Addis Ababa Declaration on Biosafety Concerns regarding Artificial Intelligence and Genetic Engineer
ADDIS ABABA DECLARATION ON BIOSAFETY CONCERNS REGARDING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND GENETIC ENGINEERING IN AGRICULTURE AND FOOD SYSTEMS
ADOPTED AT THE NATIONAL WORKSHOP ON “AI AND GENETIC ENGINEERING: UNDERSTANDING, TRENDS, AND BIOSAFETY CONCERNS”
ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA
ADDIS ABABA DECLARATION ON BIOSAFETY CONCERNS REGARDING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND GENETIC ENGINEERING IN AGRICULTURE AND FOOD SYSTEMS October 1,
AddisAbabaDeclarationonBiosafetyConcernsregardingArtificial IntelligenceandGeneticEngineeringinAgricultureandFood Systems
Adopted at the National Workshop on “AI and Genetic Engineering: Understanding, Trends, and Biosafety Concerns”
AddisAbaba,Ethiopia—October1,2025
1 Preamble
We, the participants of the National Workshop on “AI and Genetic Engineering: Understanding, Trends, and Biosafety Concerns,”heldinAddisAbabafromSeptember30to October 1, 2025, convened by MELCA-Ethiopia with the technical and financial support of the African Centre for Biodiversity (ACB), and comprising representatives from government institutions, academia, civil society organizations, indigenous communities, marginalized groups and farmers’ associations, youth issue this Declaration as the collective voice of Ethiopian stakeholders committed to ensuring that Ethiopia’s food and agricultural future remainssovereign,ecologicallysustainable,nutritionallydiverseandpeople-driven.
During our deliberations, we have critically examined emerging global trends in Genetic Engineering (GE), New Genomic Techniques (NGTs), and Artificial Intelligence (AI)—particularly their increasing application to indigenous and strategic Ethiopian crops through accelerated, non-inclusive processes of modification, quick track approval, and introduction.
While acknowledging the potential benefits of technological innovation, we affirm that Ethiopia’s biodiversity, cultural values, food and nutritional security and sovereignty and traditionalknowledgesystemsmustneverbecompromisedinthepursuitofpseudoprogress.
We note with great appreciation the government efforts to ensure biosafety by ratifying the Cartagena Protocol onBiosafety(2000),enactmentandrefinementofthebiosafetyproclamation (896/2015) and associated enforcement mechanisms and subsidiary instrument, renewed commitment of the Honorable MembersoftheHouseofPeoples’Representativestouphold and strengthen biosafety measures, and we also commend the Environmental Protection 4 | Page
Authority (EPA) for its ongoing efforts—despite limited resources—to ensure biosafety and environmentalprotection.
Recognizing that ensuring biosafety requires collective effort, partnership, and solidarity amongallnationalandcontinentalactors,
Strongly underscoring that Ethiopia’s & largely African agriculture and food system heritage is deeply rooted in diverse indigenous crops, traditional farming practices, and community-basedknowledgethathavesustaineditspeopleandbiodiversityformillennia.
We, the participants of this Workshop, hereby issue thisDeclarationtoarticulateourshared concerns, principles, and policy demands aimed at safeguarding food sovereignty, biosafety, andethicalinnovation—forEthiopiaandforAfrica.
2 KeyConcernsIdentified
2.1 GeneticandCulturalHeritageatRisk
Ethiopia is a globally recognized center of origin and diversity for crops such as teff, enset, coffee,sorghum,maize,Ethiopianmustard,etc.Traditionalseedselection,sharing,andrituals decline as patented seeds dominate and resulting loss of land races. Furthermore, thereisahigh possibility to negatively impact soils and other beneficial insects. Unregulated genetic interventions threaten these crops through genetic erosion, verticalandhorizontalgeneflowand subsequent contamination that may result in loss of landraces and genetic diversity. In addition buildup of pest resistance, commodification, and foreign appropriation—putting both biodiversity and cultural heritage at risk. Biodiversity and cultural heritage are deeply interconnected, as traditional knowledge, beliefs, and practices often arise from—and help sustain—the unique ecosystems that communitiesdependon.ThusGeneticmodificationofsuch strategic crops, withoutrobustbiosafetysafeguardsandadherencetotheprecautionaryprinciple, endangersEthiopia’suniqueecological,geneticresourcesandculturallegacy
2.2 AgroecologicalDisruption
The unregulated deployment of GE and NGTs risks disrupting indigenous seed systems, ecological balance, and community-based resilience—undermining the foundations of sustainablefarmingandfoodsecurity.
2.3 CorporateCaptureandExternalControl
The growing influence of corporate-led innovation, elite lobbying, and opaque partnerships jeopardizes democratic governance, local autonomy, and national sovereignty over food and agricultural systems and biosafety related policies. Patented seeds prevent saving/replanting; farmersrelyonimportsandcontracts.
Ethiopia currently lacks the institutional, technical, and legal capacity as well as collective understanding and wisdom to independently assess, monitor, advocate and regulate emerging geneticengineeringandAI-basedagriculturaltechnologies.
There is a growing tendency to sideline homegrown, agroecological, andtraditionalsolutionsin favor of externally driven genetic and technological interventions—threatening and dismissed time-tested indigenous systems of knowledge and production in favor of “corporate science.”
GM adoption can disrupt cultural seed heritage, marginalize women and indigenous practices, and weakensocialcohesionaroundfarmingtraditions allkeyaspectsofEthiopian ruralidentity.
2.6 HealthandFoodSafetyProblems
We have a great health concerns that potentially links to toxin, herbicides residue, allergenicity anddigestionconcerns,antibioticresistance,unhealthyadditives,lossofnutritionaldiversitythat is expressed in high prevalence of malnutrition. Even when acute toxicity isn’t proven,
3 | Page
precautionary food safety measures are justified. Furthermore, the indigestibility issues of stalked are also associated with livestock feed and demands deep inspection. Weak monitoring leads to accumulation of chemical residuesandfoodinsecurityovertimeinourfoodsystemthat couldleadtoirreversiblepublichealthdamage.
3 DeclarationofCorePrinciples
Weaffirmthefollowingguidingprinciples:
3.1 BiodiversityasaNationalCommons
Ethiopia’s genetic resources and the traditional knowledge associated with them are public goods, not commodities. They must remain under the custodianship oftheEthiopianpeopleand beprotectedfromprivatizationandforeigncontrol.
3.2 HomegrownSolutionsFirst
Agricultural challenges mustbeapproachedthroughlocal,traditional,naturalwaysandbased on globally recognized agroecological practices approach that globally recognized as science, practice, and movement based on its 10 Elements (FAO, 208) and 13 principles endorsed by High level Panel of Experts (HLPE) of the UN Committee on World Food Security (2019), as “an agroecological pathway grounded in biodiversity, farmer autonomy, system-resilience and local ecological knowledge and genetic resources rather than adopting GMO/industrial-monoculture models that risk dependency,biodiversityloss,andtechno-lock-in. Agroecology offers sustainable yields, promote circular and low external inputs ecological stability and food sovereignty in the long term.” as a first priority GE and NGTs should be considered only when such methods prove insufficient—and only under strict, transparent, and sovereignbiosafetyoversight.
All technological interventions must adhere to the precautionary principle, ensure public accountability, and guarantee meaningful participation byfarmers,pastoralists,marginalized groups, consumers, women and youth, CSOs, scientists, and local communities in decision-makingprocessesandopenaccesstofeedback,informationanddecisions.
3.4 SovereignAgriculturalDevelopment
Ethiopia must retain full sovereign control over its agricultural research, seed systems, and food policies, resisting external or donor pressures that undermine national interests.Introduces foreign corporate control over seed and input chains, eroding national decision-making and farmer autonomy contradictingAfrica’sModelLawonBiosafetyandEthiopia’sBiosafety Proclamation(896/2015)whichprioritizesovereigntyandprecaution.
We call on resisting opaque ill fitted partnerships that pose risks to democratic governance and nationalsovereignty,includingamongothersthefollowing:
✔ Donor-driven research trials where foreign institutions or companies introduce genetically modified organisms (GMOs) under expedited or conditional approval frameworksorclandestinepersonalinterestbasedpromotionalresearchcontracts.
✔ Technology transfer agreements that embed proprietary seed systems and input dependencies,limitingfarmerautonomyandundermininglocalinnovation.
✔ Closely investigate and monitor the soundness of material transfer and research agreement that exposed our key genetic material in the pretext of knowledge building, improvement of productivity and technology transfer to the interest and manipulation corporatesofuniqueandstrategiccropsandanimalgeneticresources,
We are very concerned that such arrangements often bypass inclusive consultation and create asymmetrical power dynamics where multinational corporations influence seed laws, biosafety
protocols, and research agendas. The result is ashiftfromfarmer-ledsystemstocontract-bound, input-dependentmodelsthaterodetraditionalpracticesandbiodiversity.
3.5 ResistingDisinformationandTechnologicalHype
We reject disinformation and media narratives that present genetic modification or AIas“silver bullet”solutionswhileignoringlong-termecologicalandsocialrisks.
Impose an immediate moratorium on the use, release, and commercialization of GE/NGT-derived varieties of teff, enset, coffee, sorghum, maize, Ethiopian mustard, cotton, andotherstrategiccropsuntilEthiopiaestablishesastrong,sovereignbiosafetycapacity
● Clarify on contained use and confined use and conflict of interest by restricting involvementofnotcertifiedindividualsandnotaccreditedinstitutions
● Minimize or avoid conflicts of interests and close loophole for contract andpromotional researchthatbenefitsindividualsbutputatriskthenation.
● Provide option to EPA for contract an independent capable international institutions for conducting risk assessment and /or helpinreviewingofthebiosafetydossier.Thecostof suchundertakingshouldbecoveredbyproponents
● Elaborate the risk assessment guidelines to include multigenerational and epigeneticrisk assessment. Mandatory labeling of GE/NGT products to support consumer choice and traceability, thresholds for herbicide and antibiotic residues in food and feed as well as .Independent toxicological and nutritional studies prior to commercialization, especiallyforcropsenteringschoolfeedingprogramsorvulnerablepopulations.
● Broaden the stakeholder bases of the national Biosafety Committee to include farmers, consumers, CSO, higher learning institutions and competent professionals to make it inclusiveandtransparent.
● Make public notice more proactive, accessible and have sufficient time and enabling environmentformeaningfulreviewandreflections.
● Protect Agroecological Zones through GMO-Free Designation through authorization of Regional States and communities to declare GMO-Free Zones to safeguardbiodiversity,culturalheritage,andecologicalintegrity
● Build capacity and ensure the mainstreaming of agroecology into agricultural extensionandappropriatesectoralprogramsandpolicies
● Targeted outreach to women, youth, and marginalized groups using different approach including digital platforms (Mobile-based biosafety alerts and educational messages (SMS,IVR),massmedia.
| Page
● Maximize the conservation of indigenous agricultural and biodiversity knowledge for better utilization andco-creationofknowledgeforenhancedfoodandagriculturalsystem transformation.
5.4.2 Put in place robust, transparent and accountability mechanisms, such as:
➔ A national public registry of all GE/NGT-related applications, agreements, trials, and approvals, accessible to civil society and local communities as wellasthegeneralpublic inaproactiveandaccessiblemanner.
➔ Organize a system for participatory m &E system of biosafety-related partnerships, Contained, confined field trials, and commercial release and post releaseassessmentand inspectionsinvolvingfarmers,indigenousrepresentatives,andindependentscientists.
➔ Set Mandatory criteria/directives for certification, registration and management of conflict-of-interest & disclosures for institutions and individuals involved in GE/NGT riskassessment,research,promotionorreviewprocesses.
➔ Establish Independent review panels for high-risk or strategic crop interventions,with clearseparationfrompromotionalordonor-linkedentities.
These measures would help safeguard Ethiopia’s food sovereignty andensurethattechnological innovationservespublicinterest,notprivateprofit.
Urge the Government of Ethiopia to ratify the Nagoya–Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, ensuring accountability for harmscausedbyGMOsandrelatedtechnologies.
7.2 StrengthenAfricanSolidarityandLegalFrameworks
We call upon African networks and institutions—including the African Centre for BiodiversityandAfricanUnionbodies—to:
● Update and elevate the African Model Law on Biosafety to address emerging technologies and threats. Mobilize for its formal adoption as an African Protocol on BiosafetyundertheAfricanUnionframework.
● Facilitate multigenerational and epigenetic risk studies, which are currently beyond thescopeofmostnationalinstitutions.
● Support joint review mechanisms for transboundary technologies and trials, reducing duplicationandenhancingscientificrigor.
● Partnerships with African institutions such as the African Center for Biodiversity, African Biodiversity Center, Alliance for Food Sovereignty, African Union Development Agency (AUDA-NEPAD), African Biosafety Network of Expertise (ABNE), and African Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) could provide technical support, policyguidance,andpeerlearningplatforms.
Conclusion
We, the undersigned participants of this Addis Ababa Declaration, reaffirm that Ethiopia’s agriculturalandtechnologicaldevelopmentmustbe:
We commit ourselves to advancing a sovereign, ethical, and precautionary approach to biosafety and innovation—ensuring the well-being of Ethiopia’s people, ecosystems, and future generations.
We further call upon the Government of Ethiopia, civil society, academic institutions, farmers’ organizations, and continental biosafety advocates to unite their efforts—andinvite international partners to take meaningful, responsible actions in support of the principles and demandsoutlinedinthisDeclaration.
IssuedinAddisAbaba,Ethiopia,October1,2025
Annex1:WorkshopParticipants
Typeof Organization
Organization
Name
Government HouseofPeoples’Representativesof FDRE Honorable,TesfayeBangu
Government HouseofPeoples’Representativesof FDRE Honorable,AlemuDamtew
Government HouseofPeoples’Representativesof FDRE Honorable,BartemaFikadu
Government EnvironmentalProtectionAuthority (EPA)
Government EnvironmentalProtectionAuthority (EPA)
Government EthiopianIntellectualPropertyAuthority
Government EthiopianStandardAuthority
Government EthiopianBiodiversityInstitute
Government MinistryofHealth
Government OromiaEnvironmentalProtection Authority
