsulateditagainstpossiblelossofUSsupportwhichitrequiredformilitaryprotectionofitsborderintereststothenorthinEritreaandtotheSouthinSomalia,allofwhichfedintoUSinterestsalsotoneutraliseIslamistelements(Clapham2009,pp181-192)32Therehasbeenmuchconcernregardingthe2005and2010elections.EUclaimedthe2010electionfailedtomeetinternationalstandards(EU2010quotedinFiseha2014,p.84-85)33“DevelopmentalStateisaninstitutional,politicalcumideologicalarrangementthatevolvedfromJapan’s,postwareconomicrecoveryandwaslateradoptedbysomeEastAsiancountries”.EPRDFstartedtoarticulatethisconceptintheearly2000sandisclearlylaidoutinakeyspeechbyMelesZenawiin2006(Fiseha2014,pp.69-71).

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

19

the kind of ambiguity and contradiction that transformationalist scholarshipasserts is thecentralhallmarkof thisperiod,withaccompanyingdislocationanddestabilisation of key institutional coordinates in a highly paradoxicalglobalisation. However, because it is not fixed or concrete as hyperglobalistswouldsuggest,norstuckwithintherigidboundariesofthestate,asrealistswouldthink,itcontainsthecapacityforcounter-hegemonicresponsesandpossibilityforamultiplicity of radical responses, even reform. The fateof seed sovereignty indistinct locations, has become an important lens providing us with essentialinformationonhowpowerandcontrol isbeingorganisedoverourfoodsystem,whilstalsoindicatingsomepossibleavenuesforfutureaction.

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

20

References:

Abay, F., Bjornstad, A. and Smale, M. 2009. Measuring on Farm Diversity andDeterminantsofBarleyDiversity inTigray,NorthernEthiopia,MonomaEthiopian

JournalofScience,MekelleUniversity,1(2),pp.44-66.AfricanCentreforBiodiversity(ACB).2015.TheExpansionofthecommercialseed

sectorinsub-SaharanAfrica:Majorplayers,keyissuesandtrends.Johannesburg,SouthAfrica.www.acbio.org.za[accessedonlineFebruary3rd2016]Alemu,D.2011.ThePoliticalEconomyofEthiopianCerealSeedSystems:StateControl,MarketLiberalisationandDecentralisation.IDSBulletin,42(4),pp.69-77.Altieri,M.A.2010.Agroecology,SmallFarmsandFoodSovereignty.Monthly

Review[Online].Availablefrom:http://search.proquest.com/openview/98165d33d3bec3c0f47ca6821e49eef0/1?pq-origsite=gscholar61(3),p.102-113[Accessed6December2010]AgriculturalTransformationAgency.2015.AgriculturalTransformationAgenda

ProgressReportcovering2011-2015intheGTP1period.AddisAbaba,Ethiopia:ATA.Baylis, J., Smith, S. and Owens, P. 2011. The Globalization ofWorld Politics, AnintroductiontoInternationalRelations.5thed.NewYork.OxfordUniversityPressBerneDeclaration.2014.OwningSeeds,AccessingFood,AhumanRights ImpactAssessment of UPOV 1991, Published by the Berne Declaration, Switzerland,October2014.[accessedonlineNovember2014]Broek, J.A. van den. 2015. Business Opportunities Report Seed #4. Centre forDevelopment Innovation(CDI), Wageningen University, Netherlandshttps://www.rvo.nl/sites/default/files/2015/11/Rapport_Seed_Ethiopi%C3%AB.pdf[accessedonline10thApril2017].Chinsinga,Blessings.2011.SeedsandSubsidies:ThePoliticalEconomyofInputProgrammesinMalawi.IN:IDSBulletin42(4).Clapp,J.2014.FoodSecurityandFoodSovereignty:GettingpastthebinaryfromDialoguesinHumanGeography.,4(2)206-211;2014(accessedonlineSeptember26th2014)DaVia,E.2012.SeedDiversity,Farmers’Rights,andthePoliticsofRepeasantisation.Int.JournalofSociologyofagricultureandFood,19(2),pp.229-242.De Schutter, O. 2009. Seed Policies and the right to food: enhancing

agrobiodiversity and encouraging innovation. A/64/170 UN General Assembly,2009. http://farmersrights.org/pdf/righttofood-n0942473.pdf [accessed online23rdFebruary2013]DiFalco,S,andBezabih,Y.2010.SeedsforLivelihood:CropBiodiversityandFood

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

21

ProductioninEthiopia.EcologicalEconomics(69),pp.1695-1702.Di Falco, S. and Chavas, J. 2009. On Crop Biodiversity, Risk Exposure, and FoodSecurity intheHighlandsofEthiopia.AmericanJournalofAgriculturalEconomics91(3)pp.599-611.De Jonge, B. 2014. Plant Variety Protection in Sub-Saharan Africa: BalancingCommercialandSmallholderFarmers’Interests.JournalofPoliticsandLaw,7(3),pp.100-111.PublishedbyCanadianCentreofScienceandEducationDownes,G.2003.ImplicationsofTRIPSforFoodSecurityintheMajorityWorld,Comhlámh,Cork.https://www.comhlamh.org/[accessedonlineApril10th2017.Dutfield,G.2011.Food,BiologicalDiversityandIntellectualProperty:TheRoleoftheInternationalUnionfortheProtectionofNewVarietiesofPlants(UPOV),IntellectualPropertyIssue,PaperNo.9;QuakerUnitedNationsOffice.Edelman,M.2014.TheNextStageoftheFoodSovereigntyDebate.DialoguesinHumanGeography4(2).pp.182-184.Doi:10.1177/2043820614537153Erosion,TechnologyandConcentrationGroup(ETC).2010.WhowillFeedus?

QuestionsfortheFoodandClimateCriseshttp://www.etcgroup.org/sites/www.etcgroup.org/files/web_who_will_feed_us_with_notes_0.pdf[accessedonline2012]ETCGroup.2010.CapturingClimateGenes:GeneGiantsStockpile‘Climate-Ready

Patents’(accessedonlineDecember2nd2012)FAO1996.RomeDeclarationonWorldFoodSecurityandWorldFoodSummitPlan

ofAction.WorldFoodSummit,Rome13-17November.FoodandAgricultureOrganisationoftheUnitedNations.FAO2003.TradeReformsandFoodSecurity:ConceptualisingtheLinkages.Rome.FoodandAgriculturalOrganisationoftheUnitedNations.FAO2015.TheStateofFoodInsecurityintheWorld,Rome.FoodandAgriculturalOrganisationoftheUnitedNations.Fiseha,A.2014.DevelopmentwithorwithoutFreedom?INReflectionsonDevelopmentinEthiopia:NewTrends,SustainabilityandChallenges.Part1,chapter3,pp.67-97.AddisAbaba,Ethiopia.ForumforSocialStudies.GatesFoundationandAGRA.2015.Investinginagriculturetoreducepovertyandhungerhttp://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Resources/Grantee-Profiles/Grantee-Profile-Alliance-for-a-Green-Revolution-in-Africa-AGRA[accessedonlineOctober21st2015]George,S.2015.ShadowSovereigns–HowGlobalCorporationsareSeizingPower.CambridgeUK:PolityPress.

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

22

Grain.2005.Africa'sSeedLaws:RedCarpetfortheCorporationswww.grain.org[accessedonlineNovember11th2014].Grain;andAFSA.2015.LandandSeedLawsunderAttack,WhoispushingchangesinAfrica?www.grain.org[accessedonlineJanuary22nd2016].Grey,S.andPatel,R.2015FoodSovereigntyasdecolonisation:somecontributionsfromindigenousmovementstofoodsystemsanddevelopmentpolitics.AgricHum

Values(32)pp.431-444.Harrison, G. 2010. Neoliberal Africa: The impact of Global Social Engineering,LondonZedBooksHassena,M.,Hospes,O.,DeJonge,B.2016.ReconstructingPolicyDecision-MakingintheEthiopianSeedSector:ActorsandArenasInfluencingPolicymakingProcess.PublicPolicyandAdministrationResearch.6(2)pp.84-95.

Held,D.,andMcGrew,A.2007.Globalisation/Anti-Globalisation:BeyondtheGreatDivide,2ndEdition,Cambridge:PolityPressIDSBulletin.2011.ThePoliticsofSeedinAfrica'sGreenRevolutionIDSBulletin42(4).WileyandBlackwell,Oxford.International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology forDevelopment (IAASTD). 2009. Agriculture at a Crossroads: Global Report.WashingtonDC:IslandPressIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2014. Climate Change 2014:Synthesis Report, Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth

Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [CoreWritingTeam,R.K.PachauriandL.A.Meyer(eds)].IPCC,Geneva,Switzerland.Jarosz, L. 2014. Comparing Food Security and Food Sovereignty Discourses;DialoguesinHumanGeography,4(2)pp.168-181.SagePublications.Kloppenburg, J. 2013. Re-Purposing the Master’s Tools: The Open source seedinitiative and the struggle for seed sovereignty, Paper # 56; from “FoodSovereignty:AcriticalDialogue,InternationalConference;,YaleUniversityKloppenburg, J. 2010. ImpedingDispossession, Enabling Repossession: BiologicalOpenSourceand theRecoveryof SeedSovereignty. JournalofAgrarianChange,10:367-388Kloppenburg,J.2008.Seeds,Sovereignty,andtheViaCampesina:Plants,Property,

and the Promise of Open Source Biology

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255583305_Seeds_Sovereignty_and_t

he_Via_Campesina_Plants_Property_and_the_Promise_of_Open_Source_Biology

[accessedonlineApril10th2017]LaViaCampesina(LVC).1996.TheRighttoProduceandaccesstolandfrom

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

23

http://www.voiceoftheturtle.org/library/1996%20Declaration%20of%20Food%20Sovereignty.pdf(accessedonline22/6/2015).LVC2008.DeclarationofMaputo:VInternationalConferenceofLVC,October19-22http://viacampesina.org/en/index.php/our-conferences-mainmenu-28/5-maputo-2008-mainmenu-68/declarations-mainmenu-70/602-open-letter-from-maputo-v-international-conference-of-la-vcampesina[accessedonline22June2015].Maathai,W.2010.TheChallengeforAfrica.London,ArrowBooksMagdoff,FandTokar,B.2010.AgricultureandFoodinCrisis;Conflict,Resistance,andRenewal,MonthlyReviewPressNY.McKeonN.2015.FoodSecurityGovernance;EmpoweringCommunities,regulating

corporations.LondonandNewYork:Routledge:TaylorandFrancis.McMichael,P;andSchneider,M.2011.FoodSecurityPoliticsandtheMillenniumDevelopmentGoals.ThirdWorldQuarterly,32(1).pp.119-139.

Munyi,P.2015.PlantVarietyProtectionRegimeinRelationtoRelevantInternationalObligations:ImplicationsforSmallholderFarmersinKenya.TheJournalofIntellectualProperty,18(1-2),pp.65-85.

Munyi,P;andDeJonge,B.2015.SeedSystemsSupportinKenya:ConsiderationforanIntegratedSeedSectorDevelopmentApproach.JournalofSustainableDevelopment.8(2)[accessedonlineFebruary8th2016]Murphy,S.2010.FreeTradeinAgriculture:ABadIdeaWhoseTimeisDone.IN:Magdoff,FandTokar,B.2010.AgricultureandFoodinCrisis;Conflict,Resistance,andRenewal,NewYork.MonthlyReviewPress.AgricultureandFoodinCrisis,byMagdoffandTokharMurphy,S.2013.LandGrabsandFragileFoodSystems–TheroleofGlobalisation,InstituteforAgricultureandTradePolicy.Murphy,S.2014.ExpandingthePossibilitiesforafuturefreeofhunger.DialoguesinHumanGeography.4(2)pp.225-228;(accessedonlineSeptember26,2014).Nowicka,M.,andCieslik,A.2014.BeyondMethodologicalNationalismininsiderresearchwithmigrants.MigrationStudies(2),pp.1-15NyeleniDeclarationonFoodSovereignty,2007.NyeleniVillage,Selingue,Mali.Availablefrom:https://nyeleni.org/spip.php?article290[accessedonline10/4/2017].Odame,H.andMuange,E.2011.CanAgro-dealersDelivertheGreenRevolutioninKenya?IDSBulletin,42(4).Patel, R. 2009. What does food sovereignty look like? The Journal of Peasant

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

24

Studies36(3),pp.663-706.Rahmato,D.,Ayenew,M.,Kefale,A.andHabermannB.2014.ReflectionsonDevelopmentinEthiopia.NewTrends,SustainabilityandChallenges,AddisAbaba,Ethiopia:ForumforSocialStudies.

ScoonesIanandJohnThompson:2011,ThePoliticsofSeedinAfrica’sGreenRevolution:AlternativeNarrativesandCompetingPathways,Vol42,No4,July2011Sen,A.1982PovertyandFamines.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPressScholte, J.A.2008.DefiningGlobalisation.TheWorldEconomy.31 (11).pp.1471-1502Doi:10.1111/j.1467-9701.2007.01019.xShiva, V. 2013. The Law of the Seed, Navdanya International.http://www.navdanya.org/attachments/Latest_Publications4.pdf [accessed onlineapril2nd2015.Slaughter,AM.2004.ANewWorldOrder.PrincetonUniversityPressSperling, L. 2008. Beyond Seeds and Tools: Effective Support to Farmers inEmergencies’,SpecialIssueofDisasters.26(4).pp.283-7.SeedTradeAssociationofKenya(STAK).2007.STAKNEWS.11/06(2)TanseyGeoff,2011:“Whosepowertocontrol?SomereflectionsonSeedSystemsandFoodsecurityinaChangingWorld.IDSBulletin.42(4),pp.111-120.Toulmin,CClimateChangeinAfrica:LondonZedbooks:2009.UnitedNationsHumanDevelopmentReport(UNDP).2007.Fightingclimate

change:Humansolidarityinadividedworld.(NewYork:UnitedNations). http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-report-20078[accessedonlineApril10th2017]Worede,Melaku1991.AnEthiopianPerspectiveonconservationandutilisationofplantgeneticresources;INPlantGeneticResourcesofEthiopia,editedbyJanN.N.Engels, J.G.Hawkes, and Melaku Worede, pp. 3-21. New York, CambridgeUniversityPress.1991Worede,M2011.Establishingacommunityseedsupplysystem:communityseedbankcomplexesinAfrica,FAO2011World Bank 2013. World Bank Group Agriculture Action Plan 2013-1015.Washington, DC: World Bank.http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2013/03/1749873:bank-group-agriculture-action-plan-2013-2015.(lastaccessedonline22/6/2015).

Elfu

turodelaalim

entació

nylaAgricu

lturaenelSigloXXI.

25

NazioartekoHizketaldia

ELIKADURARENETORKIZUNAETANEKAZARITZARENERRONKAKXXI.MENDERAKO:

Munduanork,nolaetazer-nolakoinplikaziosozial,ekonomikoetaekologikorekin

elikatukoduenizangodaeztabaidagaia

InternationalColloquium

THEFUTUREOFFOODANDCHALLENGESFORAGRICULTUREINTHE21stCENTURY:

Debatesaboutwho,howandwithwhatsocial,economicandecologicalimplications

wewillfeedtheworld.

April24th-26th.EuropaCongressPalace.VitoriaGasteiz.Álava.BasqueCountry/Europe

ColoquioInternacional

ELFUTURODELAALIMENTACIÓNYRETOSDELAAGRICULTURAPARAELSIGLOXXI:

Debatessobrequién,cómoyconquéimplicacionessociales,económicasyecológicas

alimentaráelmundo.

no/npdeAbril,nqrs.PalaciodeCongresosEuropa.Vitoria-Gasteiz.Álava.PaísVasco.

Europa.

GUNTZAILEAK/COLABORAN/COLLABORATINGORGANIZATIONS

LAGUNTZAEKONOMIKOA/APOYAN/WITHSUPPORTFROM

2017koapirilaren24/26.EuropaBiltzarJauregia.Vitoria-Gasteiz.Araba.Euskal

Herria.Europa.