Policies for integrated seed sector development: insights from case studies in Africa and Asia

Abstract

CONTEXT

To enhance agricultural productivity in the face of global challenges, the role of seed is paramount. Recent literature calls for a pluralistic seed sector, integrating various seed systems, to meet farmers' diverse seed needs. Achieving this goal requires seed policies that recognize the complementarity of farmer-managed, intermediary, and formal seed systems, while effectively balancing the interests of all stakeholders involved.

OBJECTIVE

This study examines the alignment of seed policies in selected countries with the principles of integrated seed sector development (ISSD) to promote a pluralistic seed sector. It also identifies the critical conditions in policy formulation that facilitate this development.

METHODOLOGY

The analysis concentrated on the national seed policies of Ghana and Uganda and seed sector strategies of Ethiopia, Nigeria, and Myanmar. These documents were assessed for alignment with indicators derived from eight ISSD guiding principles. The policy and strategy development processes were mapped using a multistakeholder engagement framework.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In all five cases, it was found that stakeholders were familiar with the concept of ISSD and that the seed sector policies also generally align with the ISSD principles. These principles emphasize pluralism by recognizing the roles of farmer-managed, intermediary, and formal seed systems. They incorporate diverse stakeholder interests, support various crop groups, and promote entrepreneurship through multiple seed business models. The extent of alignment is moderated by the interests and priorities of participants in the policy formulation process. Divergence features importantly in capturing diversity and making stakeholder engagement contribute to pluralistic seed policy. Sponsorship of related investments in seed sector development in all five case studies was foreign, making seed policy formulation open to accompanying interests. Navigating trade-offs in these and also domestic interests and finding synergies is challenging in the complex contexts of the seed sector. While public and private sector roles are acknowledged, further investment is needed for the development of public-private and private business models for tasks traditionally handled by the public sector.

SIGNIFICANCE

The study's results do not provide an evaluation of the seed policies in question, nor do they include a counterfactual to the application of ISSD guiding principles. What the study does offer are valuable insights for seed sector stakeholders and policymakers on how to promote pluralistic seed policy, enhance multistakeholder engagement in seed policy formulation, and a measure of the applicability of ISSD guiding principles in diverse contexts.