NSAI Magazine by Tulika Singh

Volume 4 No.3 July-September 2011

INDIAN SEED & PLANTING MATERIAL

Message from the desk of President Dear friends, Indian Seed & Planting Material, the official magazine of NSAI has gone through a positive transformation in recent years. From mere a newsletter, it has become the knowledge source for not only seed industry but for all academic research institutes involved in agricultural research and also for Ministry of agriculture and state level organisations engaged directly with agricultural production and productivity. Each issue is coming with specific focus on a particular subject and experts in that areas have given their valuable thoughts and information which is relevant to all who are engaging themselves in different activities of agriculture. I also acknowledge the cooperation and participation of my fellow seeds men who are always willing to promote the cause of seed industry thru this publication. Through this medium we have voiced our concerns about certain issues which are going to impact the seed industry in future. In this era of technologies and information, it is important to create partnership with all stakeholders who are directly or indirectly engaged in agricultural research. Our NSAI secretariat have done an excellent job in pursuing the experts for contributions and bringing out an excellent magazine, with exceptional content, which is well sought after by all. The subject in focus was always appropriate and the layout of the whole magazine is always the best. My congratulations and best wishes to all in the NSAI secretariat particularly Dr Dadlani, Seema Sehgal and Tulika Singh who have contributed significantly to make it a success. Now I am relinquishing my office of president of NSAI and I want to thank all my GC members who all have supported me in bringing NSAI to the level where all decision making bodies in the Government are inviting us and hearing our views. We have taken few steps but lot has to be done and I wish and believe that the new GC will take the NSAI to new heights and actively participate in all the deliberations and debates with all our stakeholders. I always believe that we should have a strong medium of communication where we can demonstrate our strengths as a seed industry. We should further improve our publications and voice our concerns and issue thru this medium which is read by all who are serious about improving agricultural productivity and production. My support will always be available and I will continue to serve this organisation whole heartedly.

Jai Hind Dr M. Ramasami

CONTENTS

Message from the desk of President Indian Seed Industry : Status, Challenges & Opportunities in Field Crops - P.S. Dravid

Indian Seed Industry : Status, Challenges and Opportunities in Vegetable Crops - A S N Reddy

Implementation of Indian PPV&FR Act and Rules: Inadequacies Leading to Avoidable Litigation - M Prabhakar Rao, P Sateesh Kumar, S M Khan & Manpreet Hora

Can Private Sector R&D Reach Small Farms? - Macro Ferroni

Rice Seed Production Scenario in India - Y. Yogeswara Rao

BT Cotton in India: A Multipurpose Crop - Bhagirath Choudhary & Kadambini Gaur

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India - Carl E. Pray & Latha Nagarajan

Varietal Improvement in Maize: Development of Single Cross Hybrids in India - J. Kaul, R. Sai Kumar and Sain Dass’

Frequently Asked Questions on PPV & FR Legislation

EVENTS:

1. ASTA Delegation Visits India for Interactions with NSAI 2. NSAI – ISF – PPV & FRA Interaction 3. NSAI - SIMA - SICA Interaction Meeting between Seed Industries and Textile Industries 4. NSAI Team Welcomes NBA Chairman 5. ICAR Organises Consultation Meeting on 'Preparing Road Map for Seed Research in India’ Seed & Agriculture Statistics (Cotton up to 2010-11)

Honours & Awards

News

New NSAI Members

ABOUT NSAI National Seed Association of India (NSAI) is the apex organization representing the Indian seed industry. The vision of NSAI is to create a dynamic, innovative and internationally competitive, research based industry producing high performance, high quality seeds and planting materials which benefit farmers and significantly contribute to the sustainable growth of Indian Agriculture. The mission of NSAI is to encourage investment in state of the art R&D to bring to the Indian farmer superior genetics and technologies, which are high performing and adapted to a wide range of agroc1imatic zones. It actively contributes to the seed industry policy development, with the concerned governments, to ensure that policies and regulations create an enabling environment, including public acceptance, so that the industry is globally competitive. NSAI promotes harmonization and adoption of best commercial practices in production, processing, quality control and distribution of seeds.

NSAI GOVERNING COUNCIL 2011-2013 OFFICE BEARERS President Vice President General Secretary Treasurer Immediate Past President

: : : : :

M. Ramasami (Rasi Seeds) M. G. Shembkar (Ankur Seeds) M. Harish Reddy (Ganga Kaveri Seeds) G.S. Gill (Monsanto India) Uday Singh (Namdhari Seeds)

MEMBERS M. Prabhakar Rao (Nuziveedu Seeds)

S.L. Kagliwal (Nath Seeds)

Paresh Verma (Shriram Bioseed)

P.S. Dravid (J.K. Agri Genetic)

G.V. Bhaskar Rao (Kaveri Seeds)

K. V. Subbarao (PHI Seeds)

M. Sabir (Manisha Agri Biotech)

Rakesh Chopra (Biostadt MH Seees)

Rajvir Rathi (Bayer Bio-Science)

N. P. Patel (Western Agri Seeds)

Manish Patel (Incotec India)

F. B. Patil (Kirtiman Agro Genetics)

S.K. Roongta (National Seeds Corporation)

NSAI SECRETARIAT Raju Kapoor

N.K. Dadlani

Seema Sehgal

Tulika Singh

R.D. Sharma

Executive Director

Director

Asst Director

HR & Accounts

COMPILED & EDITED BY Dr. N.K. Dadlani & Mrs. Tulika Singh The views and opinions expressed by the authors are their own and NSAI by publishing them here, does not endorse them. The editorial correspondence should be sent to, National Seed Association 909, Surya Kiran Building, 19, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi - 110001 (INDIA) Ph.: 011-43553241-45; Telefax : 011-43533248 E-mail : nsai.delhi@gmail.com Website : http:// www.nsai.co.in Printed at: PRL Print House 6/8 Kirti Nagar Industrial Area, New Delhi - 110015 Ph.: 011-42078052. E-mail: prlprint@gmail.com

India,

Indian Seed Industry : Status, Challenges & Opportunities in Field Crops P.S. Dravid, J.K Agri Genetic Limited, psdravid@jkseeds.net

Maize, Rice and Vegetables, the seed industry has grown to a size of about Rs. 6,500 crores by 2010.

Evolution of Indian Seed Industry The development of the organized seed industry in India began with the establishment of National Seed Corporation in 1963. Thereafter, several seed companies came up in private sector after introduction of hybrids in several crops viz. Jowar, Bajra, Maize Bt Cotton during 70s. As the demand for quality seed grew, number of State Seed Corporations were established under National Seed Program which was financed by the World Bank. Very few private sector companies had started research programs and most of the supplies were from the seeds developed by the public sector research institutions. The Industry was dominated by the Public Sector till 1987 with a turnover of Rs.500-600 cores.

Structure of Indian Seed Industry The Industry comprises of more than 600 players of which 17 are from public sector and rest are from the private sector. Amongst the private sector players, large number of players are having their own R&D set up and are investing almost 5%-20% of their sales revenue into R&D. The Private sector comprises of various categories of players such as: - Large multinational companies - Established Indian seed sector players - Large business houses from India - Small and medium sized firms The individual company turnovers are ranging from less than Rs.1.00 crores to almost Rs. 600 - 700 crores.

The first inflection point came in 1988 with the announcement of New Seed Policy, with a view to make available the best seed and technology to the Indian farmers. The policy encouraged import of seeds as well as technology, entry of multinationals and large Indian companies and establishing research and infrastructure by the private sector. This resulted in rapid increase in demand and supply of seeds and rapid growth of the seed industry. The number of seed companies went up to almost 350-400 by 2000 and the industry grew to a size of Rs.2000 crores (by 2000) and Rs.2,500 crores (by 2002).

Out of the total turnover of Rs.6,500 crores, vegetable seeds comprises of almost Rs.1200 crores and the remaining Rs.5,300 crores is from the sale of field crop seeds. Out of this, Rs.3,300 crores is contributed from sale of Hybrid seeds and balance is from the sale of OPVs of various field crops. The production and sale of OPVs (High volume, low value) is being dominated by public sector i.e., National Seed Corporation, State Farms Corporation of India and 14 State Seed Corporations whereas Hy. seeds are predominantly covered by Private sector. 70% of the total field crop sales are handled by Private sector.

The second inflection point came with the introduction of transgenic cotton in 2002. The farmers rapidly switched over to cultivation of Bt. Cotton hybrids on observing the spectacular results due to technology traits and superior hybrids that were made available to them. Whilst the area under cotton went up from 7.6 million ha. to 11 million ha by 2010 (44% increase) over this 8 years period, the seed demand increased from 251 lakh packets of hybrid cotton to almost 350 lakh packets (180%] and in value terms it went up from Rs.375 crores to almost Rs.2000 crores (433% increase).

Composition of Market by Crop Amongst the hybrid crops, Bt. Cotton commands major share followed by Hy. Maize, Rice, Bajra, Sunflower, Castor and Jowar. There has been insignificant hybridization in the other crops, even though small sales are reported in respect of Hy. Wheat, Mustard and Pegeon pea.

As a result of this rapid expansion of hybrid Bt. Cotton sale, so also expansion in other crops viz. July - Sept. 2011

Indian Seed Industry: Status, Challenges & Opportunities in Field Crops

Table 1 : Market Size for Hybrids of Field Crops:

Table 2 : Market Size for Open Pollinated Varieties (OPVs)

Cotton in lakh pkts. Others in Mts Value in Rs Crores

Crop

Volume in Mts Value in Rs.Crores

Volume

Value

Crop

Volume

Value

Cotton

350

1,900

Rice

4,20,000

756

Maize

80,000

625

Rice

18,000

240

Wheat

2,50,000

450

Bajra

15,000

200

Soybean

2,15,000

430

Sunflower

3,000

Groundnut

45,000

Castor

3,700

Pulses

18,500

Grain Sorghun

6,000

Sorghum Sudan Grass

40,000

100

Mustard

8,200

–

Others

154

3,300

TOTAL

2000

Others

The replacement rates vary considerably amongst the crops, having the highest replacement in case of Mustard and Groundnut being the lowest with SRR of 70%.

In case of OPVs, the market has grown to a level of almost Rs.2,000 crores. The major crops being Rice, Wheat, Soybean.

continues for the few years, the market for hybrid maize would also grow @ 8-10% p.a. in terms of volume and @15% p.a. in terms of value. Thus, the market is slated to cross a level of 1,00,000 MT with a value of Rs.1,000 crores in the next 4-5 years time.

Growth Opportunities in the Field Crops There could be year to year fluctuations in crop acreagc due to output prices, yield variations, climatic fluctuations etc. However, over the long term, these variations will get evened out. Following trends have been noted: i.

Hybrid Bt.Cotton: The acreage under cotton has been steadily increasing at around 2-3% p.a. If cotton output prices remain favourable and productivity gains due to new traits continue, the same trend may continue for the next few years till the acreage reaches saturation level. In addition, if the area under denser planting goes up, there would be increase in demand by 8-10% p.a. during this period. If the seed prices increase on account of new traits as well as germplasm, the market could reach a level of 4.5 crore packets with a turnover of Rs.3,500 crores.

ii.

Hy. Maize: The area under maize cultivation is increasing steadily @ 2-3% p.a. over the last decade. So also area covered under hybrid (particularly single cross hybrids with denser planting) is going up. The present coverage under hybrids is to an extent of 67% with an area under cultivation of 8.00 million. Several State govts, having low levels of hybridization are educating the farmers and actively supporting them through subsidy programs to adopt hybrid cultivation. If the same trend

July - Sept. 2011

iii. Hy. Paddy: Even though Rice is the single largest crop grown in the country almost round the year with an area under cultivation around 44 million ha, the hybridization has still remained at a low level of 3%. One of the reasons for not having wider adoption of the hybrids has been high differential between output (commercial produce) price of 0PV grain vis a vis that of Hybrid grain. Lot of efforts are going on for developing the hybrids having superior grain quality and also better yield compared to high yielding varieties. Once such products are available and well demonstrated by the Industry to the farmers, the hybrid rice acreage is bound to increase substantially. However, it is very difficult to say at this stage as to what would be the growth rate on this count, since much would depend on introduction of new products in to the market. However, there is lot of support given by the State Govts, for promoting cultivation of Hybrid Rice in Eastern and North Eastern States. So, the area is bound to increase with 2

Indian Seed Industry: Status, Challenges & Opportunities in Field Crops

the support given by the State Govts. Thus, even on conservative assumption, the market would grow to the size of about 25,000 MT valued at Rs.400 crores within next 5 years time. iv.

heterosis and/or due to seed production bottlenecks, present coverage is insignificant. If required breakthroughs are obtained in these crops, one could see rapid expansion since the area under cultivation in these crops is very large, which would provide plenty of opportunities for growth.

Hy. Bajra: The area covered under Hy.Bajra is about 60% of area under cultivation which has remained almost at the same level for the past several years There has been a very low level of coverage under hybrid Bajra in low rainfai area in W.Rajasthan. If suitable hybrids are developed for this area, there could be some boost in demand for Hy.Bajra, otherwise, the market is expected to remain at the same level without much growth in terms of volume and value.

Thus, if we were to add the projections mentioned above, the total hybrid market is expected to grow on a conservative side, to the level of Rs.5,500 crores from the current level of Rs.3,300 crores, in the next 5 years period. If we get technological breakthroughs in Hy. Rice, Rabi Sorghum, Sweet Sorghum and New hybrids crops (viz. Wheat, Mustard and Pigeon pea), the markets will grow still further.

Hy. Grain Sorghum: The hybrids are cultivated mainly in kharif sorghum and the area covered has reached a saturation point. In fact, because of continuous decline in kharif Sorghum area, the market for Hy.Sorghum is shrinking and may further decline.

In addition to the normal growth of the hybrid markets, lot of transgenics are under trial in respect of Maize, Rice, Pigeon pea etc .lf the clearances are received in the next few years, there could be further expansion in the market due to added trait value as well as increased coverage under hybrids, in respect of these crops.

Lot of efforts have been made to develop Rabi Sorghum hybrids over the last 30 years. But the hybrids having superior gram quality and ability to yield on residual moisture have not been successfully developed. If there is any breakthrough in this sector, there would be good possibility to expand the market for Grain sorghum.

vii. Open Pollinated Varieties (OPVs) : In respect of OPVs, there has been a very good coverage in certain crops like 670/0 in Mustard, 350/0 in Soybean, followed by 320/0 in varietal Paddy. Since the farmers have realized the importance of replacing the seed, we expect that SRR should go up further. In the crops where SRR is still much lower compared to the targeted rates, we expect that there will be some improvement as Govt. is taking up a campaign to increase SRR in various crops. Introduction of new varieties by private sector from their research programs or through PPP would further boost the sale of OPVs. Thus, if we were to take growth rate in OPVs at 100/0, the sales expected to grow to the level of Rs.3,000 crores in the next 5 years period.

There has been increasing demand for Sorghum Sudan Grass (SSG). However, due to lack of differentiated products, it is being sold like a commodity low value seed. Thus, t h e market for Grain sorghum and Sorghum Sudan Grass is expected to remain at the same levels since some shrinkage in Grain Sorghum volumes will be made good by increase in volumes of SSG. Several Sweet Sorghum hybrids are under trial cultivation and the trials for conversion of stock to ethanol area so taken up. If this becomes a viable option for bio fuel, there would be growth opportunities in this area.

The totaI market of field crops seed is expected to grow to the level of Rs.8,500 crores from the present level of Rs.5,300 crores in next 5 years period.

vi. New Hybrid crops viz. Wheat, Mustard / Pigeon pea: Lot of research efforts are going on for the development of hybrid systems in Wheat, Mustard and Pigeon pea and several hybrids have been developed in these 3 crops. However, either for want of commercial July - Sept. 2011

viii. Exports: India is becoming a production hub for supply of seeds to South Asia and some of the African countries. 3

Indian Seed Industry: Status, Challenges & Opportunities in Field Crops

The present export turnover is estimated to be Rs.200 crores. With more of the Indian products being tried out in overseas market, we expect that there would be healthy growth on export front also. Thus, both from domestic and export front, we expect the field crops sales would increase substantially in the next few years which would give a big boost for growth of Indian Seed Industry.

made. If necessary pubic private partnerships may be initiated to break the barriers and develop hybridization in various crops to expand the markets. iii. Bottlenecks in Seed Production due to Improved Profitability in Commercial Cultivation: Since the farmers have started cultivating high yielding hybrids of Cotton, Maize, Vegetables and Rice in irrigated areas, they are finding that the commercial crops have become more remunerative in comparison with the hybrid seed production. This would tend to increase the procurement cost. This calls for more efforts for improving the productivity in seed production to contain the seed production cost.

Major Challenges Having outlined various opportunities that are coming up, it would be necessary to take stock of various challenges that would become limiting factor in growth. i.

Labour Shortage: The seed production is very labour intensive activity, more so, in the crops like Hy.Cotton and Vegetables which involve hand emasculation and pollinations. Even in seed production of crops like Maize & Hy.Rice, lot of labour intensive operations are required to be carried out.

iv.

New geno types will have to be developed to address these challenges. Biotechnology will play an important role in developing these new genotypes.

Number of Seed production are as are facing acute shortage of labour and as such seed production could become limiting factor.

This problem can be overcome by taking up production research to improve productivity in Hy. seed production. Secondly, new production areas could be developed to diversify the seed production base to the new areas, having surplus labour. Govt, should consider skill building in seed production under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Program so as to utilize the surplus labour effectively in productive jobs.

In view of this, there is a need to bring in Science based approach as well as clarity and transparency in the entire approval process so as to enable the Industry / technology providers to plan out their activities accordingly.

Technological breakthroughs like CMS/ GMS based system in seed production of cotton, CMS in Maize could help improving seed productivity and availability. Technological Breakthroughs: Te c h n o l o g i c a l breakthroughs are required to expand the markets of Hy. Paddy, Rabi Sorghum, Sweet Sorghum and new hybrid crops viz. Wheat, Mustard and Pigeon pea.

vi. Non-uniformity in registration procedure by various State Govts.: At the this juncture, different State Govts, are having different procedures for registration of new products.

Very intensive and focused efforts need to be July - Sept. 2011

Delay in Regulatory Clearances of Genetically Modified Crops: The procedure for regulatory clearances of GMOs is still evolving. There is a need to bring in clarity as to what all tests are to be carried out for food crops as well as nonfood crops and the stages at which the tests need to be completed, before getting the clearance for conduct of the trials in the next stage. Furthermore, there is no clarity as to how the individual product would be commercialized once the event is cleared from bio-safety and environmental safety angles. At times, the approvals are also getting delayed because of pressures from stakeholders

In addition, Seed Production Crop Insurance could ensure adequate returns to the seed growers while mitigating their risk.

ii.

Climate Change: Global warming is resulting into more frequency of droughts and floods and extreme changes in the temperature either on lower or higher side.

Indian Seed Industry: Status, Challenges & Opportunities in Field Crops

There are arbitrary rules made by some of the State govts, making the non availability of new products in the market. In view of these variations, there is a need for Central Govt, to step in, to ensure that uniform procedures are practiced across the country by different State Govts. It is all the more necessary as the new seed bill has still not come into force.

iii. Public-private partnership to break the barriers and develop hybridization in various crops, to expand the markets.

vii. Price Controls: Several State Govts, have imposed the restrictions on the MRP of Hy.Bt Cotton seed whereas the cost of seed production is going up. The State Govts, have not been allowing for increasing the selling price which has put tremendous pressure to the seed companies to take up seed production. This issue also needs to be addressed immediately so as to ensure adequate quantities are produced which would in turn benefit the farmers.

The State Govts. should remove price controls of Bt.Cotton which would pave the way for more and more investments in R&D to develop products which would be beneficial for farmers so also to enhance the productivity. The seed production would also improve.

vii. Concessions on cost of deregulation of GMOs of National importance. viii. Tax holiday for agri biotech & seed industry: To promote the agri biotech R&D investments Government may also consider the Income-tax holiday for 10 years or on the line similar to IT industry. ix. Creation of national database on the research projects/products getting developed in AgricuIturaI universities/Govt. Institutes. x.

Access to National Germplasm Bank: To develop better hybrids with desired traits like drought resistance, pest and disease tolerance, access to National Germplasm may be provided to private seed sector players also.

xi. National forum for dissemination of scientific information on safety/benefits of GM technologies to counter the misplaced/ malicious propaganda by various vested interest bodies against GM technologies.

Govt. should consider skill building in seed production under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Program. Flexible public private partnership formats: For effective utilization of the available biotech R&D infrastructure facilities, Government may consider issuing grants on specific projects, to the private organizations on the lines similar to national institutes / public institutes for conducting the agri biotech research.

July - Sept. 2011

The present limits of 25%, subject to ceiling of Rs.50.00 lakhs on capital subsidy to be enhanced to a level of 50% with a cealing of Rs.500 lakhs to encourage investments by seed industry.

The present limits of 25% of capital subsidy, subject to ceiling of Rs.50.00 lakhs is very much inadequate. Since the capital costs for establishing processing units has gone up substantially, the Govt. should increase the subsidy ceiling limit at least to the level of Rs.5 crores and balance may be made available to the Industry on loan at concessional interest rate. In order to resolve the problems listed above, the following steps should be taken

ii.

There is a need for Central Govt. to step in, to ensure that uniform procedures are practiced across the country by different State Govts.

vi. Concessional funding for infrastructure development: Government may consider making available the funds at nominal interest rate [with adequate capital grants) on long term basis.

viii. Strengthening Infrastructure: On account of increase in the volumes and need to produce high quality seeds, it has become necessary to invest heavily in seed processing plants and drying units. Several companies have established very good infrastructure to take these activities. However, lot of small & medium players are finding it very difficult to establish processing infrastructure because of huge capital outlay.

iv.

With all these initiatives, proposed above to remove bottlenecks in the smooth growth of the Industry, we would be able to see the industry growing to a level of Rs. 8,500 cores for field crops and including vegetables industry would grow beyond Rs.l0,000 crores, within the next 5 years period. (Reprinted from Souvenir, Indian Seed Congress, 2011) 5

Indian Seed Industry : Status, Challenges and Opportunities in Vegetable Crops A S N Reddy, Seed Works India Pvt. Ltd. Email: asn@seedworks.com

Vegetables - An Overview

Hybrid Technology - An Effective Way

The world is today showing a constant trend of increasing population and it's been more prominent in Asian countries. The general policy of promoting a balanced diet with proteins, vitamins and fibres from plants to complement a predominantly carbohydrate diet, advancements in long term storage technologies and changing food habits has resulted in an increasing demand for fresh vegetables.

The main constraints to meet the vegetable production to the tune of demand are lack of adequate number of high yielding varieties, and quality seeds, pest and diseases infestations for which no effective control measures have yet been found, lack of proper irrigation facilities in many areas of the country, the poor and marginal farmers of the country cannot afford to grow vegetables because of the high initial investment, improper marketing channels of fresh vegetables, lack of infrastructure, and social problems related to the strong hold of middlemen in the marketing chain.

The total cultivable land in all Asian countries is almost at saturation, but the proportion under vegetable cultivation is increasing, which indicates that crop diversification is taking place. The reason for stagnant development can be explained by the land pressure due to industrialization, and competition with essential grain production. On the basis of climate, technical advancements and existing policies, the productivity is fluctuating year after year among the countries. This wide yield range sets a benchmark of progress to be achieved for countries having the lowest productivity and for those having higher productivity should further improve their yields, if they want to meet the challenges to feed an ever increasing population.

Among the prevailing opportunities, hybrid technology is a possible and most accepted way to increase the vegetable production. Hybrid seed, in a certain number of vegetable crops, contributes greatly to increase the yields, to reduce the use of pesticide by in built disease resistance, and to produce standard products, with improved keeping quality. Nowadays, hybrid vegetable seed industry is one of the fastest growing industries in India and with the advent of new hybrids in most of the vegetable crops. The increase in the demand for hybrid seeds in recent years has resulted in the proliferation of private companies, which produce and sell hybrid seeds. Until the early 1990s, there were only local and national seed companies involved in seed production in India. The trade liberalization policy in the 1990s encouraged the entrance of large multinational and national seed companies. Now there are over 200 companies involved in vegetable seed business operating in our country.

Figures say it all... India, being a developing country with 1.4 % of annual growth rate in population and around 400/0 of the people being vegetarians (Source: APEDA 2010 Estimate), is the second largest producer of vegetables in the world, next only to China, with an estimated production of about 83.1 million tons from an area of 8.0 million hectares with an export capacity of 1.6 million tons of both fresh and processed vegetables [Source: FAOSTAT, 2007). India ranks second and produces approximately 15% of the world's vegetables from approximately 3% of the total land of India under vegetables. Within India, production of vegetable is a monoculture in some selected areas, but majority on small land holdings in various cropping patterns or in homestead gardens.

July - Sept. 2011

Hybrid Seed Production -Indian Perspective In our country, at present the vegetable hybrid seed production is manifested to produce and make available the F1 seed for around 3000 MT. Out of which the major crop share is for Okra (1700 MT) followed by gourds (800 MT), Watermelon (130 MT), Tomato (90 MT), Chilli [80 MTl. and Egg plant

Indian Seed Industry: Status, Challenges and Opportunities in Vegetable Crops

(75 MT), Cole Crops [110 MTl. Cucumber (30 MT), Capsicum [4 MT) and other melons (20 MT).

Hybrid Seed Production Challenges....

The said vegetable seed production in India is largely concentrated in three states namely Karnataka, Maharashtra and Gujarat. The existing setup for the seed production in India especially by private seed sector is like; companies do not make direct agreements with local seed farmers, but operate through third party seed organizers or in direct agreement with seed farmers.

• The seed production areas are confined to limited and selected locations which cannot suffice the future needs. Our country, having diversified climatic zones, could be rightly exploited for getting new locations under production like parts of Chattisgadh, Madhya Pradesh, Tamilnadu and Andhra Pradesh, which are having similar climatic requirements with the

July - Sept. 2011

Exploiting the new production locations

Indian Seed Industry: Status, Challenges and Opportunities in Vegetable Crops

existing production areas as depicted in the below map [Source: IMD)

consumer priorities towards healthy vegetables with less external residues by farming with less usage of chemical inputs

• In recent times, there is paradigm shift in the climate resulting in high cost of cultivation and often ending with less remuneration to the farmer. The hybrids should be made adoptable to resist in this changing scenario of climatic regimes.

Vegetable Seed Industry-Future Prospects The growers and consumers today have a better and wider choice of products and this has a strong parallel with the activities and offerings from the private seed sector. Research has been strengthened and new hybrids with disease resistance and better quality have emerged from private sector, which are rapidly gaining ground.

• The efforts shouId be holistic and in such a way that the income of a seed production grower is always better or at least in tune with commercial vegetable grower for the said crop. • The socioeconomic status of the production growers should be lifted to accept the innovative methods in seed to seed operations like rising nursery in green/net houses, mulching (pictures below), drip irrigation, fertigation and mechanical seed extraction and seed treatment(TSP) methods to decrease the labour cost and dependency, reduce pest and disease infestation and improve the quality of seed.

The rate of conversion of the area under hybrids from OPVs is astonishingly rapid in Okra, Tomato, Chillies, Cabbage and Gourds, which is encouraging and setting targets for research for development of suitable hybrids to pace with the changing scenario. Growers have not hesitated to go for high value to the products with disease/pest resistance and higher yield and there is room for rapid growth in most of the vegetables with special traits.

Seed Production Vs Skilled Labour • The hybrid seed production involves emasculation, pollination and seed extraction techniques which require skilled labour. Due to urban migration of the labour and competition for the available labor, the wage is at its peak besides unavailability of timely man power.

There is scope for designing such vegetable hybrids to cater the needs of growing demand for the products from organic farming, which avoids health hazards from chemical residues, upon consumption. It is important that research should be reoriented on shifting time scales dictated by market compulsions. Super markets and retail chains in cities bringing in quality vegetables, well packed and presented provide scope for premium quality, unique new products and convenience items [icebox watermelon) as well as novelty items (cherry tomato, colored bell pepper, baby corn, asparagus, lettuce, etc.].

• The labour insufficiency is further intensified because non engagement • Strengthening of seed buy back policies, organizer grower linkage and hence making the seed grower a profitable stake holder.

Seed Production Constraints - Research Orientation

Seed Companies have to consider and to fine tune their business activities in line with the changing attitude of the farmers (both commercial and seed production)where one is more interested to use the readily available healthy nursery instead of seed. The seed with priming and pelleting will be the value addition in terms of vigour and uniformity in the nursery.

• Strengthening the germplasm base and exploiting there on • Male sterility systems should be brought under use, wherever possible, to avoid the labour cost for emasculation and increase in productivity. • Gene pyramiding may be done intelligently by introgressing the genes for tolerance/ resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses in to parental lines and thereby in to the hybrids.

The requirements of the Agri-based industries like processing and canning should be co-related to the seed industry and rightly addressed by restructuring business plans.

• Develop the hybrids in line with the changing July - Sept. 2011

Indian Seed Industry: Status, Challenges and Opportunities in Vegetable Crops

Besides the scope for better products through research, further efforts to economize seed production costs, enhancing seed quality and seed treatment will become key points for growers to make choices and for this there is a need for upgrading quality control laboratories to meet international standards. Finally, a right blend of research related and other activities of private and public enterprises will negate the challenges and pave the way for a better tomorrow.

In the Lights of Globalization... The Indian Seed Industry was insulated from Global Industry before 1988. There was limited exchange of germ plasm lines primarily through the Government bodies and exports were confined to the extent of limited contract seed production. The Industry was dominated by public sector in research as well as marketing. However, prior to economic liberalization, the Govt. of India realized the importance of opening up the seed sector. Accordingly, the new seed policy was announced in 1988 with the main objective of providing the best planting material available anywhere in the world, to the Indian farmers. The policy aimed at liberalizing seed import/ exports and encouraged entry of multinational companies so also formation of foreign collaborations.

Genetic Engineering - a powerful tool Transgenic varieties yielding genetically-modified foods have the potential to solve many of the world's hunger and malnutrition problems, and to help protect and preserve the environment by increasing yield and reducing reliance upon chemical pesticides and herbicides. Yet there are many challenges ahead for governments, needs a lot meaningful debate and bringing transparency especially in the areas of safety testing, regulation, international policy and food labelling. However, we must proceed with caution to avoid causing unintended harm to human health and the environment as a result of our enthusiasm for this powerful technology.

The seed acts under the lights of liberalization also encouraged the research in private sector, which resulted into availability of large number of superior research products from both public, as well as private sector in the last decade. Even though there has been rapid growth in custom seed production for exports and also import of vegetable seeds, we are still a minor player in the global seed trade. If the vast opportunities are tapped aggressively and systematically, Indian Seed Industry could emerge as a major force in the rapidly expanding global seed trade.

Seed Industry under the Regime of PPV & FR Act, 2001 by GOI The Plant Variety Protection and Farmers Rights Act (PPVFRAJ. 2001, a sui generis system, is an attempt by the Indian Government to recognize and protect the rights of both commercial plant breeders and farmers in respect of their contribution made in conserving, improving and making available plant genetic resources for development of new plant varieties and to encourage the development of new plants varieties. Protection of the plant varieties under the PPVFR Act, 2001 accelerates agricultural development and stimulates investment for research and development for the development of new plant varieties, which in turn facilitates the growth of the seed industry and ensures the availability of high quality seeds and planting material to the farmers. The PPV authority had started preparation of guidelines for 35 prioritized crops of which ti II date, 30 crops are kept open for inviting the applications. This is the time for the seed entrepreneurs to gear up, understand the soul of the act and design the plans accordingly.

July - Sept. 2011

Concluding Remarks about a Vibrant Industry.... The vegetable seed industry in India had a very modest beginning during the sixties and seventies with handful of companies which were mostly selling imported seeds. An important landmark in the development of Indian seed Industry was the production of hybrid seeds of vegetables for commercial growing and is undergoing wide ranging transformations. This includes an increasing role of private seed companies, joint ventures of Indian companies with multinational seed companies with focus on biotechnology, and wide ranging changes in regulatory frameworks, which would affect seed research, marketing and trade in coming years. Joint ventures, partnerships, mergers and acquisitions are proliferating in numerous areas of 10

Indian Seed Industry: Status, Challenges and Opportunities in Vegetable Crops

the seed industry between the private and public sectors as well as between national and international companies. The activities targeted in such joint ventures include R&D, production and marketing of hybrid seed. While the reform process initiated in the India seed sector continues to evolve, the private seed companies keenly await further initiatives and relaxations in the Government regulations in seed market. Import of hybrids and OPV in Cole crops exemplifies the successful and proper functioning of International seed trade. Seed associations are ready to take up the cause of the industry, to support effective and efficient seed trade with other countries for imports.

But ahead, along with these green patches some grey areas also exists viz. Intellectual property Rights, Farmers and Breeders Rights, lack of skilled and technical personnel, open markets marred with mergers and acquisitions. India has a unique opportunity in terms of breeding a range of vegetable crops, competent breeders capable of developing superior hybrids, backed by strong production capabilities can galvanize the industry towards development of hybrids not only for the Indian subcontinent but also for other Asian and middle-eastern countries. India has a vibrant vegetable seed industry and appears to be on the right track for the bright future. (Reprinted from Souvenir, Indian Seed Congress, 2011)

Implementation of Indian PPV&FR Act and Rules: Inadequacies Leading to Avoidable Litigation P Sateesh Kumart, S M Khan. Manpreet Hora and M Prabhakar Rao, Nuziveedu Seeds Private Limited The Indian Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights (PPV&FR) Act is now a decade old and PPV&FR implementation implications are now clearly visible. The shortcomings and inadequacies in implementation of the Act and the Rules are a matter of grave concern to the seed industry, in particular, and Indian agriculture, in general. This needs to be addressed and resolved by the Central Government and the PPV&FR Authority in order to meet the objectives enshrined in the Act. These inadequacies are perceived in terms of slow-moving approach for database maintenance of existing varieties, notification of crop species eligible for registration, duration and effect of registration of extant notified varieties and varieties of common knowledge, ambiguity in parent line and hybrid registration under new variety and/or extant variety category, powers of the Registrar, advertisements published in Plant Variety journals, registration of transgenic varieties, parent lines etc. This paper highlights the issues that need to be resolved to avoid misuse of the Act and thereby unwarranted litigations.

The PPV & FR Act, 2001 fulfilled a mandatory requirement for India under the TRIPS, namely, enacting a legislation for effective protection of plant varieties (PVP) either by way of patents or a sui generis system stipulated under Article 27.3(b)of the TRIPS Agreement, a move welcomed by the Indian agriculture and seed sector. Since the public sector alone could no longer meet the crop improvement research and seed requirements of agriculture in India and the private industry had begun to play a substantial role in plant breeding; it was universally felt that PVP will stimulate research in both the private and public sectors. This article explores and analyses the development of the PPV&FR legislation from the view point of Indian seed sector.

by the PPV&FR Authority for registration of ‘new varieties’ without prescribing the registration fee for such ‘new varieties’. This led to litigation, and as on date, the matter is sub judice. Other inconsistencies in the enactment, rules and implementation are identified and further discussed.

PPV & FR Authority: Contentious Issues Non-Availability of Database of Existing/Extant Varieties Rule 22 (4) mandates that ‘the Authority shall compile and maintain a database on all varieties of common knowledge including all registered extant and farmers’ varieties and such varieties being cultivated outside India for each crop species prior to grant for registration for new varieties belonging to such species’.

The PPV&FR Act is a valuable instrument, which confers important rights on the registry as against the rights of others. Significant responsibility lies on the PPV&FR Authority and also on the Central Government to ensure that there is ample clarity and no ambiguity in the enactment, rules and procedures, so that the PPV&FR Registry performs its functions effectively to achieve the objectives enshrined in the PPV&FR Act. With the issuance of a notification on 1 November 2006, for registration of varieties of 12 food crops under the Act, the process of granting protection to the varieties of these crops commenced. Subsequently, 27 other crops were also notified for registration. However, experience in the past four years has shown that the implementation of the Act is in often ad-hoc. Such ad-hocism could lead to a catastrophic situation for the seed industry and result in unnecessary litigation. An instance of the ad-hoc approach was observed when 12 crop species were notified for registration and applications accepted July - Sept. 2011

Nonetheless, contrary to rule 22 (4), the PPV&FR Authority took up registration of both extant and new varieties simultaneously and more recently notified 2011 horticultural crops with their genera and species (not being extant varieties or farmers’ varieties) eligible for registration. This created an opportunity to file applications for existing plant varieties claiming them as ‘new’ with the Authority having no database to counter check this claim. It is imperative that the Authority keeps on hold all the applications of ‘new varieties’ till the extant/ existing varieties are registered/ recorded and a database developed, to ensure proper scrutiny and examination of the applications filed for ‘new varieties’. Registration of Extant Variety Rule 24 of the Act provides for registration of every extant variety within three years of its notification. 13

Implementation of Indian PPV&FR Act and Rules: Inadequacies Leading to Avoidable Litigation

When the statute provides a three year period for registration of an extant variety, a breeder can apply for registration any time within three years period. The procedure for registration of extant varieties is however, first come first serve basis, which is inappropriate. This could create a scenario where an unscrupulous applicant may submit an application for a variety of a third party claiming it as his own under different denomination and get registration. The original breeder cannot even file opposition as he is yet to apply and obtain registration for his variety. However, under the statute, the said breeder is within his rights to file application for registration of his extant variety within three years period. In a case as above, the breeder will first have to apply for registration and thereafter plead for cancellation of the fraudulently obtained registration. This will lead to vexatious litigations. Ideally, it would have been proper for the Registry to wait for the deadline of three years, during which time all the applications were received, the applications made for the same variety with different denominations shortlisted; false claims rejected and registration provided to the rightful breeder.

Bank at the National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources as National Repository, and to the establishment or accreditation of recognized DNA fingerprinting centres for handling referral samples for conflict resolution. Only if these issues are addressed by the Authority, future complications and legal hassles can be avoided.

Inconsistencies in PPV & FR Act & Rules Status of Parents of a Hybrid, itself an Extant Variety (i) Under Section 15(3)(a), a new variety is considered novel if it has not been sold or otherw ise disposed of, for the purposes of its exploitation in India, earlier than one year; or outside India, in the case of trees or vines, earlier than six years, or in any other case earlier than four years, before the date of filing of application for registration. Misinterpretation of the above provision, has led applicants to file applications for registration of hybrids, as extant varieties, with parent lines as ‘new varieties’ (example not cited for the purpose of confidentiality). It is paradoxical to treat the hybrid as ‘extant variety’ and consider its parent as ‘new’. The fact remains that the parent of a hybrid fails to meet the ‘novelty’ criterion, if the hybrid developed using the said parent, was sold prior to one year from the date of filing of application for registration of the parent line. As per Section 15(3)(a), a variety (parent) would be considered novel if it has not been ‘sold or otherwise disposed of earlier than one year in India. This is not legitimate since the use of parent line for development of hybrids, repetitive use of the parent line for production of hybrids, and issuing parent line to seed growers for production of hybrid seeds fall within the meaning of ‘otherwise disposed of. It would be thus, wrong to consider parent line of ‘extant variety’ as ‘new’ for the purpose of registration under the PPV&FR Act.

Lack of Clarity on Essentially Derived Varieties Another lacuna is the lack of clarity on EDVs although the enactment is now a decade old. The Authority has also not put in place any mechanism to register EDVs so far. It is therefore possible that an existing variety or an EDV may be registered as a ‘new variety’. Due to this lack of clarity on EDVs, opposition proceedings against ‘new varieties' thus claimed would be an arduous task for both the opponent and the Registrar. The present procedure/methodology adopted by the Authority for registration of ‘new varieties’ before issuing conclusive prescription for the registration of extant varieties in a particular crop is fraught with serious implications and consequences for the seed industry. This is again a source of unnecessary and avoidable litigation.

Even as the Authority is conducting awareness workshops, the ambiguity in this aspect remains, leading to confusion. The Registry continues to accept applications claimed to be ‘new’ or ‘extant’ without proper rationale and scrutiny. In such a situation, an old variety without PVP registration may be registered as a new variety by a ‘stealer’.8

It is therefore vital that the PPV&FR Authority first takes up registration of existing varieties before notification of a crop to develop database on such existing varieties and then embark upon registration of ‘new varieties’ and EDVs. In addition to such database development, attention should also be paid to the existing collections in the National Gene July - Sept. 2011

(ii) There is inconsistency in the treatment of a hybrid as notified under Section 5 of the Seeds Act 1966 (ref. 9), and its parent lines by the Authority. 14

Implementation of Indian PPV&FR Act and Rules: Inadequacies Leading to Avoidable Litigation

registration (Section 24(6)(i)). But under Section 24(5) of the Act, an applicant can be protected before registration, an irrational provision which can be misused to harass third parties. Effectively, one may file application for registration of a plant variety under Section 14 and lodge complaint under Section 24(5) the very next day, without notice to the party concerned. In other countries, action is initiated only after grant of rights.10 In addition, the Rules are silent on the provisions related to Section 24 and the entire matter appears to have been left to the absolute discretion of the Registrar. Provisions for the provisional protection in the PPV&FR Act need to be harmonized with enactments in other countries that appear more reasonable, rational and pragmatic.

When the hybrid is treated as ‘extant variety’ by virtue of notification under the Seeds Act, its parents are not given same status by the Authority. Although PVP protection is more important for the parent lines as compared to the hybrid, with the Registry, the reverse appears to be true. It is relevant to point out that the Seeds Act treats both hybrids and its parents at par and provides for certification of both hybrid and its parents by State Certification Agencies under its provisions. To bring in parity, the relevant provisions of the PPV&FR Act with regard to ‘extant variety’, notified under Seeds Act, should also be interpreted in line with these provisions of Seeds Act. Furthermore, taking into consideration basic plant breeding principles, it is obvious that parents of a hybrid are an integral nart of the hybrid, and to treat a hybrid in isolation and independent of the parents in case of extant varieties, defies logic.

Public Notice on Variety of Common Knowledge The variety of common knowledge has not been defined in the Act, although, an official notice was published in the Plant Variety (PV) Journal11 prescribing certain criteria for VCK. Criteria laid down under Para D reads as follows:

Powers of Registrar for Grant of Extension of Time for Filing Notice of Opposition. There is inconsistency in provisions (Rule 32, 33(6), FormPV-3 and PV-5 of the PPV&FR Rules, 2003), which deal with time-limits for filing notice of opposition, evidence, counter statement and extension of time. The powers of the Registrar, has become a contentious issue and some companies have already approached the Hon'ble High Courts in the matter (example not cited for the purpose of confidentiality). Despite the inconsistencies in the statute, suitable amendments in the relevant rules could have brought in sensible solutions.

‘A candidate variety should have been sold or otherwise disposed of in India one year prior to the date of filing of the application and it should not have been sold or otherwise disposed of 13 years prior to the date of filing of application and in case of trees and vines it should not have been sold or otherwise disposed of 16 years prior to the date of filing of application’. Such public notice is bad in law; particularly since the Authority does not have the power to prescribe such restriction. The issuance of this public notice by the Authority is questionable and disputed. Further, assuming that the Authority has such powers, the duration should have been counted from the date of notification of the crop species and not the date of filing of the application. This amounts to unlawful curbing of the rights of an applicant to seek registration for PVP, as provided under the PPV & FR Act. Appropriate corrective measures in the interest of equity and justice, including the withdrawal of this public notice, is in order. Issues irregularities in the Implementation of the Act

Duration and Effect of Registration There is a serious discrimination in providing protection to various categories of extant varieties under Section 24(6). Clause (ii) of Section 24 (6) provides 15 years protection to the notified variety from the date of notification under Section 5 of the Seeds Act 1966, whereas clause (iii) provides for protection from the date of registration under PPV & FR Act in case of a variety of common knowledge (VCK). The different periods of protection for extant variety about which there is common knowledge and extant varieties notified under Seeds Act is discriminatory and violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Provisional Protection

Advertisement under Section 21 of PPV&FR Act

The risiht granted under PPV&FR Act, 2001 comes into force from the date of sirant of certificate of

The applications published in the PV Journal are not in accordance with the provisions laid down under

July - Sept. 2011

Implementation of Indian PPV&FR Act and Rules: Inadequacies Leading to Avoidable Litigation

breeders by publishing unconfirmed DUS characters. This is in violation of Section 20 which provides for acceptance of application after an enquiry by the Registrar. It is pertinent to mention here that Section 19 provides for conducting of DUS test. It means an application for registration can be accepted only if it confirms the claim of the applicant with regard to DUS characters. Only such an application, which is subjected to test under Section 20 and claims made found to be true and correct, is eligible for advertisement under Section 21.

the PPV&FR Act. Form 0-1 prescribed under rule 30 is defective, as it is not in line with the said rule, making effective filing of opposition a difficult task. Out of the several inconsistencies observed in the advertisement procedure, following are a few of the major issues: (I)The Act lays down under Rule 30(3) (a) that an advertisement for opposition in the PV Journal should contain information about the name, passport data and source of the parental line. Rule 30(3) (d) lays down that an advertisement in PV Journal should contain information about the agronomic and commercial attributes of variety. At present, the Registry is not providing all such information in the advertisements. In case of a hybrid, the parents are more important and integral. Any opposition to be filed in case of hybrid would have to be mostly based on the proprietary rights on the parents. Absence of any published information in the PV Journal as per the stated provisions of the law, constrains the concerned third parties in filing the opposition. Apart from this, some of the applicants do not disclose the true denomination of the parental lines involved in the development of the hybrid. Without proper scrutiny, the Registry is probably publishing false names of the parent lines, based on the particulars given in the application. The Registry is thereby, unwittingly helping applicants evade opposition. In such cases, there exists a high probability of a genuine breeder/company missing the chance to file an opposition with the unscrupulous applicant getting away to enjoy proprietary rights over someone else’s variety.

(iv)Photographs published in the PV journals must contain or depict the distinguishing features of the claimed characteristics of the variety, as laid down in the official notice on ‘Guidelines for line drawings and colour photographs to be submitted along with the application’.1 In an earlier official notice1" it was laid down that ‘the features of plant/plant parts shall be clear’. The quality of pictures presently being published in the PV journals rarely meet these guidelines and are not very useful in filing oppositions. In sharp contrast, the PV journals of other countries publish photographs clearly showing the distinguishing characters as claimed together with photographs of the reference varieties.15 Right to Obtain Certified Copies of any Document from the PPV&FR Registry Under Section 84 and Rule 76 of the Act, general public can obtain the certified copies of any document in any proceedings from the PPV & FR Registry by filing Form PV-33. However, no fee has been prescribed in the second schedule, as on date. There should be a mechanism whereby, despite nonpayment of fee, necessary action be taken on pending PV-33s by the Registry. Not only does the Authority publish advertisements with incomplete information inviting oppositions, it does not provide all documents applied for by filing PV33, making opponents handicapped; often compelling them to give up their rights on their own varieties.

(ii)U n d e r R u l e 3 0 ( 2 ) o f P P V & F R R u l e s , advertisement in the PV Journal should necessarily mention the place(s) where the specimen for the candidate variety may be inspected, which is not being adhered to by the Authority. As the time for filing opposition (90 days) against a variety begins from the time it is published in the PV Journal and received by the public, opponents are severely handicapped in filing an opposition within prescribed time in the absence of mandated adequate information in the said advertisement.

Registration of Transgenic Varieties The Registry offers protection for both transgenic and non transgenic versions of the same variety.

(iii)The DUS characters as claimed by the applicant are first published in the PV Journal after which the Registry conducts the DUS test to confirm accuracy of the claim made by the applicant. In effect, it means the Registry invites oppositions from the

July - Sept. 2011

Cotton is the only crop for which transgenic versions are available in India. Once the non-Bt version is registered under the PPV&FR Act, 2001, 16

Implementation of Indian PPV&FR Act and Rules: Inadequacies Leading to Avoidable Litigation

seeking registration for Bt versions of the same variety/hybrid is unnecessary and illogical, as nobody can develop transgenic version of a registered and protected variety without specific licence/ permission of the registry. Furthermore, it will be illegal and a misuse of process of law, if the Bt gene is added to an already registered non Bt/ non transgenic variety, and claimed to be an EDV or new variety.

other parties from committing infringements. There is no such provision or guidelines under the PPV&FR Act or Rules for the registry of a plant variety to notify the public about the registration of the said plant variety like in Trademarks Act. In the absence of such notification, infringement may be committed unknowingly.

Conclusion

Protection of Transgenic Parental Lines

Since the PPV&FR Act is in its infancy, the consequences of plant variety registration under the Act are yet to be felt and perceived by the seed industry in India. However, once the consequences of the Act start impacting the stakeholders, massive litigations are possible in the Indian seed industry in view of its highly competitive nature. It is still possible to rectify the existing anomalies/lacunae in enactment, rules and procedures in the Indian sui generis PVP legislation. Furthermore, discrepancies in the Act and the Rules appear to have already led to a situation where genuine concerned parties have been prevented from filing opposition proceedings against wrongful claims based on deliberate misrepresentation of facts and other deceitful practices. In the absence of urgent midcourse correction to the legislation, the Authority might be bogged down by avoidable litigation.

For registration of a transgenic variety, the PPV&FR Authority laid down that compulsorily approval by the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) should be enclosed. However, presently, the GEAC accords approval only for trials, production and marketing of Bt cotton hybrids and not for the Bt parent line. Thus, the lack of approval of GEAC has become an impediment in seeking registration of transgenic parent lines. This is an issue to be addressed and resolved by GEAC and PPV&FR Authority. Lack of Identification Under the Trademarks Act, a registered mark is denoted by ‘®' and the mark which is applied for registration is denoted by ‘TM’ (as superscript), wherever such mark is put to use. This prevents References 1

PPV&FR Act 2001, http://www.plantauthority.gov. iiVpdt/ Indgazette.pdf (3 December 2010).

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/t_agmO_e.htm (3 December 2010).

PPV&FR Authority constituted under Section 3 of the PPV&FR Act, vide Gazette Notification No 1588 (E) dated 11 November 2005, consists of one chairperson and fifteen members. http://www.plantauthority.gov.in/pdf/GZ_

1316.pdf (3 December 2010).

Registration of plant varieties under new variety category was notified vide Gazette Notification no 1316 dated 1 November 2006. whereas the Central Government notified the registration fee for new varieties much later, vide Gazette Notification no 319 (E) dated 11 May 2009. This became a matter for litigation when the Authority implemented the notification with retrospective effect Authority filed LPA No 491 of 2010, 492 of 2010 and 493 of 2010, before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi against the decision in W P (C) No 852 of 2010, 1370 of 2010 and 1373 of 2010.

APSA's position and the seed industry's perspective on plant variety protection in the Asia and Pacific Region. Hideto Kaneko Sakata Seed Corporation. Yokohama Japan. http://www.apsaseed.org/images/lovelypics/Documents/PreCongress08/APSAposition.pdf(3 December 2010).

Under Section 5 of the Seeds Act 1966. the Central Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, may notify a kind or variety in order to regulate the quality of seed of such kind or variety to be sold for purposes of agriculture: Law of Seeds, 14th edn (Asia Law House. Hyderabad). 2010. p. 10.

Provisional protection provision (Section 20) of Plant Variety Protection Act Act 22 of 2004, Singapore. http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/.\

The Plant Variety Journal. 3 (9) 2009. http://www.plamauthority.gov.iiVpdt7PVJ_sept_2009.pdf (4 December 2010).

S Nagarajan. paper presented in National Consultative Seminar on Section 41 of PPV&FR Act 2001: Rights of Communities, New Delhi, 25-26 May 2010, http://www.plantauthority.gov.in /pdf/Proced_rightsofcommunity.pdf(4 December 2010).

The Plant Variety Journal. 3 (11) 2009.

Gazette Notification No 2883 dated 02 December 2010, http://www.plantauthority.gov.in/pdf/GZ_2883.pdf (3 December 2010).

The Plant Variety Journal. 1 (3) 2007.

B rah mi P. Saxena S and Dhillon B S. The protection of plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act of India. Current Science, 86 (3) (2004) 392-398.\

Plant Variety Journals of Canada, http://www.inspection.gc. ca/english/plaveg/pbrpov/joubule.shtml (4 December 2010).

(Reprinted from Journal of Intellectual Property Rights Vol. 16(2), 2011)

July - Sept. 2011

Can Private Sector R&D Reach Small Farms? Macro Ferroni , Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture, Email: marco.ferroni@gmail.com

Millions of small farmers are reached commercially every day as they buy seeds and crop protection products, fertiliser, cell phones, machinery and tools, taking advantage of the science and research embodied in these products. The market for agricultural inputs is large, and the role of the private sector as a purveyor of technology and services is growing. It is in the nature of the private sector to bring products to the market and deliver value, including to small farmers. But the private sector goes where there is a commercial incentive. Farmers that are too poor to purchase inputs are not helped, and the technologies they need may not get developed. This is a public policy and societal challenge that cannot be solved by the public or the private sector alone. The solution requires the creative complementarities of public–private cooperation that — in addition to the farm population — must include the ‘third’ or not-for-profit sector (foundations, NGOs, civil society). This pathway can develop and deliver solutions to large numbers of small farmers.

purveyor of technology and services is growing. It is in the nature of the private sector to bring products to the market and deliver value, including to small farmers. But the private sector goes where there is a commercial incentive and a business case where money can be made. Farmers that are too poor to purchase inputs are not helped, and the technologies they need may not get developed. A Comments by colleagues at Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture are kindly acknowledged. Special thanks and recognition go to Vivienne Anthony, Mike Robinson and Yuan Zhou for their contributions. The usual disclaimers apply. This is a public policy and societal challenge that cannot be solved by the public or the private sector alone. It requires public–private cooperation that — in addition to the farm population — must include the ‘third’ or not-for profit sector (foundations, NGOs, civil society). Cooperation offers the prospect to overcome each sector’s limitations: the business sector’s inability to operate where there is no market; the not-for-profit sector’s tools and interventions that tend to take the form of projects that can reach only relatively small numbers of farmers; and the public sector’s limited ability to market research outputs.

Introduction The theme of the Crawford Fund’s 2009 Annual Development Conference — World Food Security: Can Private Sector R&D Feed the Poor? — continues to be relevant and timely. World food security is a distant dream. Donors have reacted to the recent food price crisis by promising increased support to agriculture — notably in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia where crop yield shortfalls are pronounced. But ultimately it is the private sector that must deliver inputs to the farmers. Can private R&D and distribution channels reach small farmers, the group that produces most of the food consumed in less developed countries and emerging markets?

Clearly, public agricultural research is important and there is a large literature on its impact. The benefits include spillovers that clear the road for private agricultural research. For example, the seed industry in India — which reaches millions of small farmers annually and makes major contributions to yield gains in the country’s smallholder- dominated agriculture (Gadwal 2003) — benefits from access to germplasm and breeding lines developed by the public sector. But public agricultural research has lost some of its dominance, luster and dynamic edge. Global public agricultural research spending is down when expressed as a share of agricultural GDP, whereas private spending is up, having grown significantly in the last two to three decades. Creative complementarities and cooperation between the public and the private sector are

The answer is straightforward: millions of small farmers are reached commercially every day as they buy seeds and crop protection products, fertiliser, cell phones, machinery and tools, taking advantage of the science and research embodied in these products. The market for agricultural inputs is large, and the role of the private sector as a July - Sept. 2011

Can Private Sector R&D Reach Small Farms?

needed to develop and deliver solutions to large numbers of small farmers. This paper looks at how this can be done.

Micro-level studies of the impact of private research show similarly strong effects. The CIMMYT impact study of modern maize varieties estimated that by 2000, maize breeding by international, national and private sector researchers collectively had added about 1 t ha–1, on average, to the 58.8 million ha in developing countries where modern maize varieties had been adopted (Morris 2002, cited from Pray et al.).

Impact of Private Agricultural Research The impact of private agricultural research is less well documented than that of public R&D, and the literature that exists does not have much to say about impacts by farm size. The literature has been reviewed by Pray et al. (2007), and it is from this source that this section borrows.

Private research is undertaken by domestic and multinational companies. The relative effects of each on yields, farm profits and agricultural growth are difficult to disentangle because of the presence of spillovers of private research from rich to poor countries, such as when multinational companies engage in cross-border technology partnerships.

Private R&D fosters innovation and productivity gains in agriculture in both rich and poor countries. A number of studies attest for example to the positive impact of private agricultural research by Indian seed companies on crop yields and farm profits in that country. Econometric studies cited by Pray et al. demonstrate that:

The impact of private agricultural research is easier to demonstrate for certain regions and products than for others. It has visible impact in Latin America, South Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia. In Asia private R&D benefits small farmers almost by definition, because there are few farms there that are not small. There is less impact in Sub-Saharan Africa so far because economic conditions there have long been relatively depressed, seed markets barely exist (see below), and there is a relative disincentive to private research that stems from the region’s large number of different crops each with relatively small markets.

• increases in the use of manufactured agricultural inputs developed and sold by the private sector added to average annual agricultural growth in Asia and Latin America, but not in Africa • private research had the effect of increasing agricultural output by raising total factor productivity when the quality of inputs improved such as when breakthrough chemicals and varieties of seed or machinery were developed and diffused. Assessments of total factor productivity in Indian agriculture that looked at the relative contributions of public and private agricultural research found positive private contributions, but they were smaller than those derived from public R&D.

Private sector innovations are dominant in some important product categories: agricultural chemicals, seed treatment, plant growth regulation, fertiliser, machinery, many hybrid varieties, and genetically engineered crops. Therefore, where products from these categories are sold and used, impacts of private R&D come into view. In China, genetically modified crops and a significant share of hybrid seeds for key crops are developed by the public sector, but partnerships with private firms are growing. The adoption of products from these categories differs widely across countries and world regions; the reader is referred to Pray et al. for data. An aspect that the products have in common, except for some types of mechanisation, is their scale-neutrality and thus their applicability irrespective of farm size, at least in principle.

Studies that examined the impact of private research on productivity changes in particular commodities, especially hybrid maize and poultry, found significant effects on maize yield from research conducted by multinational seed companies and from seed imports. Pray et al. note that hybrid seed technology can be transferred directly among temperate countries through seed imports, while adaptive research is required to move technology from temperate to tropical regions. The authors report that private pearl millet and sorghum breeding for the semi-arid tropics made important contributions to farmers’ income and welfare in India by increasing yields by means of hybrids that were both high-yielding and resistant to diseases to which public hybrids were susceptible. July - Sept. 2011

What are the factors limiting adoption then? ‘Farm capability’, a concept introduced in the next section, is one such factor. Others include: 20

Can Private Sector R&D Reach Small Farms?

• the absence of extension services

and other industries reveals. The literature on the distribution of benefits from improved varieties — both conventional hybrids and transgenics — among farmers and seed companies dispels the myth of monopoly profits accruing to the industry. Pray et al. cite the case of hybrid sorghum in one period in India where seed companies captured less than one-fifth of total benefits, while more than four-fifths went to farmers. Gouse et al. (2004) found that during the 2000/2001 cropping season in South Africa, 33% of the benefits from introducing Bt cotton went to the seed company and its distributors and 67% to domestic farmers.

• the absence of remunerative links to markets • the absence of technology that works, either because the research to develop the technology has not been done or because the regulatory framework in the country precludes farmers from accessing it. The price of purchased inputs, and considerations such as patents, hybrids, oligopolistic conditions in the international crop science industry, and whether or not ‘biotechnology’ is involved have little or no bearing: • The price of seed — and crop protection products for that matter — ‘is not considered a constraint in usage by the farmers, if the seed (or product) ensures higher return through higher productivity and other value added traits’ (Gadwal 2003). This is the inescapable conclusion from data on the growth of the Indian seed market between 1990/1991 and 1998/1999 that show steady increases in (I) area planted to bought seed — including open pollinated varieties — and (ii) proprietary hybrids at the expense of public hybrids even as the average price of proprietary hybrids rose.

• As to ‘biotechnology’ in its various dimensions, including genetic modification, this is a blessing, not a curse — for farmers and farm profitability, consumers and the environment. Agricultural biotechnology helps improve crop plants by providing built-in protection against diseases and insects, and by conveying herbicide tolerance. This creates opportunities to produce more food in sustainable ways. Pray et al. note that the overall importance of private agricultural research to agricultural development has been increasing over time. They also note that private agricultural research is uneven in that it favors certain types of technologies and inputs. (Actually, it is not different from public agricultural research in this respect.) The footprint of private agricultural research in SubSaharan Africa is weak. Important questions are what public policy can do to stimulate private research in the full range of challenges that demand solutions, and how private and public research capability can be pooled for the benefit of small farmers. These are addressed below.

• Plant breeders’ rights and patents on mechanical, chemical and biological products and processes are a means of promoting and protecting investment in R&D and innovation. Rather than making small farmers in developing countries dependent on expensive inputs, as some tend to argue, these tools of intellectual property lead to the development of technology that would otherwise not become available and that farmers can choose to use or not to use. Hybrid varieties — which provide appropriability without patents — are sought out by farmers because of the yield advantages and other traits that they convey.

The Small Farm Challenge Census data indicate that there are about 450 million small farms with up to 2 ha of land in nonOECD countries today, mostly in China, the Indian sub-continent and Africa. Assuming an average farm household size of five, the corresponding agricultural population is about 2.3 billion people, a third of mankind. Not surprisingly, the farms operate under a wide range of natural and manmade opportunities and limitations. At the lower end of the spectrum, farms are not viable as economic units in average years. At the upper end, farmers have access to productivity-enhancing

• Does industrial concentration or for some reason the evolution of science and ‘agricultural biotechnology’ create conditions that hinder the adoption of technology by small farmers? Hardly. Some level of concentration is a reality in many economic sectors for many reasons nowadays. It does not mean that there is not competition or that innovation is neglected, as a glance at the information and communications technology sector, automobiles, pharmaceuticals July - Sept. 2011

Can Private Sector R&D Reach Small Farms?

technology and are commercial, buying inputs such as seed and fertiliser and selling produce. Agrodealers (and thus the private sector) are a key source of technology and externally supplied agronomic knowledge and expertise for this group. If one assumes for the sake of an indicative calculation that 40% of the total number of small farms (450 million) run commercial operations — not an implausible figure — one gets a universe of some 270 million small farms in developing and emerging market countries that are ‘precommercial’, practicing what some call ‘subsistence farming’, a potentially misleading term, among other reasons because it suggests ‘autarchy’ at the family or community level when in reality nobody can live without money and trade. The yields and profitability of these farms are low, and emigration out of agriculture may be the best option to the extent that there are off-farm jobs domestically or abroad to which farmers in this category can aspire. However, offf arm employment is scarce. The re-shaping of economic geography, a process that is massively underway these days, takes time, and farming, therefore, remains the default form of employment for many ‘precommercial’ farmers in the short and medium run.

labour that is cheap in relation to capital in developing countries, they face low transaction costs per unit of output associated with labour, the main contributor to output other than land. So investing in small farms by developing technology and making it accessible to them is not ‘backward’ or a ‘lost cause from the outset’ as some might have it: it can be a winning proposition, quite apart from being necessary and irreplaceable as a route to food security and poverty reduction in countries where the rural population is large and most farms are small, as in all of Asia and much of Africa. Paths to food security and poverty reduction that are based on the intensification of smallholder agriculture on a large scale will remain relevant for several decades to come — until spatial demographic realities change and the urban and rural non-agricultural economy lastingly absorbs a large share of agricultural labour Agricultural intensification requires technology and also services by which inputs are delivered and farmers can be linked to markets. Exhibit 1 lists some of the products and practices that this entails: varieties, chemicals, mechanical tools, fertiliser and agronomic practices, to mention but some of the components of ‘technology’. Key services include seed and other input systems, agricultural extension, connectivity, market and weather data, financial services such as credit and agricultural insurance, infrastructure, ‘conducive’ agricultural and trade policies, and market access for the farmer.

The private and social pay-off for improving productivity, sustainability and profitability through links to markets of ‘pre-commercial’ farming is high in this situation. How to get there on the required scale is the break-through question that exercises the professional community that is active in this field. Two phenomena bode well: technology (in the broadest sense of the term) is advancing in leaps and bounds, and markets for agricultural commodities — including high-value products for human consumption such as vegetables and fruit — are growing as never before because of rapid income and continued population growth. The opportunity for transformational change in smallscale farming is there.

Needs for technology and the capacity to productively absorb external inputs vary with the ‘capability’ of farms. Exhibit 2 suggests a way of thinking about agricultural intensification from ‘enhanced basics’ at the cash- and endowmentstrapped bottom to successively more professional levels of inputs and technology as capability expands. It is an additive progression: basic elements of technology need to be present at each successive step.

Smallness is not an economic condemnation. Small farms can be viable, and many that are not could be with the help of technology and links to markets. Michael Lipton has demonstrated that there is an inverse relationship between farm size and land productivity in labour-abundant developing countries across most conceivable conditions: ‘small farms produce more, per hectare per year, than large farms’ (Lipton 2009).

At the low end of the spectrum, improved agronomy (and thus competent extension services, privately or publicly supplied, or offered through mixed partnerships), seeds (typically of the farmersaved kind), and basic soil nutrients are the priority. At higher levels, there is scope for additions to the basics that farmers can afford if there are links to markets. These additions include hybrids, possibly transgenic traits and stacks, modern crop

As small farmers apply family and community July - Sept. 2011

Can Private Sector R&D Reach Small Farms?

protection, crop enhancement chemistry, nutritional content enhancement through biofortification, precision agriculture and so on, all ideally combined with low-tillage farming and other methods to preserve water and take care of soils.

distributors) selling fertilisers, machinery, agrochemicals and seeds can be expected to come in as capability expands. This can create movement to the right or vertically as a result of good agricultural extension or in response to relevant technologies that spread by themselves as in the case of Bt cotton in some countries. Farmers, even very modest ones, will buy inputs if they detect an opportunity to realise returns.

Exhibit 1. Technology and services Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture

Exhibit 3. Stakeholders and the additive progression Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture

The R&D challenge in smallholder agriculture is to develop the right kinds of products for different farm capabilities and agro-ecological conditions and then take them to market and the farmer. This may sound easy, but it is not. Partnerships can help in two respects: to bring out synergy between private and public entities in agricultural research and to develop — or ‘kick-start’ — input markets where they do not exist.

Exhibit 2. Farm capability as an additive progression (ROI = return on investment) Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture

Business Partnerships in Agricultural Research

Return on investment’ (‘ROI’ in Exhibit 2) is the decision paradigm. Note at the same time that there is not only movement to the right in the progression, but also movement up. Farmers can improve farming within their capability (‘horses for courses’) as the widespread adoption of Bt cotton by smallholders in India suggests. Even at the simplest and essentially ‘organic’ level of farming, improvements in land management and yield can be achieved. The ‘natural’ supporting actors in this model differ depending on the point in the progression (cf. Exhibit 3). Not-for-profit actors — foundations and NGOs professionally specialised in agriculture, and the public sector — are vital at the lower end. For-profit sector companies (and their July - Sept. 2011

Agricultural technology is in essence about realising yield potential. The seed that the farmer plants holds yield potential that must be protected in the face of risk. This is achieved with the help of inputs and management that include traits (derived conventionally or through genetic modification), seed treatment, sprays, fertiliser, and ‘agronomy’, where particular attention is paid to water and nutrient management and postharvest technology. Ultimately, too, a healthy farmer is a pre-requisite for effective risk management and the achievement of yield potential. How to enhance the yield potential that is 23

Can Private Sector R&D Reach Small Farms?

Table 1. Recent examples of public–private partnerships in international agricultural research. Source: Private sector and AATF websites Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture Partner / partnership

Date announced

Rice science exDecember change and collabo- 2009 ration programme

Partners

Objectives

Bayer CropScience, International Rice Research Centre (IRRI)

To strengthen rice productivity by utilising rice genetic diversity, development of diagnostic tools for seed-borne bacterial leaf blight, monitoring greenhouse gas emissions from growing systems, and capacity building for young rice scientists. To rapidly identify and map genetic markers to support wheat resistance breeding against Ug99 stem rust (Puccinia graminis). This fungus is causing devastating crop losses and spreading across Africa, Asia and the Middle East. To strengthen and accelerat e breeding efforts and commercialisation of higher-yielding hybrids with added resistance to brown plant hopper. To boost the quality and diversity of hybrid rice in Asia. Doctorate scholarship programme for rice scientists for Asia. To use marker-assisted breeding and biotechnology to develop African maize varieties with the long-term goal of making drought-tolerant maize available royalty-free to African small-scale farmers.

Wheat rust resis- August 2009 Syngenta, tance research partInternational Maize and nership Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT) Boosting rice yields March 2009 — science exchange programme

DuPont, International Rice Research Centre (IRRI)

Water Efficient March 2008 Maize for Africa (WEMA) (A multilateral consortium led by AATF)

Monsanto, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Centre (CIMMYT); African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF); National Agricultural Research Systems (NARS) in five African countries

embodied in the seed? Molecular breeding building on the genomics revolution of the past decade is the key. Transgenic approaches can also offer some specific scope.

and needs for partnerships arise when private companies and public organisations lack the resources or incentives to fully develop products or exploit their assets independently — an almost everyday occurrence where research for ‘precommercial’ agriculture is concerned.

It turns out that molecular breeding presents ‘natural’ opportunities for partnerships between the public and the private sector such as centres of the Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) and national programs, on the one hand, and crop science companies on the other. This is so because of the distribution of comparative advantages in phenotyping and genotyping, both of which are needed to develop varieties and traits that are of interest to farmers.

Unfortunately, the types of partnerships that are desirable — with symmetry as far as the distribution of burdens and benefits is concerned and clarity as to the objectives, the business plan, the protection of (and agreement on how to exploit) intellectual property, and accountability for deliverables — are not necessarily easy to bring about. Deals must be negotiated, and there is little to go by in the form of precedent and guidance. Publicprivate partnerships in international agricultural research are slowly growing in number, but each deal is generic — which does not mean it cannot be part of a publicly announced, consistent strategy. The examples in Table 1 are vital aspects of plans by individual international agricultural research centers to gain relevance through products using advanced genomics, molecular biology and

The public sector, with its germplasm resources and knowledge derived from in situ field trials, has particular strengths in phenotyping and breeding, whereas the private sector, with its high throughput genomic and bioinformatics capabilities, is well resourced to contribute knowledge and capability on gene sequencing and genotyping. Opportunities July - Sept. 2011

Can Private Sector R&D Reach Small Farms?

stewardship management capacity is a precondition for the introduction of transgenic events anywhere. The Syngenta Foundation is funding a project in biosafety and stewardship management in Africa and is partnering with the Forum of Agricultural Research for Africa (FARA) to catalyse sharing of best practice in stewardship between private- and public-sector R&D and seed communities.

breeding methods. As an example, the Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture brokered an agreement between Syngenta (the Corporation) and CIMMYT in 2009 to cooperate on breeding for resistance to Ug99, the new, virulent strain of stem rust (a fungal disease) that threatens the global wheat harvest and requires stepped-up research to find sources of resistance and to breed varieties that can cope.

All told, a new reality was recognised: given the lay of incentives and comparative advantage, partnerships (or perhaps a form of joint ventures) between the public and the private for-profit and not-for-profit sectors are needed to reach large numbers of small farmers. The list of implementation issues is non-trivial, however, and must be dealt with. It includes the need for agreement on the sharing of germplasm, open access to data, implementable approaches to market segmentation, arrangements to deal with stewardship and liability in the case of transgenic crops, market analysis, and performing routes to market and the farmer.

The two-year project seeks to rapidly identify and map genetic markers for use in wheat resistance breeding. Funded by the Foundation, the project combines Syngenta’s genetic profiling expertise with the strengths of CIMMYT’s extensive field research to develop a genetic map of wheat stem rust resistance. This will culminate in the development of wheat varieties that have better tolerance to the disease. The results from this project will contribute directly to the global effort to combat stem rust, which is coordinated by the Borlaug Global Rust Initiative. The marker data arising from the research will be published. Pre-breeding information developed by the project will thus be in the public domain for others to use without restriction — a standard to which public–private partnerships in international agricultural research should rise. In turn, the breeding products that are expected to be developed by CIMMYT and Syngenta, respectively, will be marketed by each in its geographies and markets. A CGIAR Workshop on Public Private Partnerships and Associated Needs for Product Stewardship and Liability was hosted by the Syngenta Foundation in November 2009. The workshop concluded that ‘PPPs (public private partnerships) should be seen as a valuable and effective vehicle … to capitalise on the complementarities that exist between the CGIAR and the private sector’s R&D value-creation process’.2 Participants noted the need to bring R&D closer together with product dissemination and deployment to generate impact where it matters, that is in farmers’ fields. They recognised strengths of the private sector that go beyond breeding, transgenics and pre-breeding — for example, in project management and how to organise a research process with a development mindset to bring products to the market and to farmers in good time. Likewise, they recognised the private sector’s assets of know-how and expertise in stewardship management. High quality July - Sept. 2011

Business Partnerships to Kick-Start Input Markets Routes to market and the farmer are as important as advanced chemistry and genomics, if the objective is to achieve change on the ground. Markets are needed to help the millions of small farmers that must be reached in the effort to bring technology to every acre farmed. Some rural markets clearly work, reaching customers on a massive scale: think of soap, certain drinks and mobile phones. For agricultural input products and services this is not the case, at least not to the same extent, because of demand and supply side constraints that need to be addressed. On the demand side, for farmers to buy inputs and services they must have access to markets for their products (a vital topic not specifically discussed in this paper because of space limitations) or a source of income such as cash entitlements or offfarm employment. Well administered and effective intermediate solutions — typically partnershipbased, such as when governments or NGOs buy and distribute seed and fertiliser at subsidised rates - can help ease the demand constraint in subsequent years if they engender income growth. The question is whether and to what extent they do. 25

Can Private Sector R&D Reach Small Farms?

harmonisation, too, would help because of the high cost of registering new products and the resulting disincentive to take them to small markets. So for input markets to begin to function, and for products to become available to farmers, certain conditions need to be fulfilled, particularly as related to regulation and stewardship capacity as discussed in the previous section. Partnerships can then play productive roles, as shown forthwith with reference to seeds and fertiliser. Exhibit 4 on area shares of maize seed types displays the position of selected countries in the landscape of proprietary, publicly supplied and unimproved farmersaved seed. Not surprisingly, the private sector’s presence measured in area shares is much higher in the selected Asian cases with their relatively well-developed seed markets and seed distribution systems than in Africa, except for South Africa.`

Exhibit 4. Area share of maize seed types, selected countries Source: Global Seed Market Database, 2009. Syngenta Foundation for Sustainable Agriculture

On the supply side, the first aspect to note is that selling to different farm capabilities at the bottom of the pyramid is well-known as a method in the input and crop-science industry and practiced by agro-dealers all over the developing world. But in agriculture special considerations apply: the first is the fact that for best results and safe and effective use, inputs must be marketed along with knowledge, the delivery of which must be provided for in farmer-interactive ways that foster learning. This can complicate the task. The second consideration refers to regulation. Inputs such as seed and crop protection products are regulated, and regulation, if it is not well designed and properly administered, can have the unintended effect of withholding safe and needed products from the market.

Seed markets and seed systems are in rudimentary stages of development in much of Africa. It can take years for improved varieties to find their way to farmers’ fields — some never make it — for reasons having to do with four sets of challenges: • the establishment of seed companies in what are uncertain, high-cost, and over- and ill-regulated environments • the production of seed, which is plagued by the lack of access to germplasm and credit, among other factors •

Thus, for seeds, unrealistic quality standards are sometimes encountered that inhibit the emergence of a seed industry. Where national markets are small, as in Africa, the lack of harmonisation of seed laws across countries (such as related to varietal release, phyto-sanitary standards and plant variety protection) hampers the emergence of seed companies and markets by inhibiting cross-border trade.

• the demand for seed at the farm level, which is low because of the absence of supporting services and problems with grain marketing on the output side (Langyintuo et al. 2008) In India, the seed business took off decades ago with the advent of private seed companies that operated in close partnership with the public sector and benefitted from public germplasm, pragmatic regulation with the 1964 Seeds Act and the New Seed Policy of 1986 as milestones, and support from the Rockefeller Foundation in the early days and to this day from the national agricultural research system and the CGIAR.

In crop protection, farmers need access to the most effective agents with the greatest operator and environmental safety profiles, rather than the old and outmoded generic technology that one frequently encounters in developing countries and emerging markets. Regulatory systems often fail to provide for this. Cross-border regulatory July - Sept. 2011

the marketing of seed, where poor infrastructure is a constraint

Partnerships of this kind are needed in Africa to give rise to an entrepreneurial class in the seed 26

Can Private Sector R&D Reach Small Farms?

sector — managers and business owners who understand plant breeding and the intricacies of seed production, the challenges of seed promotion, marketing and pricing, and the need for seed companies to provide advice linked to their products on all aspects of cultivation: land selection and preparation, fertiliser application, irrigation and moisture management, pest, weed and disease control, and harvesting and postharvest technology.

Accelerated Agricultural Inputs Program is an example with a unique feature that links farmers to credit from Equity Bank. The challenges of design and implementation of these programs, which must have an exit strategy, are significant, of course, but so are the benefits, potentially, in the form of improved productivity of small farms, farm income, and as a contribution to the development of input markets. This contribution can be expected to be the more ‘productive’, the better organised and stronger markets are on the output side. The World Food Programme’s local food procurement program ‘Purchase for Progress’ can play a role in this respect by helping to develop secure markets for farmers’ harvests. introduction), supported by functioning markets on the output side’. The generic functions that must be combined include helpful policies and regulation from the public sector; products and investments to develop the market from the business sector; and a role of ‘tipping the scales’ for foundations and not-forprofits.

Fortunately, a number of partnerships and efforts are underway at the national and sub-regional level in Africa to drive seed policy reform, link publicsector breeding efforts and emerging private actors, create conditions for commercial investments in R&D, and establish seed consortia to bring together different types of implementing partners to address seed sector development in a coordinated way. Vitally important ‘work in progress’, clearly, where governments, donors, the Alliance for a Green Revolution for Africa (AGRA) and programs by some of the centres of the CGIAR are working in tandem with emerging local firms that themselves are getting organised in national seed trade associations. An African Seed Trade Association was formed in 2000 to represent the African private seed sector to promote production, marketing and the use of improved seed.

References Gadwal, V.R. 2003. The Indian seed industry: its history, current status and future. Current Science 84, 399–406.

Public–private partnerships are also at work in fertiliser distribution. Under the Rwandan Government’s Crop Intensification Program, for example, an apparently effective public–private partnership to develop a market for fertiliser and distribute fertiliser to small farmers has been underway since the 2007 main cropping season. The partnership takes the form of an auction for fertiliser: the government imports fertiliser and auctions it off to private distributors who then transport and sell it to communities and farmers at the local level, sometimes in package deals with seed. The effects on the quantities of fertiliser moved and maize yields have been significant, aided by adequate rains, with maize yields rising, on average, from 0.7 t ha–1 in 2007 to 1.1 t ha–1 in 2008 and 1.7 t ha–1 in 2009 according to crop assessment data of the Ministry of Agriculture.

Gouse, M., Pray, C.E. and Schimmelpfennig, D. 2004. The distribution of benefits from Bt cotton adoption in South Africa. AgBioForum 7, 187–194. Langyintuo, A.S., Mwangi, W., Diallo, A.O., MacRobert, J., Dixon, J. and Bänziger, M. 2008. An Analysis of the Bottlenecks Affecting the Production and Deployment of Maize Seed in Eastern and S o u t h e r n A f r i c a . C I M M Y T, M e x i c o D F. http://www.cimmyt.org. Lipton, M. 2009. Land Reform in Developing Countries. Routledge, London and New York. Morris, M.L. 2002. Impact of International Maize Breeding in Developing Countries, 1966–98. CIMMYT, Mexico DF. http://books.google.com. Pray, C.E., Fuglie, K.O. and Johnson, D.K.N. 2007. Private agricultural research. In: Evenson, R, and Pingali, P. (eds) Handbook of Agricultural Economics. Vol. 3, Chapter 49, pp. 2605–2640. Elsevier.

Versions of Rwanda’s model of public–private partnership for agricultural inputs are in effect in many African countries today; Kenya’s National

(Reprinted from the proceeding of the Crawford Fund Fifteenth Annual International Conference, Canberra, Australia, 2009)

July - Sept. 2011

Rice Seed Production Scenario in India Y. Yogeswara Rao, Vikky's Agrisciences Pvt. Ltd., E-mail: vikkysagriscience@gmail.com

tonnes of rice will be required by 2025, against the current production of 234.50 and 94.01 million tonnes of food grains and rice respectively during 2010-11.

Abstract The growing population of India along with its changing food habits needs around 130 million tonnes of rice by 2025. Seed is the basic and critical input in crop production. The increase in rice production can be achieved through quality seed, hybrid seed and transgenic varieties tolerant to pests etc. The usage of farm saved seed is to be reduced and farmers are to be encouraged to use quality seed to increase productivity levels.

Per Capita Availability of Food Grains and Rice in India. The per capita availability of foodgrains increased from 144.1 to 162.1 kg per year during 1951 to 2009 while the rice availability increased from 58.0 to 68.8 kg per person per year. In view of the increase in purchasing power and increase in population, the growth in rice and foodgrain production is needed (Table 1).

Andhra Pradesh which is popular as “Seed Hub of India”, can produce required quantities of quality seed of varieties and hybrids on indents to various states, besides meeting its own requirements. Private sector is playing a key role in seed production in Andhra Pradesh. About 85 percent of the hybrid rice seed marketed in the country is produced in Andhra Pradesh. It is estimated that nearly 3.5 to 3.75 lakh qtls of hybrid rice seed was produced in Andhra Pradesh during Rabi 2010-11.

Table 1: Per Capita Net Availability of Rice Vs Foodgrains (per annum) in India. (kg. per year) Year

The public sector research organisations, ViZ., ICAR/SAUs to provide the seeds of latest varieties/hybrids of rice to public and private sector seed companies on liberalised terms of MOA. To popularize the usage of quality seed, the Government of India should allow subsidy under different schemes for all popular hybrids without insisting for notification and release. This will help particularly for increase of area under hybrid rice in the country. Seed is the basic and critical input in crop production. In the absence of quality seed, the investments made on other agricultural inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides both under rainfed and irrigated conditions will not give desired yields. Thus, for raising the productivity levels in crops, “Quality seed is a must”. It is necessary to provide quality seed on time, in adequate quantities near the door steps of the farmers.

Foodgrains

Percentage of Rice to Foodgrains

1951

58.0

144.1

40.24

1961

73.4

171.1

42.89

1971

70.3

171.1

41.08

1981

72.2

166.0

43.49

1991

80.9

186.2

43.44

2001

69.5

151.9

45.75

2009

68.8

162.1

42.44

Source: Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2010: Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, GOI

The targeted foodgrain production can be achieved by vertical growth in crop production particularly in crops like rice and wheat. Rice is the staple food for nearly 70% of the Indian population. During the year 2010-11, rice with 94.01 million tonnes of production contributed to 40.5% of the total foodgrain production of the country (Table 2). Table 2: India-Rice Production During 2006-07 to 2010-11 Year

The current population of India is 121.02 (2011 Census) crores. It is estimated that the population is likely to increase to 138.89 crores by the year 2025. To meet the requirement of growing population and changing life style, about 300 million tonnes of food grains including 130 million July - Sept. 2011

Rice

Production (Million tonnes)

Increase/Decrease in production over previous year (%)

2006-07

93.36

—

2007-08

96.69

+3.5

2008-09

99.18

+2.5

2009-10

89.13

-10.1

2010-11*

94.01

+5.4

Source: Agricultural Statistics at a Glance 2010: Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, GOI *National Conference on Agriculture for Kharif campaign - 2011, Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, GOI

Rice Seed Production Scenario in India

During the past five years, the growth in rice production ranged from 2.5 to 5.4% except in 2009-10 which was -10.1%. Thus in general it shows the need for further increase in rice production and also stabilisation of production during aberrant weather conditions.

tubers were higher than the requirements proposed under National Seed Plan (Table 3) Table 3. Seed Requirements of India as per National Seed Plan (NSP) and Seed Availability in 2010-11. Quantity: Lakh qtls

The rice productivity and production can be improved by using: 1. Quality seed of location specific improved varieties released by ICAR/SAU’s/ Private sector.

Crop Group

Seed requirement as per NSP

Seed availability 2010-11

All Cereals

184.77

201.31

All Pulses

23.26

25.90

All Oil Seeds

41.60

66.82

All Fibers

4.36

3.44

2. To encourage usage of short duration hybrids in Northern India (both Notified and Nonnotified) to enable sowing of wheat and other crops on time in rabi season and long duration hybrids for kharif in coastal areas.

Potato & others

4.88

20.57

All Crops

258.87

321.36

3. Development and adoption of transgenic rice varieties/ hybrids tolerant to insect pests as in China.

Source: National Conference on Agriculture for Kharif campaign - 2011, Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, GOI

4. Promotion of best management practices in rice production.

During kharif 2011, the rice seed availability was 64.05 lakh qtls. against the requirement of 62.75 lakh qtls. The seed production of required rice varieties / hybrids can be organised during rabi season in semi-arid areas of different states to get good quality seeds.

INDIAN SEED INDUSTRY Indian seed industry comprising of both Public and Private Sector companies is well poised to meet the specific seed demands of farmers, dealers and distributors.

Seed Replacement Rates (SRR) in Rice The Seed Replacement Rates in rice are comparatively low in the states of Madhya Pradesh, Chathisgarh, Haryana, Bihar, Orissa, Jharkhand and West Bengal. The details of Seed Replacement Rates in rice during 2008-09 to 2010-11 are given in Table 4.

As per the demand projections of National Seed Plan (NSP), the country needs nearly258.87 lakh qtls. of seeds of all crop varieties / hybrids. During the year 2010-11, a total quantity of 321.36 lakh qtls of seeds of all crops was available in the country.

The states with comparatively low SRR can meet their requirements by entering into agreement for seed production with Public sector (State Seeds Corporations(SSCs))/Governmental agencies / Cooperatives / Private sector organizations in the surplus seed producing states like Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra, U.P. etc

Currently 25-30% of the total seed requirement of the country is being met from organized seed production while rest of the seed requirement is met from farm saved seed. Farmers are to be motivated to use quality seed obtained from organized seed production rather than using farm saved seed.

PUBLIC - PRIVATE - PARTNERSHIP (PPP) IN SEED PRODUCTION

Seed Requirement and Availability in India

The public sector research organizations (ICAR/SAU’s) need support of public and private sector seed companies for popularizing the high yielding varieties / hybrids of rice developed by

During 2010-2011, the quantities of seed produced in cereals, pulses, oil seeds, potato and other July - Sept. 2011

Rice Seed Production Scenario in India

Table 4: Seed Replacement Rates (SRR) in Rice in Major Rice Growing States of India During 2008-09 to 2010-11 (SRR in percentage) State

Area (m.ha) *

Seed Replacement Rates (2008-09 to 2010-11)

2006-07

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

Karnataka

1.39

32.95

38.85

42.65

Gujarat

0.73

22.76

37.32

36.44

Madhya Pradesh

1.66

11.05

15.60

13.31

Tamil Nadu

1.93

61.39

73.09

70.00

Andhra Pradesh

3.98

100.00

Maharashtra

1.53

42.07

42.02

44.13

Chathisgarh

3.72

13.81

20.39

28.41

Punjab

2.62

21.09

27.83

40.08

Haryana

1.04

17.86

18.52

21.69

Uttar Pradesh

5.92

28.92

28.40

37.77

Bihar

3.36

19.51

26.39

31.27

Orissa

4.45

15.05

19.07

20.79

Jharkhand

1.62

14.61

23.42

25.13

West Bengal

5.69

28.03

30.00

32.00

Assam

2.19

22.70

32.42

46.45

Source: National Conference on Agriculture for Kharif campaign - 2011, Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, GOI *Rice Almanac India, DRR 2010

them. To enable the farmers to have access for the latest varietal / hybrid seed of public sector research organisations (ICAR/SAU’s), the following changes are needed in the MOA being adopted by ICAR/SAU’s currently (Table 5). This goes a long way in making available the seeds of latest rice varieties/hybrids developed by public sector to the farming community which ultimately helps to July - Sept. 2011

increase farm incomes. All popular hybrids of public sector/ private sector for which there is demand from farmers, irrespective of their notification and release, to be made eligible for subsidies. In the absence of this, the farmers will be denied of getting the benefit of the popular hybrids. 31

Rice Seed Production Scenario in India

Table 5. Modifications Needed in MOA of ICAR/SAU’s Clause No.

Existing Clause

Modification Suggested

The Licensee agrees that it would use the given parent line(s) only for the purpose of commercial seed production and sale of the said hybrid and its marketing as per this agreement.

The parents of the hybrids particularly ‘R’ lines to be permitted for marketing as a variety, if desired by the company. The royalty for such varieties is to be paid on par with Article 6.7 of SMTA of CGIAR, which is about 1.1% or 1.0 %.This goes a long way in commercializing public bred varieties. In case the Licensee wants to use any exclusive denomination (brand name) to trade the licensed hybrid/variety, the seed packet should contain a visible statement “This hybrid is produced by using the parental lines licensed by ICAR/SAUs”. This will help to avoid unhealthy competition among companies.

The Licensee agrees that it would market the seed under the same name as given by the licensor

9 & 10

The Licensee agrees not to sublicense to produce/multiply/market the seeds of the said variety/hybrid to any other company including its own subsidiaries/associate companies operating in India or abroad. In case the Licensee desires to further sub-license the seed multiplication and marketing or any other use, of the said variety/hybrid, the Licensee agrees that it shall be done only with specific written permission /agreement with the licensor.

Licensee to be permitted to sub-license the product to its subsidiaries/associate companies operating in India. Some of the big national companies having share holding in other companies are selling popular products through all their associate companies. This will help for sale of large volumes of seed. Not to insist for specific permission from licensor, when marketed through its subsidiaries/ associates companies

The Licensee agrees to be fully responsible for any complaint made liability claimed by any affected party (i.es) including farmers/ farmers organization/court decisions etc. and the licensor will not be responsible for any complaints/litigation.

The Licensor if required, to depute scientists to inspect the fields under complaint and to give the feedback to the company.

The Licensee agrees to pay upfront payment of Rs……..lakhs at the time of signing the MOA. On payment of above mentioned amount by the Licensee; the Licensor will supply 30 kg. seeds of the variety or The Licensee agrees to pay upfront payment of Rs……..lakhs at the time of signing the MOA and will pay royalty @4% on the total amount of net realization value [Net realization value =(Invoice price-Dealers discount)] of sale of hybrid seed produced subject to a minimum payment of Rs……lakhs every year starting from the third season (second year) during the period under which MOA is in force. On payment of the above mentioned royalty every year by the Licensee ,which is mandatory, the Licensor will supply the seeds of parental lines of the hybrid(10 kg. of A line,5 kg. of B line and 5 kg. of R line)

Better to increase royalty instead of upfront payment and royalty. The middle level and small companies will be at a disadvantage, since they may not be able to pay upfront. To encourage the above two categories of companies, it is better to charge royalty only.

The Licensor and the Licensee agree that this agreement is valid initially for a period of …….years from the date of signing the agreement, and thereafter, it is renewable for any further period on mutually agreed terms and conditions.

Agreement period to be valid for five years uniformly.

July - Sept. 2011

Rice Seed Production Scenario in India

PUBLIC - PRIVATE - PARTNERSHIP IN RICE With a view to make available the seeds of rice hybrids developed by public sector research originations (ICAR / SAU’s) to the farming community in different states, the private sector seed companies have entered into MOU/MOA with the following ICAR organizations / SAU’s (Table 6).

Table 6. MOU / MOA in Rice with Private Seed Companies Sl.

Public Sector Research Organizations

Rice Hybrids under MOU/MOA

Private Sector Seed Companies entered into MOU/MOA

DRR, Hyderabad

DRRH-2

Sampoorna Seeds, Pratham Biotech Limited, Neo Seeds, Vikky’s Agrisciences Pvt.Ltd., Charoen Pokphand Seeds (INDIA) Private Limited., Bio seed Research India Pvt.Ltd., Shakthi Seeds Pvt Ltd.

DRR, Hyderabad

DRRH-3

Devgen Seeds & Crop Techonology Pvt. Ltd., Kaveri Seeds, India Foundation Seed and Services Association, Ankur Seeds Pvt.Ltd, Ganga Kaveri Seeds Pvt. Ltd

IARI, New Delhi

Pusa RH-10

India Foundation Seed and Services Association, J.K.Agri Genetics, Nath Biogene (I) Ltd., Devgen Seed & Crop Technology Pvt. Ltd., Zuari Seeds Limited, Advanta India Limited, Yashoda Seeds Pvt. Ltd., Namdhari Seeds Pvt. Ltd., Amareshwara Agri. Tech Ltd., Bhavani Seeds Pvt. Ltd.

GBPUAT, Pantnagar

PSD-1& PSD-3

Syngenta India Ltd., Pune.

TNAU,Coimbatore

CORH -3

Rasi Seeds (P) ltd, Attur, T.N.

CRRI, Cuttack

Ajaya, Rajalakshmi

Annapurna Seeds, Vikky’s Agrisciences Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad

UAS, Mandya

KRH-2

Namdhari Seeds Pvt., Bidadi, Bangalore.

BSKKV, Karjat

Sahyadri-1

Syngenta India Ltd., Pune.

JNKVV, Jabalpur

JRH-4, JRH-5

Vikky’s Agrisciences Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad.

Source: Viraktamath, B.C. et al 2011 their state requirements.

RICE SEED PRODUCTION

b) Hybrid Rice Seed Production: The hybrid rice seed production is concentrated mainly in Karimnagar, Warangal, Khammam, Kurnool and Mahabubnagar districts of Andhra Pradesh.

a) Varietal Rice Seed Production : Varietal seed production of rice is mainly concentrated in the states of Andhra Pradesh, Chathisgarh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand and West Bengal.

Andhra Pradesh share in hybrid rice seed production is around 85 %. Hybrid rice seed is also produced in Chathisgarh, Karnataka and other states.

Where ever there is shortage of rice varietal seeds, the SSCs / Governmental organizations of these states can enter into agreements for seed production with their counter parts and Private companies of the states, which can produce more quantities of seed over and above July - Sept. 2011

The following are the major companies involved in production and marketing of hybrid rice seed in India (Table 7). 33

Rice Seed Production Scenario in India

Table 7 : Major Companies Involved in Production and Marketing of Hybrid Rice Seed in India Sl.No

Name of the Company

Sl.No

Name of the Company

A.P. State Seeds Development Corporation

Manisha Agri Bio Tech Pvt. Ltd

Ankur Seeds Ltd

M & M Seeds

Advanta India Ltd.

Nath Bio Gene(India) Ltd

Annapurna Seeds

National Seeds Co-operation

Aadhaar Seeds Pvt.Ltd.

Nidhi Seeds Pvt.Ltd.

l.No Name of the Company

Nirmal Seeds Pvt.Ltd.

Bayer Bio Science Pvt.Ltd

Nuziveedu Seeds Ltd

Bioseed Research India Pvt.Ltd.

PHI Seeds Ltd.

Delta Agri Genetics Pvt.Ltd.

Rasi Seeds (P) Ltd.

Devgen Seeds & Crop Technology

Siri Seeds (India) Pvt.Ltd.

Dhaanya Seeds

Sriram Bioseed Genetics India Ltd.

Ganga Kaveri Seeds Pvt.Ltd.

Super Seeds (P) Ltd

Indo American Hybrid Seeds-India Pvt Ltd.

Spriha Bio-Sciences Pvt.Ltd.

Karnataka Agricultural University

Syngenta India Ltd.

J.K. Agri Genetics Ltd.

U S Agri Seeds (India) Pvt.Ltd.

Kaveri Seeds Company Ltd

Vibha Agritech Ltd.

Krishidhan Seeds Ltd

Victory Seeds

Maharashtra State Seeds Corp

Vikky's Agrisciences Pvt Ltd

Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company Ltd.

V.N.R Seeds Pvt. Ltd.

Zuari Seeds Ltd.

Source: Information collected from production centers

CERTIFIED SEED PRODUCTION OF RICE IN ANDHRA PRADESH During the period from 2007-08 to 2009-10 the quantity of certified rice seed produced in the state ranged from 9.84 to 14.74 lakh qtls. (Table 8).

Table 8: Agency wise Certified Rice Seed Production in Andhra Pradesh during 2009-10 Quantity in qtls Sl.No.

Agency

92615

MSSC Ltd

47802

348027

SFCI Ltd

1090

Seed Village Program

771

Co-operatives

4345

Seeds Farms

159

Private Companies

NAFED Ltd

37003

Sl.No.

Agency

Quantity Certified

NSC Ltd

APSSDC Ltd

Total

Source: APSSCA 2010 July - Sept. 2011

Quantity Certified

942948 14,74,760

Rice Seed Production Scenario in India

From the above it is seen that National Seed Oraganisations Viz; NSC, SFCI and State Seed Corporations Viz; APSSDC, MSSC and Cooperatives and Private Seed Companies have taken up certified seed production of rice in Andhra Pradesh. During 2009-10 certified seeds of 49 rice varieties were produced in the state.

(Table 9).The domestic seed market of India had increased from 1500 USD million in 2008 to 2000 USD million (Rs.9400 crores) in 2011, registering an increase of 33.3% in a span of three years. The share of India in commercial seed market is 4.76 percent. The domestic seed market value of the country may easily reach Rs.15, 000 cores by 2015.

This shows that there is ample scope for production of certified seed of required rice varieties in Andhra Pradesh to meet the seed requirements of various states and thereby increase their Seed Replacement Rates.

The varieties/hybrids of different crops developed in India will be suitable for the Agro Ecological zones situated between 300 North and South latitudes. The value of seed exports of field crops from India in 2009 was 15 USD million. The value of seed exports can be increased considerably by increasing export of hybrid seeds of rice and maize etc., to Vietnam, Philippines, Bangaladesh, Indonesia and other countries.

During 2009-10, the share of private seed companies in certified seed production of rice in Andhra Pradesh was 63.9 percent. Thus the private sector seed companies are playing great role in seed production of high volume - low value crops also.

References:

VALUE OF INDIAN SEED MARKET

Anonymous, 2010. Agricultural statistics at a glance: Directorate of Economics and statistics. Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India, New Delhi, India. Tables 4.5(a), 4.6(a) &10.2.

Anonymous, 2011. National Conference on Agriculture for Kharif Compaign-2011, Department of Agriculture & Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India. New Delhi, India. pp 1; 57-67.

Viraktamath, B.C., Shaik N.Meera., and Hari Prasad, A.S. 2011. Public - PrivatePartnership in Rice Sector: Present Status and Future Prospects.Indian Seeds and Planting Material. 4(2); National Seed Association of India, New Delhi. India. pp 49-55.

Shobha Rani, N., Prasad, G.S.V., Prasad, A . S . R . , S a i l a j a , B . , M u t h u r a m a n P. , Viraktamath, B.C., and Shaik N.Meera. 2010. Rice Almanac India. Directorate of Rice Research, Rajendranagar, Hyderabad, India.

India with nearly 2000 USD million ranks 4th along with Brazil in domestic seed market in the world.

Table 9: Domestic Seed Market in Top Ten Countries (March 2011) Value: USD million Country

Value

USA

12000

China

6000

France

2400

Brazil

2000

India

2000

Japan

1400

Germany

1261

Italy

780

Argentina

600

Canada

550

Source: International Seed Federation (ISF), 2011

July - Sept. 2011

BT Cotton in India: A Multipurpose Crop Bhagirath Choudhary, Kadambini Gaur, ISAAA, New Delhi

A Decade of Bt Cotton in India, 2002 to 2011 2011 marks the 10th year of Bt cotton cultivation in India, an important milestone in the history of Indian agriculture in which millions of cotton farmers and consumers akin to celebrate a successful decade ofBt cotton growing which has been a great boon to cotton, farm economy and the country. Cotton is recognized as a fiber crop with varied applications from making tiny threads to fashionable clothing in the textile sector. A significant unknown fact is that roughly 67% of the cotton produced is consumed directly as food or feed with the remaining 33% used as fiber in the textile sector in India. The cotton crop, like maize and rice, has been gaining popularity as a multipurpose crop in India. Cotton lint and cottonseeds are the principal products of the cotton plant. Cotton lint is the fiber part of the cotton plant whereas the cottonseeds yield three important by-products including linters, hulls and kernels (Figure 1). Linters are specially used for manufacturing of various products including production of propellants used for gun ammunition and also for missiles in the defense sector. Along with the deoiled meal, the decorticated cottonseeds cake or commonly known as hulls are also directly fed to livestock such as cattle and buffaloes for producing milk and meat. A significant portion of the crushed kernel are consumed either as edible oil or mixed with other edible oils for direct human consumption in the country.

July - Sept. 2011

Over the years, cotton fiber has been used as a principal raw material for textile industry, whereas the use of cottonseed oil and meal (de-oiled cake) has been gaining popularity in the country. Notably, for every 1 kg of fiber, the cotton plant produces around 1.65 to 1.85 kg of cottonseed - a rich source of oil and high quality protein. This attribute makes cotton the second largest field crop in India in terms of edible oilseed tonnage (Sunikumar et al. 2006; AICOSCA, 2010). Amongst all the sources of edible oil seeds, cottonseeds production registered the most significant increase from 2003 to 2009 cottonseeds almost doubled production from 5.5 million tons in 2003 to 8.7 million tons in 2009 and is likely to cross the 10 million tons level in 2010 (Table 1). Bt cotton contributes more than 86% of the total cottonseeds and its by-products, oil and meal, in 2009. Table 1. Status of Oilseeds Production in India (million tons), 2003 to 2009

Year

Edible Oil Seeds Production

Cottonseed Production

2003-04

25.2

5.5

2004-05

24.4

6.8

2005-06

27.9

8.5

2006-07

24.3

9.0

2007-08

29.8

9.9

2008-09

25.9

8.7

*Nine major oilseeds crop including groundnut, soybean, rape/mustard/toria, sunflower, sesame, castor, niger, safflower and linseed (Source: Compiled by ISAAA, 2010; COOIT, 2010}

BT Cotton in India a Multipurpose Crop

In addition, cotton meal (de-oiled cake) constitutes the largest share in terms of total availability of meal, followed by soy cake, rapeseed and rice bran in the country. It is important to note that cotton meal contributes one third of the total meal consumed, and is the preferred feed for cattle and buffaloes in the country (Figure 2). Cottonseed is also a major source of protein, as its by-product oil cake contains a high quality protein (23%) - a necessary ingredient for animal feed. De-oiled cotton cake assumes a special significance as an

important component of animal diet given that traditional cattle feeds have been replaced by the nutritionally balanced compound cattle feed in India. The All India Cottonseed Crushers’ Association (AICOSCA) estimates that the availability and access to large quantities of de-oiled cake as a proteinaceous cottonseed extraction would significantly boost the manufacturing prospects of compound cattle feed, fish feed and also poultry feed in India (AICOSCA, 2010).

Bt Cotton Oil: A Domestic Substitute for Imported Edible Oil

widening gap between the production and consumption of edible oil in the country and it is estimated that the import of edible oil costs US$6.5 billion every yeard India’s exchequer (COOIT, 2010). The fact that imports exceeded domestic production for the first time is mainly due to the fact that, with the exception of cotton, the productivity of major oilseed crops are either stagnant or decelerating - a near stagnant oilseeds production in the last decade due to non growth in hectarage (Economic Times, 2010).

India is a major importer of edible oil in the world. Notably, India imported around 8.8 million tons of edible oil in 2009-10 to meet the burgeoning demand for edible oil in the country - imports have doubled in the last five years from 4.39 million tons in 2003-04 to 8.8 million tons in 2009-10. In 2009-10, imports of edible oil constituted more than 50% of the total edible oil consumption in the country (Table 2). There has been a

Table 2. Edible Oil Production, Import and Consumption in India, 2003 to 2010

July - Sept. 2011

BT Cotton in India a Multipurpose Crop

Amidst the oilseed crisis, cotton is the only oilseeds crop that has shown a remarkable progress after the introduction of Bt cotton hybrids in 2002. In the last nine years, cottonseed has become an important source of oilseeds in the country. The production of cotton oil

registered a three-fold increase from 0.46 million tons in 2002-03 to 1.20 million tons in 2010-11 (Table 3). Due to the high nutritional content of cotton oil, it is marketed after blending with different vegetable oils in the country.

Table 3. Break-down of Cotton By-products from 2002-03, 2009-10 and 2010-11

Very few farmers retain cotton seed for sowing over the last nine years as cotton hybrid seed planting increased to 90% of cotton area. Cotton hybrid seeds production is undertaken separately by specialised cottonseed growers and marketed by private seed sector in the country. (Source: Compiled by IS AAA, 2010; COOIT, 2010; AICOSCA, 2010)

In 2009-10, cotton oil contributed 1.08 million tons to the total production of 7.88 million tons of edible oil from all domestic sources, including cotton oil which is equivalent to 13.7% of total edible oil production in the country. It is estimated that cotton oil has the potential to offset a significant amount of edible oil import demand provided that effective measures are undertaken to improve cottonseed storage, implement scientific processing by

delinting/dehulling prior to ginning & pressing, reduce direct consumption of oil- content meal, promote decorticated meal as feed, enhance percent oil recovery, and use modern methods in processing other by-products (Bajoria, 2010; AICOSCA, 2010). More importantly, full utilization of seed cotton to the value chain of various cotton by-products generates a significant value of Rs. 47,000 per ton to farmers and processors (Table 4).

Table 4. Value of Seed Cotton By-products, 2009-10

Summing Up In this decade, 2002 to 2011, Bt cotton has been successfully used as a multiple purpose crop in three ways: in the form of edible oil as food for human consumption; de-oiled cake as an animal feed; and kapas for fiber. The production of cotton seed, and its byproducts as oil and meal, has increased manifold from 0.46 million tons in 2002-03 to 1.20 million tons in 2010-11. As a result, Bt cotton meal (de-oiled cake) July - Sept. 2011

contributes one third of the country's total demand for animal feed, whereas cotton oil contributes 13.7% of total edible oil production for human consumption in the country - a significant contribution which offsets more than half of the import bill for edible oil valued at US$6.5 billion annually. Increased production ofBt cotton oil could be one of the important strategies to substitute for edible oil imports which constitute more than 50% of the total edible oil consumption in the

BT Cotton in India a Multipurpose Crop

country. In 2009-10 India, for the first time ever, imported more edible oil, 8.80 million tons, than the 7.88 million tons it produced domestically. Due to the high nutritional content of cotton oil, Bt cotton oil is marketed after blending it with different edible oils. India is becoming increasingly dependent on expensive imports of vegetable oil, which is a valid strategic concern, and biotech Bt cotton and its second generation of stacked products, as a multipurpose crop for oil, fiber and feed, can play a critical role in Indian agriculture in the near, mid and long term future (James, 2010). It is noteworthy that the by-products ofBt cotton, have been safely consumed as food and feed in India for nine years, without incident. Given this unblemished record, which is consistent with experience of more than 10 other countries world-wide, now maybe is the time for India to benefit from the application of the well-tested Bt technology in other crops.

References AICOSCA. 2010. 50th Annual Report & Accounts 200910, All India Cottonseed Crushers’ Association (AICOSCA), Mumbai, 2010 Bajoria, S. 2010, Speech of Sandeep Bajoria, Golden Jubilee Celebration, 50th Annual General Meeting, All India Cottorceed Crushers' Association (AI COSCA), Mumbai, 3 Sept 2010

Central Organization for Oil Industry and Trade (COOIT). 2010. Crop Estimate Information Sheet, 31st All India Seminar on Rabi Oilseeds crops, COOIT, Delhi, 12th March, 2010 Economic Times. 2010. Edible oil imports doubled in four years to over 88 LT, 18 Oct 2010 James, Clive. 2010. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2010. ISAAA Brief No. 42. ISAAA: Ithaca, NY. Mayee, C.D. and Chakraborthy, M. 2010, The significance of cotton seed oil in edible oilseed - An overview, Article for Souvenier 2009-10 of IOPEPEC, ministry of Commerce and Industry, Govt of India, 2010. Ministry of Agriculture. 2010. Edible Oil Scenario. Directorate of Vanaspati, Vegetable Oils and Fats, Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Consumer Affairs, Govt, of India. Sunikumar G. LM Campbell, L Puckhaber, RD Stipanovic and KS Rathore. 2006. Engineering cottonseed for use in human nutrition by tissue specific reduction of toxic gossypol. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). 103(48) 18054-18059. http://www.pnas.org/content/103/48/18054.abstract Oil Technologists Association of India (OTA). 2009. OTA News letter, Western Zone, vol. XI, no. 4, Oct-Dec 2009, Mumbai. (Reproduced courtsey ISAAA)

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India Carl E. Pray, Latha Nagarajan , IFPRI

Abstract

(typically three to four months from planting to harvest), and can be grown in a wide range of soil types.

The spread of modern varieties and hybrids of pearl millet and sorghum that began in the mid-1960s has had an important impact on small farmer welfare in India. The success and sustainability of these improved cultivars resulted from three types (or periods) of interventions by the Indian government: (1) increased investments in crop improvement by national and international agricultural systems during the 1970s; (2) development of efficient seed systems, with the gradual inclusion of the private sector in the 1980s; and (3) the liberalization of the Indian seed industry in the late 1990s. In addition to increased overall production levels of sorghum and millet, there have been substantial yield gains in semi-arid regions as well as improved cultivars adopted in some of the poorest areas of India. The innovations of new, hybrid technology have not been limited to the Green Revolution crops; they have also had significant impact on the productivity of smallfarmer households growing dryland crops, such as millet and sorghum in India.

Sorghum or jowar (Sorghum bicolor) is predominantly grown in the arid and semi-arid regions of India (Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, and Tamilnadu), areas with as little as 400 to 500 mm rainfall per year. As many as 100 distinct cultivars of sorghum have been identified in the sorghum-growing regions of India, and India is the unique center of origin for the post-rainy (rabi) season varieties of sorghum. Pearl millet or bajra (Pennisettum typhoides) is the next most important millet crop in India in terms of area and production, after sorghum. India is also considered to be the secondary center of origin for pearl millet, with many distinct cultivars growing throughout the country. Given sufficient rainfall (typically just 500 to 600 mm per year), pearl millet tends to be preferred over sorghum and is grown extensively in the dry western and northern regions of the country (Gujarat, Rajasthan, and Haryana). In other parts of India it is grown as a winter crop. Pearl millet is primarily a fodder crop in the western part of Rajasthan and Gujarat—especially during the summer when green fodder is scarce. In arid regions of India, pearl millet is a major source of food.

Keywords: Millions Fed, Food Security, Pearl Millet, Sorghum, India

Introduction

In India, agriculture is the major source of livelihood for nearly 70 percent of the population and accounts for 28 percent of Gross Domestic Product. Agricultural growth averaged 2.7 percent per annum between 1990 and 2002, driven by the introduction of high-yielding varieties of wheat, rice, and maize, and by the expansion of irrigation and other infrastructure facilities and services. Cereal crops occupy nearly 65 percent of the total cropped area; the rest is occupied by sugar crops, spices, horticulture crops, and oil seeds (ICAR 2006).2 Agricultural output of the major cereals registered a sharp increase immediately following the green revolution, largely due to a growth in yields. However, the yield growth pattern has not been uniform, tending toward deceleration in the 1990s (Reserve Bank of India Bulletin 2006).

World cereal area and production has steadily expanded over the past five decades. The productivity (specifically yields) of cereals has also doubled during the same period. Sorghum and other millet crops currently constitute an estimated 11.4 percent of the cereal area harvested and 4.1 percent of the total output of world cereals produced (FAOSTAT 2007). Sorghum and millets are often a recommended option for farmers operating in harsh environments where other crops do poorly, as they are grown with limited rainfall and often without application of any fertilizers or other inputs. Moreover, these crops constitute the principal source of energy, protein, vitamins, and minerals for millions of the poorest people in these regions. Millets and sorghum comprise a group of annual grasses, found mainly in arid and semi-arid regions of the world.1These grasses produce small seeded grains and are often cultivated as cereals. They are widely grown in Africa, Asia, China, and the Russian Federation (FAO 1995), and can be used as either grain or forage. They are resistant to drought, have a short duration July - Sept. 2011

Production Trends India is a major producer of sorghum and other millets. Sorghum and pearl millet account for nearly 5 percent (each) of the total cropped area, but this area is concentrated primarily in the arid and semi-arid regions of India, with nearly 60 percent of the rural population 42

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

(ICAR 2006). India ranks second worldwide in both area and production of sorghum and millets (FAOSTAT 2007). Although the area sown to sorghum and millet has steadily declined over the past four decades, an increase in yields is evident, especially since the mid-1970s.

crops, yields rose for sorghum but not pearl millet. By the mid-60s, new hybrids of sorghum and pearl millet were developed as part of the All India Coordinated Crop Improvement Projects. It appears that the sorghum hybrids—particularly CSH series from the Indian government research system, which are short duration, high-yielding types—were successful at raising yields. One factor that may have held down pearl millet yields during this period was the recurrence of downy mildew (Pray and Ribeiro 1991; McGaw 2001; Breese et al. 2002; Figure 3).

Distinct trends in production, area, and yield levels of sorghum and millet define three general periods: postindependence (1947–65); public-supported growth (1966–85); and private sector driven growth (1986 to present).5The post-independence period witnessed major increase in production of sorghum and pearl millet (Figure 1). Official data indicate that area and yields increased substantially for both crops (Figures 2 and 3). Official statistics suggest that yields were a major contributor to increased production of sorghum and millet during the post-independence period; however, this conclusion is based on very low estimated yields in the first few years after independence, which may be unreliable (Evenson and Pray 1991)

In the last period, from 1986 to the present, the production trends were reversed: sorghum production declined while pearl millet increased. Areas declined substantially for both crops, but much more for sorghum, and pearl millet yields increased more than sorghum yields. By 1986, ICRISAT had made a major contribution to pearl millet research by developing downy-mildewresistant male sterile lines and releasing two hybrids (ICMH 451 and 501). These lines became the basis for numerous hybrids developed through private research, which would steadily drive up pearl millet yield and production.

During the second period (1966–85), sorghum production increased quite rapidly while pearl millet production was stagnant. Although total area gradually declined for both Figure 1. Production trends of pearl millet and sorghum (1950-2008)

Figure 2. Acreage trends under pearl millet and sorghum in India (1950-2008)

Note: For the year 2007–2008, we used actual data to denote current trend. Source: Data from Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India (2008).

Figure 3. Yield trends of pearl millet and sorghum (1950-2008)

Figure 4. Trends in kharif and rabi sorghum area and production in India (1962–1963 to 2007–2008)

Note: For the year 2007–2008, we used actual data to denote current trend. Source: Data from Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India (2008).

July - Sept. 2011

Source: Data from Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India (2008).

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

The sorghum story is complicated by a major shift in production, from the rainy season (kharif) to the postrainy season (rabi).6Changing consumption preferences among consumers toward wheat and rice rather than coarse grains reduced the demand for both rabi and kharif sorghum, creating competition (especially for rainy season sorghum) from modern varieties of food as well as cash crops. Kharif sorghum production accordingly declined, despite successful crop improvement efforts by public and private sector breeders. Kharif sorghum yields, however, are steadily increasing, currently at 900 kg/hectare, despite losses to pests and diseases (ergot and mold). Production declines in both seasons are evidently mainly driven by reductions in area (See Figure 4).

per capita consumption was highest (92 kg/year) in rural Rajasthan and the dry areas of Gujarat. In those two regions, pearl millet accounts for more than 50 percent of cereal consumption, contributing about 20 to 40 percent of the total energy and protein intake (Parthasarathy et al. 2006). The decline in consumption of millets and sorghum reflects rising per capita income levels, along with changing food habits and tastes and the increasing availability of fine cereals at subsidized prices, offered through government-sponsored public distribution systems (PDS). The PDS system in India is based on the wheat and rice model, which is less relevant in many areas and especially in the dryland farming areas, where millets, sorghum, and pulses were traditionally the staple grains for household consumption (Dayakar Rao, Reddy, and Seetharama 2007).

As Figure 2 shows, much like the better known Green Revolution crops (rice and wheat), dry land crops such as millet and sorghum have also shown increased and stable yields during the past five decades. Millet and sorghum occupy less than 9 percent of the total irrigated area in India (MoA 2006)—far less than other cereals.7The technology advancement in millets and sorghum has nevertheless kept their production levels stable, despite the decline in area planted.

The demand for sorghum and millet has been enhanced, however, by increasing use in the poultry (especially layer feed) and animal feed sector. In the past four decades, the share of sorghum used as feed has increased from 38 to 50 percent. Dayakar Rao, Reddy, and Seetharama (2007) projected that by the year 2010, the likely demand for sorghum for poultry and cattle feed would be around 3 million metric tons. There is also huge demand for sweetstalked and high energy sorghum, as a major bio-energy crop for the production of industrial alcohol, gasohol, and electricity.

Consumption Patterns Annual per capita consumption of pearl millet in India has declined by 57 percent, from an average of 14 kg in 1998 to only 6 kg in 2003. Per capita consumption of sorghum declined by around 42 percent during the same period (CWC 2003); the current level is about 5 kg (Parthasarathy et al. 2006). In the major sorghum-producing regions, however, per capita consumption is still high. In rural Maharashtra, per capita annual consumption of sorghum is around 75 kg, accounting for almost half (48 percent) of per capita consumption of all cereals in those districts. Similarly, among the major pearl millet producing regions,

Interventions The spread of modern varieties and hybrids of pearl millet and sorghum, beginning in the mid-1960s, has had an important impact on small farmer welfare in India. Table 1 summarizes the impacts on production, yield, private sector participation, and household participation.

Table 1. Pearl millet and sorghum improvement in India: Impacts at-a-glance

July - Sept. 2011

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

The success and sustainability of these improved cultivars was the result of three types of interventions (corresponding to the three historical periods defined above) that were implemented by the Indian national and state governments working in collaboration with the international agricultural research center ICRISAT. These interventions included:

have more than doubled over the last four decades, though with significant spatial variation in different parts of the country. • Almost 80 percent of the sorghum and pearl millet areas are sown to high-yielding varieties (HYVs), with privately bred hybrid cultivars substantially more widely adopted for pearl millet than for sorghum.

• Public sector research regarding sorghum and millet plant breeding (especially increased resistance to diseases and pests) and crop management

Interventions: Government-supported Millet And Sorghum Research

• Government support for seed production by both the public and private sector

There was little research on sorghum and pearl millet in the pre-independence period. Even after independence these crops received very little research attention, until the creation and expansion of the All India Coordinated Crop Improvement Projects. In the early 1960s, the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, with Rockefeller Foundation assistance, initiated research on hybrid sorghum and pearl millet. ICAR then initiated the All India Coordinated Pearl Millet Improvement Project (AICPMIP) and the All India Coordinated Sorghum Improvement Project (AICSIP), in 1967 and 1969. These programs organized government research and conducted multilocation testing for improved characteristics of hybrids and varieties, working with state agricultural universities, research institutes, ICRISAT, and experiment stations. The first sorghum hybrid, CSH 1 (Coordinated Sorghum Hybrid), was bred in India and officially released for commercial cultivation in 1964, followed by the first pearl millet hybrid (HB 1) in 1965. The creation in 1972 of the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) further stimulated substantial research on sorghum and pearl millet. Interviews with private firms found that by 1970, four companies had their own sorghum and pearl millet breeding programs; by 1985 the number had grown to ten companies (Pray et al. 1991). In 1981, MBH-110 (pearl millet) was the first private hybrid of any crop to be officially released by the government of India.

• Government policies that allowed the private seed industry to grow Indian public sector agricultural research agencies have been breeding improved millet varieties since the early part of the twentieth century. The development of hybrid sorghum in India started in the early 1960s, with the establishment of hybrid breeding programs at a number of agriculture research centers: IARI (Indian Agricultural Research Institute); the State Agricultural Universities in Haryana, Karnataka, and Andhra Pradesh; the Directorate of Sorghum and Millet research in Hyderabad; and the All-India coordinated sorghum improvement program (AICSIP) of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). In 1972 the International Crops Research Institute for Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) was established, further spurring sorghum and millet improvement research.8 It drew on the work of a number of publicly funded Indian agricultural research agencies9as well as research conducted around the world. ICRISAT undertook a major effort to collect and conserve representative millet germplasm from the areas of origin as well as areas of cultivation. Improved crop varieties and breeding lines developed by ICRISAT and the Indian public research institutes constitute a major source of the open-pollinated varieties and hybrids that were distributed by public and private seed companies, as well as of breeding materials for private seed companies. 10 As a result, the adoption of improved pearl millet and sorghum varieties by farmers (both hybrids and open-pollinated varieties) has increased dramatically, beginning in the mid1960s.11Initially, from the mid-1960s to early 1990s, the rate of uptake of improved wheat and rice varieties exceeded that for sorghum and pearl millet; since then, however, the relative growth rates reversed, and the crop area shares in improved sorghum and pearl millet varieties are now comparable to the numbers for rice and wheat.

A major driver for the spurt in private sector growth was the strong public sector research support program on sorghum and millet. International agricultural research centers such as ICRISAT exchanged breeding material with both public and private research institutions. National agricultural research centers such as ICAR and the agricultural universities provided breeder seed to the national and state seed corporations as well as the private seed companies, to be multiplied as foundation seed and distributed through company outlets, farmer cooperatives, and private dealers. Table 2 shows that public sector research in millet and sorghum has resulted in many improved varieties.

To Summarize:

In general, the private companies with research

• National average yields of sorghum and pearl millet July - Sept. 2011

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

Table 2. Pearl millet and Sorghum crop varieties released in India, 1961–2005

programs acclaimed the contribution of public research (Pray et al. 1988). The development of in-bred lines or restorers takes a long period of time—usually up to nine seasons. For private firms, their association with ICRISAT or ICAR and State Universities is thus invaluable, as the public institutions provide developed in-bred lines free of cost. Former ICRISAT-based scientists and other university-based scientists also assisted small seed companies to develop proprietary hybrids. All the pearl millet hybrids developed by private firms in the late 1980s (with the exception of a few developed by MNCs) used at least one ICRISAT line.

India report (Reserve Bank of India 2005) on the status of Indian agriculture claimed that nearly 80 percent of the commercial seed sales of pearl millet and sorghum are by private seed companies.

Pearl Millet Research India, which produces more than half the world's pearl millet (FAOSTAT 2006), has been the center of research efforts since the 1960s, when the availability of cytoplasmic-genetic male-sterile lines brought a succession of hybrids. Before ICRISAT was founded in 1972, most of the research was done by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) and other Indian organizations, raising yields to new highs. Since the mid1960s, when hybrid pearl millets were first introduced in India, average grain yields have nearly doubled, despite the shift to more marginal production environments. The All India Coordinated Pearl Millet Improvement Project (AICPMIP) was started in 1967 in Poona, Maharashtra, and later moved to Mandor (Jodhpur), Rajasthan. The first pearl millet hybrid HB 1 (developed by Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana) was released in 1965, making pearl millet one of the earliest public-bred hybrid crops marketed in India.

Pray et al. (1991) estimated that in the late 1980s, private investments into pearl millet improvement were at the same level as public investments, and the share has increased considerably since then. This might appear surprising, as pearl millet is grown largely by subsistence farmers in India. However, the large size of the market together with the fact that farmers were already used to regular seed replacements provided a sufficient business incentive. Moreover, as all pearl millet hybrids periodically develop diseases, there is ongoing demand for new and better products. Until late 1980s, public agencies played the major role in varietal development, multiplication of seeds, and distribution through seed outlets (by state departments of agriculture, national and state seed corporations, and farmer cooperatives). Beginning in the early 1990s, small-sized private seed firms began to "bulk up" publicly bred varieties and began distributing the seed through their own networks of private dealers. Private companies began to breed their own millet varieties in the 1970s, but it took a decade to produce the first commercially successful improved cultivars. A recent Government of July - Sept. 2011

In 1974–75, a heavy attack of DMD reduced pearl millet production dramatically, to 3.3 million tons—a decrease of 57 percent from previous years. The second series of millet hybrids was released during 1974–75 (PBH 10 and 14) and proved more tolerant than previous cultivars, but they also broke down quickly. The two other hybrids brought during the mid 1980s, BJ 104 and BK 560, were known for their short duration and drought resistance; they had improved adoption levels and slowly brought back production levels up to 6

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

Box 1. Marker assisted selection (mas) and pearl millet hybrids: The case of HHB 67 improved (HHB 67-2)

million tons. However, these cultivars also suffered from DMD, and the government of India withdrew both of them from commercial use in 1986 (Pray and Ribeiro 1990).

HHB 67, a public-bred hybrid, was developed and released by Haryana Agricultural University in 1995–96 and was widely adapted by farmers in Haryana and Rajasthan, covering nearly 400,000 hectares. The hybrid is grown under rainfed farming systems, and its short duration allows farmers to prepare for a following crop, such as chickpea, wheat, barley, or oilseed mustard. This means two crops per season—one for food and fodder, and one for cash. After more than 10 years of widespread and repeated cultivation, the hybrid was constantly attacked by downy mildew (DMD). A new hybrid, "HHB 67 improved," was accordingly released by the Haryana State Varietal Release Committee in 2005–2006.

Figure 5. Pearl millet and downy mildew in India

To create the new version of the hybrid, the male parent line (bred at ICRISAT-Patancheru) was adapted by markerassisted backcrossing to add the gene(s) for downy mildew resistance, transferred from elite parent ICM 451 to H 77/833-2 (the male parent of the original HHB 67). The female parent of HHB 67-2 was bred at ICRISATPatancheru by conventional backcrossing to add several genes for downy mildew resistance from ICML 22 to 843A/B (the A/B-pair used as female parent of the original HHB 67); this conventional process took three times as long as breeding the improved male parent. ICRISAT then multiplied breeder seed for these improved seed parents, sufficient to cover 200,000 hectares in the 2007 season.

Source: McGaw 2001.

Downy mildew (Sclerospora graminicola) epidemics constitute the major risk to cultivation of pearl millet hybrids, a risk that can be reduced by effective crop improvement research. Losses can approach 100 percent in individual fields, and are estimated to average 14 percent across India. When one hybrid is overcome by rapidly evolving pathogen populations, other hybrids having a genetically identical parental line soon follow—and pearl millet hybrids in India are in fact based on a narrow range of closely-related parental lines. This results in rapid cultivar turnover, mostly driven by disease pressure rather than yield or quality improvements, to the detriment of pearl millet consumers, producers, and all those involved in the seed trade (Breese et al. 2002).

A downy mildew epidemic can destroy 30 percent of the grain harvest. For HHB 67, this would amount to a loss of at least $7.7 million in just the first year of an epidemic.12The introduction of the downy-mildewresistant hybrid (HH B 67 Improved) moreover promises an additional estimated return of $2.6 million, reflecting an improved yield advantage of 10 percent over the existing cultivar. According to Hash, the success of this program can be attributed mainly to "reasonably strong linkage of the 'upstream' biotechnology end of the series of projects to the more 'applied' plant breeding product development, testing and delivery end."

Proper agronomic recommendations made it possible to harness the potential of high-yielding hybrids and varieties. Popular public hybrids such as HHB 67 (released by Haryana Agricultural University in 1989) delivered increased production levels from the early 1990s until now—with current production at 9 million tons. Today, hybrids cover more than 50 percent of the total national pearl millet area of 24.7 million acres (Thakur et al. 2003).

Source: Hash et al. 2007.

of high-yielding and disease-resistant cultivars, along w i t h i m p r o v e d p r o d u c t i o n t e c h n o l o g y. T h e accomplishments of pearl millet breeding are considered a success story in India, with a large number of highyielding and disease-resistant single-cross hybrids and open-pollinated varieties very widely used by Indian farmers. The public and private sectors also developed strong and effective seed production and distribution programs.

Over the past two decades, research and development (R&D) in pearl millet has become increasingly privatized, reflecting a general shift in India's agricultural research system from publicly dominated to privately driven seed development and distribution (Pal and Byerlee 2003). Productivity of pearl millet increased more than twofold over the last five decades, owing to the widespread use July - Sept. 2011

Rainy Season (Kharif) Sorghum Research The first set of sorghum hybrids was released in the mid1960s. These were followed by the release of more popular hybrids, like CSH5 and CSH 6 in the mid-1970s 47

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

and CSH 9 in the early 1980s, augmenting the spread of sorghum HYVs and open-pollinated varieties and boosting productivity. The gains in productivity, however, were countered by the decline of planted area. Sorghum production levels increased slowly from 6 million tons during the 1950s to a maximum of 11 million tons in the early 1980s. It started declining thereafter, and currently stands around 9.2 million tons (Figure1). Box 2. Coordinated sorghum hybrids (CSH-series): The role of Indian national agricultural research Historically, sorghum improvement has been an important success, supported by Indian national agricultural research institutions such as ICRA and SAUs. The national program released 19 kharif (rainy) and 11 rabi (post-rainy) cultivars, and state programs released an even greater number. The worth of these improved cultivars is demonstrated in their successful adoption by farmers. With the 1964 release of CSH-1, the first commercial hybrid, sorghum became the second crop after maize in developing high-yielding hybrids. Since CSH-1, nineteen more hybrids were released through the ICAR system, and several more hybrids adapted to specific regions were released at state levels. Hybrids CSH 1 to CSH 23 are a testimony to the success of Indian sorghum breeding, not only in terms of yield enhancement, but also in the diversification of parental lines and progressive advances in breeding resistance to major pests and diseases. The hybrids played a major role in pushing up productivity and production, particularly in the case of kharif sorghum. CSH 1, CSH 5, CSH 6, CSH 9, CSH 14 and CSH 16 show dramatic increases in productivity. From CSH 5 and CSH 6, with a yield potential of 3.4 t/ha, yield potential was raised to 4.0 t/ha in CSH 9 and to more than 4.1 t/ha in CSH 16 and CSH 23.

The use of improved varieties of sorghum across different states decreased the unit cost of production during the 1980s and 1990s as compared to the early 1970s, despite the increased costs of production entailed in additional inputs (Bantilan and Deb 2002). The productivity gains from improved cultivars have more than compensated for the cost of the additional inputs used for their cultivation (Reddy et al. 2007). The reduction in per ton cost of production in the 1990s was 40 percent and 37 percent in Maharashtra and Rajasthan, respectively, as compared to the early 1970s. The cost-benefit ratio of production of improved cultivars in India is 1: 1.4 (Bantilan and Deb 2002).

Source: NRCS 2007.

Next to China, India has the highest level of adoption of improved cultivars in Asia (65 percent of total sorghum area). The partnership between ICRISAT and NARS for sorghum improvement spans more than three decades. This has resulted in the development and release of several improved varieties and hybrids of sorghum exclusively for semi-arid regions of India. Adoption of these improved cultivars benefits more than 9 million farmers and enhances food security for the poor in the Indian semi-arid tropics (SAT).13

The popularity of hybrids triggered hybrid seed production in India. Several seed villages in Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka became prosperous through large-scale hybrid seed production. Seed production of one ICRISAT-private sector partnership hybrid, JKSH 22, earned farmers on average more than Rs 137 million per year in AP and Karnataka, and Rs 1200 million in Maharashtra and other sorghum-growing areas in India (Reddy, Ramesh, and Gowda 2005).

In India, more than 4 million hectares are planted in more than 54 hybrids developed by private sector seed companies, based on ICRISAT-bred parental lines or their derivatives. In particular, the ICRISAT-private sector partnership hybrids, JKSH 22 and VJH 540 (known for high-yield potential, large grain, and earliness), showed rapid adoption, covering 210,000 ha in 2002 and July - Sept. 2011

142,000 ha in 2003 in the rainy season areas in the major sorghum growing states. Several other private sector hybrids with ICRISAT content (such as MLSH 296, GK 4009, and GK 4013) are also widely adopted in India. Two other hybrids are highly popular among farmers because of their higher grain and fodder yield potential, coupled with good grain and stover quality: PVK 801 (a dual-purpose, rainy-season adapted sorghum variety currently cultivated in more than 100,000 hectares in Maharashtra), developed by ICRISAT in partnership with Marathwada Agricultural University (MAU), Parbhani; and SPV 1411 (Parbhani Moti), a postrainy season variety with pearly-white large grains (cultivated in more than 200,000 hectares in Maharashtra and Karnataka). Another hybrid is also popular, as its grain and fodder yield potential is better than the highly popular hybrid CSH 16. This is hybrid SPH 840, developed by ICRISAT in partnership with Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola. These examples of ICRISAT-bred hybrid parents illustrate the power of partnership to exploit the complementary expertise of ICRISAT, Indian NARS, and the private sector in developing and delivering desired products. Adoption of these improved cultivars, coupled with improved crop production technologies, resulted in an increase in sorghum grain productivity of 280 kg/ha during the period from 1971 to 2003.

Post-rainy (Rabi) Sorghum Research Most of the research and marketing activities are focused on millet and rainy season (kharif) sorghum

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

Box 3. ICRISAT-Private Sector partnerships in sorghum improvement

the grain yield of post-rainy sorghum. More than 80 percent of the post-rainy sorghum area is still dominated by two important cultivars: Maldandi, a local landrace; and M-35-1, a selection from Maldandi first released in 1930 (NRCS 2007). The average replacement rate for sorghum during the post-rainy season is 16 years. Unlike kharif sorghum, biological and environmental factors limit further yield and crop improvement in rabi sorghum. Participatory varietal selection trials were conducted jointly by ICRISAT and the National Research Centers for Sorghum (NRCS) in 1999–2001, in order to identify post-rainy season sorghum types suitable for further crop improvement, but the effort was not very productive. They found no restorer or cytoplasmic male sterile lines that would make it possible to exploit any heterotic vigor (to develop "hybrids"); and the purified selections made out of the existing varieties (Maldandi and its derivative M35-1) failed to outperform what farmers were already growing. For rabi sorghum, the fodder yield is given even more importance than for kharif sorghum. Grain quality is moreover as important as the grain yield.

The ICRISAT-Private Sector (PS) partnership has greatly contributed to the development and marketing of improved hybrids and varieties in Asia. In India, more than four million ha of rainy season sorghum (80 percent of the total rainy season sorghum area) and one million ha of the summer season sorghum are planted with about 70 PS-based hybrids, of which 54 are based on ICRISAT-derived parental lines or their derivatives. Another high-yield potential hybrid resulting from the ICRISAT-PS partnership, VJH 540, has been extremely popular, increasing in area planted from 650 ha in 1997 to 14,020,000 ha in 2003 (in rainy season in major sorghum growing areas)—based on the increase in seed sales from 6.5 tons in 1997 to 1420 tons in 2003. These examples illustrate the power of partnership between ICRISAT and the PS to develop and deliver desired products to the farming community. Several other private sector hybrids, such as MLSH 296, GK 4009 and GK 4013, are also widely adopted in India. The high rate of adoption of ICRISAT-based hybrids is due to their large grain and high grain and fodder productivity. These hybrids have made substantial contributions to enhance cultivar diversity, productivity, and yield stability, and have improved the livelihoods of poor farmers in the dry areas.

Figure 6. Percent of HYVs under sorghum and pearl amillet (1967-2005)

Source: Reddy et al. 2007.

only. In India, sorghum is produced in two seasons: the rainy or kharif (monsoon) season; and the rabi season (when crops are grown, if possible, on residual ground moisture). Currently sorghum is cultivated on 9.2 million hectares in India. The total area under sorghum has declined since 1961, entirely in the rainy season, from 62 percent in 1962–63 to 45 percent in 2007–2008. Its share in post-rainy season planting in fact increased from 38 percent in 1962–63 to 58 percent in 2007–2008) (Figure 6). In the last 15 years, a total area of 6.9 million ha—especially from kharif sorghum acreage—has been diverted to other crops. This trend is most evident in the states of Northern Karnataka and Maharashtra; but even there, the post-rainy season share of total sorghum area increased from 9 percent in the 1960s to 21 percent during 2004–2005.

Source: Data from Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.

Recent statistics reveal a considerable decline in sorghum area, production, and consumption in the primary growing regions of India. During the rainy season in particular, sorghum acreage has declined due to competition from other high-value crops, such as maize, cotton, and soybean. Public and private seed suppliers recognize, however, that the states of Karnataka and Maharastra, where the area under postrainy sorghum is increasing, continue to offer scope for investment. Pioneer Hi-Bred Seeds in India developed two sorghum hybrids (Pi-8703 and Pi-8704) exclusively for post-rainy season growers. These two hybrids yield 30 percent more than the existing traditional cultivar Maldandi; with one or two supplemental irrigations, the yield increase would be over 50 percent. Other seed companies (JK agri genetics and Proagro seeds) have also engaged in post-rainy season sorghum research.

Hybrid breeding in sorghum has been targeted toward the rainy season; improvement of rabi sorghum did not receive as much emphasis and effort as kharif sorghum until the nineties. Conventional breeding has so far been unsuccessful in developing higher-yielding (and droughttolerant) sorghum hybrids for the post-rainy season. Consequently, with more than 90 percent of the sorghum acreage in the rainy season now planted to hybrid varieties, rainy season sorghums average twice July - Sept. 2011

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

Public research institutions such as the University of Agricultural Sciences (Dharwad, Karnataka) and NRCS (Hyderabad) are also involved in developing specific cultivars for rabi season. Five rabi hybrids and five varieties have been released so far by public sector research institutions. However, the yield potential of the newly bred cultivars is only marginally higher than M 351, the widely grown local cultivar. The first rabi hybrid released was CSH 7R and the latest one is CSH 19R. The four rabi varieties released, CSV 8R, CSV 14R, CSV 18, and Swathi, were better received than the early rabi hybrids such as CSH 7R and CSH 8R. The more recent hybrids (CSH 15R and CSH 19R) are more productive, but their acceptability is limited, as farmers are reluctant to invest in hybrid seeds during rabi without irrigation (NRCS 2007).

Government seed production increased throughout the 1970s, but moved away from direct involvement by the state departments of agriculture (except in Tamil Nadu). Between 1968 and 1971, state governments reduced seed production; only a few have revived it, some using contract growers on large departmental farms. The State Seed Corporations (SSCs) replaced departments of agriculture in seed production. Universities and ICAR institutes expanded distribution of certified seed through farmer fairs and mini-kits. The institutional framework for the seed industry was developed at the same time, also with technical assistance from the Rockefeller foundation. The Indian Seed Act was established in 1966 as the basis for the regulatory framework. The Indian seed industry was heavily regulated, limiting the entry and formation of large firms (domestic or foreign) and restricting or banning the private importation of seeds for both commercial and research purposes.

The area under rabi sorghum, especially in Maharashtra and Northern Karnataka, may not decline substantially and is expected to stabilize at between 4.5 and 5 million ha. Rabi sorghum is highly valued as food, because of its excellent grain quality and because it is produced during the post-rainy season. It commands higher prices in the market than kharif sorghum, often on a par with or higher than (the local durum) wheat. Rabi sorghum is also highly valued as fodder during lean months and is grown without irrigation. The rabi sorghum stover is also highly valued for its quality; it is much more important than kharif sorghum stover, as its harvest precedes the lean summer months. The economic contribution of fodder to the total income from rabi sorghum is estimated at 45 to 57 percent in varieties and 39 to 47 percent in hybrids, in Maharashtra and Andhra Pradesh (NRCS 2007). Thus, even at the low productivity level, rabi sorghum is far more profitable to the producer than kharif sorghum. Both the grain and the stover enjoy strong demand which may further expand.

Support for Private R&D and Seed Distribution The seed sector was deregulated in 1971, with relaxed restrictions on seed imports and entry of private firms. In 1988, a new seed policy spurred enormous growth in private sector seed supplies in India. Today, the Indian market for agricultural seed is considered one of the biggest in the world, with annual sales at around $1080 million. The domestic market accounts for $975 million in sales, and international trade (mainly with developing countries) accounts for the remaining $20 million. The Indian seed industry has now evolved from public-sector domination into a multi-faceted industry, with a large involvement of private firms and increasing emphasis on research and development. In the absence of public sector research, a private seed industry would have started much later and developed much more slowly (Pray and Ribeiro 1990). Public plant breeding developed hybrid maize, sorghum, millet, and cotton in the 1960s, creating demand that the private commercial seed industry would build on. In the late 1960s and 1970s, government programs provided subsidies and technical advice to small and mediumsized firms to produce and multiply seeds. The 1970s were a period of experimentation for all companies: private firms invested in research and breeding activities to produce various public hybrids, using various seedgrowing locations and production strategies. The only companies that produced and sold their own hybrids were Mahyco, Pioneer, and Nimbkar.

Interventions: Government Support for Seed Industry Growth At the beginning of the Green Revolution, it became clear to the Indian government and to key state governments that a major constraint on the spread of modern varieties would be the seed distribution system, either by state extension services or the nascent private sector. The first state seed corporation, evolving out of the Pantnagar Agricultural University in Uttar Pradesh, became a model for the National Seed Corporation (NSC) and other state seed corporations. The Indian government, with the financial support of the World Bank and technical assistance from the Rockefeller Foundation, financed the development of State Seed Corporations (SSCs) in most major states of India in the 1960s. July - Sept. 2011

Another key seed policy instrument enhanced the participation of private firms: varieties could be

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

multiplied and sold to farmers without going through the regular certification process, by selling their hybrids or varieties as "truthfully labeled" (TFL) seed. Seed certification procedures for most crops also favored private firms' participation in seed markets. Farmers could have some assurance of minimum quality of seed even if they did not know the company that produced it. But as certification was (and is) voluntary, it did not slow down the development of private hybrids of millet and sorghum. Companies always had an option of selling their seed as "truthfully labeled" rather than certified.14

1. Government/ICRISAT research programs produced the high-yielding varieties and hybrid parental lines. 2. Seed industry development programs of the National Seed Corporation (assisted by the Rockefeller foundation and USAID) trained companies in producing quality, foundation, and certified seeds during the early 1970s. 3. Private companies multiplied seed and sold it to farmers using wider market networks. Pray and Ramaswami (2001) sought to measure the impact of these efforts to liberalize India's seed sector by comparing 1987 with 1995. They provided evidence that liberalization increased the competitiveness of the seed sector as well as the amount of seed research conducted by Indian and foreign seed firms, and suggested that Indian farmers would be the ultimate beneficiaries of these policy changes.

Government research programs produced a steady supply of new hybrids of sorghum, pearl millet, and cotton which increased the demand for hybrids. This was due in part to the expansion of government research during the 1970s, particularly in the state universities. Public research on pearl millet and sorghum grew more rapidly than for other hybrids after the establishment of ICRISAT in 1972. Public research also provided the basis for successful private research and development. The first private pearl millet hybrids were based on local lines developed in the public sector and exotic lines brought in by ICRISAT.

Matuschke and Qaim (2008) estimated the determinants of pearl millet adoption and the impact of increasing privatization on technology diffusion. Their analysis is based on a comprehensive survey of 266 pearl millet farmers in the state of Maharashtra in the semi-arid tropics of India. Maharashtra, the state with the second largest area under pearl millet in India, accounts for 18 percent of the national pearl millet area and 15 percent of total production (Fertiliser Association of India 2004). The Government of Maharashtra reports that seed distribution of hybrid pearl millet by public and private sources tripled between 1990 and 2000. (Statistics provided by the Department of Agriculture, State Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai, 2005.)

The expansion of the seed industry in the late 1980s and early 1990s brought about a significant rise in investment research, along with growth in the supply and demand for improved seeds in Maharashtra and other pearl millet growing states. The cultivars that had dominated during the 1980s were mostly replaced by new varieties and hybrids. The benefit-cost ratio of shifting from public hybrids (of sorghum and millet) to private hybrids was much higher for small farmers than for large farmers. In the 1990s the seed market was dominated by ICRISAT-based hybrids. While the adoption of privately released hybrids of pearl millet and sorghum increased (developed by private firms such as Mahindra Hybrid Seed Company and ProAgro and Pioneer), most of these hybrids contain parent materials from ICRISAT and other public research agencies (Bantilan and Deb 2002). Other public research hybrids, such as the Coordinated Sorghum Hybrids (CSH) series, also remain popular with farmers.

The econometric estimation by Matuschke and Qaim (2008) identified three factors that contributed to the adoption of pearl millet hybrids over recent decades: education level, distance to the main source of information, and good market infrastructure. In addition, the increasing role of private companies in seed development and distribution had a positive effect on innovation rates. The study refutes the notion that privatization of seed markets would hamper technological progress in the small farm sector, and suggests that even in typical subsistence crops, such as pearl millet, the private sector can play an important role. As noted above, however, the Indian private sector breeding programs often depend on germplasm that has been developed in the public sector. In pearl millet, for instance, many of the proprietary hybrids build on freely accessible breeding lines from ICRISAT and other public organizations.

The use of improved cultivars of pearl millets was most pronounced in the states of Maharashtra and Gujarat (up to 90 percent), Haryana (85 percent), and Tamil Nadu (80 percent). For sorghum, the adoption of improved varieties was higher for rainy season than post-rainy season; 71 percent of the total sorghum area in India was under improved cultivars by 1998–89 (Bantilan and Deb 2002).

The Consortium Model

Pray et al. (1991) and Pray and Ramaswami (2001) summarized the factors in making hybrid seed of pearl millet and sorghum widely available in India: July - Sept. 2011

In 2000, ICRISAT developed a new kind of public-private partnership called a "consortium" model: private 51

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

companies jointly fund research with ICRISAT to develop parental lines that are made publicly available. Initially, 14 private seed companies pledged a total of $109,000 annually to the consortium to support applied plant breeding research at ICRISAT. All materials developed through this research will remain as international public goods, freely available to all (ICRISAT 2002). Companies engaged in this consortium include international corporations (Pioneer, Bayer Crop Sciences, Monsanto, and Syngenta) and a large number of domestic seed companies (Advanta India, Nuziveedu, Ganga Kaveri, Nav Bharat, J K Agri-Genetics, Mahendra Hybrids, Mahyco, New Nandi, Plantgene, Proagro, Zuari, Prabhat Agri Biotech, and Shriram Bioseed Genetics).

commercializing sorghum, millet, and pigeonpea hybrids, thus contributing to the commercial viability of both domestic seed firms and the wider seed market in India (Spielman, Hartwich, and Grebmer 2007).

Economic Impacts Corn, sorghum, and pearl millet are the three most widely planted cereals in India after rice and wheat. Pearl millet (with 10 percent of the total cropped area and 35 percent of total seed sales by value) and sorghum (with 15 percent of the total cropped area and 30 percent of the seed sales) together constitute about 12 percent of the total value of seeds sold commercially in 1999–2000 (Statistics provided by the Department of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India).

Box 4. Impact of public-private partnerships: The case of pearl millet hybrids in India A case study of two hybrids was carried out by ICRISAT in the year 2006 to document the impact of ICRISAT-derived breeding materials on the consortium partners. Two of the leading private seed companies (JK and Pro Agro (Bayer crop science)) had developed successful hybrids of pearl millet on ICRISAT-bred A-lines (or their subselections), by exploiting their residual variability. Since almost all the ICRISAT-bred A/B lines were developed by pedigree-bulk breeding, a small degree of within-line variability does exist, as demonstrated in a few selection experiments for flowering time and downy mildew resistance.

For all the crops listed except sorghum, saved seed was formerly the dominant source of seed but has dramatically declined. Similarly for sorghum, the proportion of source seed to saved seed increased during the 1990s (Mahyco 2001). There was a substantial increase in the sale of proprietary hybrids for pearl millet (nearly an eight-fold increase in the 1990s) and maize (a threefold increase), and a less dramatic increase for sorghum, at around 20 percent. In contrast to proprietary hybrids marketed by private companies, sales of publicly bred sorghum and pearl millet hybrids have declined considerably. There was also a significant reduction in the sale of open-pollinated varieties (OPVs) of pearl millet from 1990 to 1999, but an increase in OPVs of sorghum during the same period (Nagarajan, Smale, and Glewwe 2007).15

– The hybrid JKBH 26, developed by JK Agri Genetics, is based on an A-line that has no other hybrid, public or private, on the market. This hybrid has been under cultivation since 1996, retaining its initial high level of downy mildew resistance. The hybrid was adopted by increasing number of farmers for its high grain and stover yield as well as its high level of downy mildew resistance, reaching a peak adoption level of more than 400,000 ha in 2005.

15 The adoption of pearl millet hybrids increased both due to its yield advantage (compared with openpollinated varieties) and also due to active promotion by the private companies. A survey by Nagarajan (2004) found that private companies foresee further area expansion under pearl millet in new areas, especially in Gujarat and in some parts of Maharashtra.

– The hybrid 9444 was developed by Proagro Seed Company (now Bayer BioScience). It is also highly valued for its high grain and stover yield, good stover quality (farmers' perception), and downy mildew resistance. This hybrid is also highly tolerant to temperatures as high as 45°C during flowering time. The adoption of this hybrid rapidly increased from 60,000 ha in 2001 to more than 400,000 ha in 2006.

About 55 percent of the area under sorghum and pearl millet cultivation in India were planted with high-yielding varieties (HYVs) during 1992–94. This nearly doubled the productivity of both crops compared with the preHYV era. The area under HYV cultivation continues to rise and so does productivity, with no yield plateau in sight. In addition, cultivar diversity has increased substantially, leading to more appropriate choices of cultivars being available to farmers, and hence improved yield stability. But these positive changes in adoption scales and cultivar diversity have occurred primarily in relatively favorable environments and in states with welldeveloped seed production infrastructure (Rai et al. 1999).

Source: R.P. Mula et al. 2007

As of 2006, 18 seed companies in the consortium supported variety improvement research on rainy season and post-rainy sorghum, and 34 supported pearl millet research. The research focuses on diversifying the genetic base of these three crops to reduce vulnerability to diseases and pests, improve seed quality, and fieldtest promising hybrids. ICRISAT's Hybrid Parents Research Consortia (HPRC) brings together small- and medium-sized domestic firms for the purpose of July - Sept. 2011

Six million hectares of pearl millet (more than 60 percent 52

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

of the total pearl millet area) is planted with more than 70 hybrids, of which at least 80 percent are hybrids from the private sector (Dar et al. 2006). More than 60 of these hybrids are based on ICRISAT-bred hybrid parents (mostly seed parents), or on the proprietary hybrid parents developed from ICRISAT-bred improved germplasm. It has been conservatively estimated that the annual return to India's farmers from pearl millet varieties developed by ICRISAT total $50 million—more than 12 times the cost of its investment in pearl millet research.16Unlike pearl millet, sorghum research in India is mostly implemented by public sector institutions such as ICAR and SAUs, rather than by the private sector, and estimated returns on the research investment are also higher. The annual return to India's farmers from government investment in sorghum crop improvement and development of HYVs (by NRCS and AICSIP) for the period from 1981 to 1999 is estimated at Rs. 11,450 million (or about $275 million)—nearly 30 times as much as the cost of investment (NRCS 2007).

total cereal expenditure was the highest for the poorest 30 percent of the population. As a result, any yield improvement in coarse cereals would have a direct impact on the poorest households. Especially in the states of Karnataka and Maharashtra, where coarse cereals are more important in the diet of poor households than rice and wheat, productivity increases in coarse grains are more important in increasing the welfare of the poor than productivity increases in rice and wheat. In sum, the contribution of private hybrids to agricultural productivity is significant, both in production and distribution of seed. These results are especially striking because they pertain to semi-arid tropical regions, where the green revolution based on HYVs of wheat and rice has had limited impact. Given that the semi-arid tropics tend to be poorer than the more favorably endowed growing regions (the Punjab and the Indo-Gangetic plains), and given that private hybrids have had most impact in subsistence crops, it is likely that poor farmers in semi-arid areas have gained from the spread of private hybrids.

The hybrid technology has also contributed to employment generation and to farmers' income at the seed production stage. Pearl millet hybrid seed production in India is primarily accomplished each year during the summer season in one district of Andhra Pradesh, and it generates an additional annual income of $1 million to the seed-producing farmers' community in that district. According to the Seedsmen association of Andhra Pradesh (2004–2005), nearly 90 percent of the total requirement of sorghum hybrid seeds and 65 percent of pearl millet seeds are produced by the contract seed growers from the state. Seed production activity employs more than 0.2 million farmers directly or indirectly in the state.

Western Rajasthan is an arid, dryland zone, with little rainfall and sandy soils. It is one of the major pearl millet growing regions in India. In the early 1990s, ICRISAT, in collaboration with the Rajasthan Agricultural University, a local NGO, and farmers in selected villages in western Rajasthan, started a program of farmer participatory breeding of improved pearl millet cultivars that continued for about ten years. Major benefits perceived by households in villages of western Rajasthan included an improved choice of varieties to suit the weather, helping them to manage the risk of rainfall failure. This further stabilized their long-term yields. Improved technology allowed greater land augmentation, increasing yields of pearl millet; more stable yields further enabled farmers to shift a portion of farmed area from millets to cash (and other) crops (Bantilan et al. 2003). Researchers documented that increased adoption of technology also resulted in increased asset generation by individual households in western Rajasthan, such as building "pucca or concrete houses" with the surplus cropping income. The participatory rural appraisals conducted by ICRISAT researchers in these villages also found increased rates of schooling (increases in enrollment of up to 20–22 percent within four years of adoption)— especially for girl children (Parthasarathy and Chopde 2000).

Maharashtra state, with a large number of private seed companies and an aggressive state seed corporation, had about 18 improved pearl millet cultivars in various scales of cultivation during the mid-1990s, compared with no more than three during the mid-1980s. Similar changes in pearl millet cultivar diversity occurred in Gujarat. These two leading states now have 85–90 percent of total pearl millet area under HYV cultivation. In Gujarat this consists mostly of hybrids; in Maharashtra, a substantial proportion is still an OPV (variety ICTP 8203). Pearl millet constitutes an important staple crop, especially for marginalized households, for whom coarse cereals account for a larger share in daily diets than wheat and rice (Ramaswami 2002). Pearl millet hybrids are widespread and have been increasingly adopted over the past decades (Bantilan, Deb, and Singh 2000; Thakur et al. 2003). Pray et al. (2001), in a study in Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Maharashtra, found that the share of coarse cereals (millets, maize and sorghum) in July - Sept. 2011

Studies conducted by Pray et al. (1991) and Pray and Ramaswami (2001) on the economic impacts of seed industry reforms found that farmers gained most from the resulting increase in private research. They found that in 1986–87, yields of private pearl millet and sorghum hybrids were higher than public hybrids and 53

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

open pollinated varieties, in all-India coordinated yield trials conducted by the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) in farmers' fields. For instance, Mahindra's pearl millet hybrid, MBH 110, out-yielded the publicly bred check hybrid BJ 104 by an average of 23 percent. Researchers examined returns on several crops, using the increase in net income of seed firms and farmers from the sale and use of private rather than public hybrids as an estimate of the total benefits from private varietal improvement research. They found that the seed companies captured no more than 18.5 percent of the benefits from using improved sorghum varieties. Similarly, for hybrid pearl millet, seed firms captured only about 6 percent of benefits, with more than 90 percent of benefits accruing to farmers. A study by Singh, Morris, and Pal (1997) on the maize seed industry in India found similar results regarding the benefit shares to farmers versus seed supply companies.

and informal) seed markets enhances millet profits of farming communities. These findings suggest that, through judicious introduction of improved varieties that complement their local varieties by providing a needed trait, it may be feasible to enhance farmer income while supporting millet crop diversity to promote the resilience of farming communities in these marginal environments (Nagarajan, Pardey, and Smale 2007). The long-term influence of proprietary hybrids and varieties is not only apparent in favorable environments but has also proven important in drylands.

Sustainability of the Interventions In the more favored growing environments of India (such as the states of Punjab, Maharastra, and Haryana), where farmers have access to irrigation and rising incomes are changing food consumption patterns, the area sown to sorghum and other millet crops is gradually giving way to rice, wheat, maize, and other specialty crops (Seetharam, Riley, and Harinarayana 1989). However, farmer demand for a range of millet crops and millet varieties in the arid and semi-arid regions (including the states of Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Gujarat) is unlikely to diminish in the near future, as there are currently few substitute crops for these harsh growing environments.

According to Pray and Ribeiro (1990), the social internal rates of returns to private pearl millet and sorghum research were at least 50 percent. The annual returns to Indian pearl millet farmers from cultivating varieties from ICRISAT and private firms are estimated at $54 million (ICRISAT 1998). The impact of private sector research became much more evident during the late 1990s, with increased area under private hybrids of cotton, pearl millet, sorghum, maize, and fodder. Evenson and Gollin (2003) show that, while crop improvements have been less pronounced for millets and sorghum than for rice and wheat in India, the progress in these crops has nevertheless been significant. A study of the impacts of ICRISAT's research showed that privately released millet varieties relied heavily on ICRISAT-developed male-sterile lines and restorers in developing their hybrid pearl millet and sorghum (Bantilan and Deb 2002).

An estimate by FAO (2004) found that 55 percent of the world's semi-arid lands with rainfed farming potential are located in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia (including India), and these areas are characterized by the lowest per capita nutrition levels and the highest population growth rates. These semi-arid regions are likely to be home to an additional 400 million people by 2025.17Soil salinity and drought still remain major abiotic stresses that pose a threat to agricultural production in this part of the world. Water is becoming an even more scarce resource, and significant expansion of irrigation does not seem feasible in many of these semi-arid countries. Furthermore, public irrigation systems need substantial investments for rehabilitation, modernization, operation, and maintenance. Desertification may be aggravated over time, either by over-exploitation by native populations or by regional climatic changes. These factors underscore the need for concerted efforts toward developing crops that are more tolerant of stressful environments.

Nagarajan, Pardey, and Smale (2007) examined the relationship between biological (varietal) diversity of pearl millet in the farm communities of semi-arid regions of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka. They found that communities with high income levels (combined farm and off-farm) maintained greater richness of millet varieties across their farms, perhaps because of greater access to improved materials and greater capacity to grow them. The educational level was also higher in these communities and had a positive effect on crop diversity at the community level. Higher seed-to-grain price ratios also enhanced millet profits among village communities, reflecting the use of modern varieties. Formal seed transactions through dealers also correlated with improved millet diversity among the village communities surveyed.

Millet and sorghum are reasonably tolerant to extreme soil and weather conditions. They also have other desirable attributes: higher nutritive value (including micronutrients such as iron, calcium, and zinc) compared with most major cereals; higher fodder value;

A key finding is that the presence of active local (formal July - Sept. 2011

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

and higher tolerance to pests and diseases. For these reasons, a case can be made for conserving as well as promoting cultivar diversity for these two major dryland cereals to help meet future food and feed needs, especially those of subsistence producers in these lessfavored economic and physical environments.

new technological opportunities for the public and private seed industry to develop profitable products. More than 50 private companies marketing approximately 75 hybrids of pearl millet, as well as nearly 11 companies marketing 20 hybrids of sorghum, based their production on seed and pollen parents from ICRISAT. ICRISAT's public-private pearl millet and sorghum consortia have helped increase cultivar adoption while enhancing resource mobilization towards research by the public sector. ICRISAT has generated more than $2 million (as of December, 2005) since the consortium program was initiated in 2000. The funds generated augment ICRISAT's core funds to support crop improvement research for developing elite sorghum, pearl millet, and pigeonpea hybrid parents to serve both the public and private sectors. This resource mobilization is particularly significant in light of diminishing core funding for crop improvement research at ICRISAT.

The emerging trends in the use of sorghum for alternative purposes (such as biofuels and animal and poultry feeds) provide some evidence of increased demand for these crops in India. While sorghum is largely used as a feed grain throughout the world, in India the cost of production and quality limitations make it less attractive compared to maize. The current feed production in the country is estimated at 2.7 million tons and is expected to grow by 3.9 million tons by the year 2010. India's huge livestock population and the increasing demand for milk and products also creates pressure for production of green and dry fodder and forages. Under semi-arid conditions, sorghum and millet are the major suppliers of green and dry fodder and forages, especially critical during the lean season; 20 to 60 percent of dry fodder supply in the semi-arid regions of India is provided by sorghum crops alone. Moreover, the diversification of rainy season sorghum as a bioenergy crop has vast potential for helping to meet the growing demand for fossil fuels.

ICAR and State Agricultural University breeding programs are the major source of germplasm as well as of finished in-bred lines to private breeding programs. Abandoning public breeding programs could therefore lead to less technological diversity and higher seed prices, with negative implications for agricultural development in general and smallholder farmers in particular. Decisions on appropriate public and private sector roles must be country- and crop-specific, to achieve desirable welfare and distribution effects (Matuschke and Qaim 2008). Strong public-private partnerships such as the ICRISAT consortium model, as well as government-sponsored science parks, represent a strategic approach to providing the necessary infrastructure for research as well as the skilled human resources needed for technology exchanges.

Part of the reason for the stagnating production of sorghum and pearl millet is the growing competition in dry regions from other major cereals, including maize, plus cash crops, which benefit from government price support programs. The per capita consumption of sorghum in rural India declined from 1.59 kg per month in 1973 to 0.45 kg per month in 2003–2004 (NRCS 2007). Some of this decline is due to governmental policies that excluded sorghum from public procurement at minimum support price (MSP) and from supply through public distribution systems (NRCS 2006). Government policies encouraged increased consumption of wheat or rice in the regions where sorghum was traditionally valued as the preferred cereal. The calculation of MSP shifted against sorghum and coarse cereals over years. The MSP of rice and sorghum were equal during 1980–81; but by 1995–96, MSP was 9 percent lower for sorghum than for rice. Moreover, government policies on pricing sorghum and millet vis-àvis pulses, oil seeds, and other dryland crops were similarly unfavorable and further accelerated the diversion of kharif sorghum or millet toward other commercial alternatives. The implication for sustainable sorghum and pearl millet production is clear: if the government decides that it cannot afford to continue subsidizing wheat, rice, and maize production, demand for sorghum and pearl millet is likely to increase.

Conclusion Despite the fact that India's combined sorghum and millet production has been stagnant since 1965, new technology has nevertheless had an important impact on improving small farmer productivity in some of the poorest areas of India. Yields doubled since 1966, largely due to improved genetics and crop management, initially spearheaded by public research (1966–85) and then by the private sector (1986 to present). Unlike the major Green Revolution crops, very little of the increase in yields can be attributed to irrigation, since at least 90 percent of these crops are grown under unirrigated/rainfed conditions. The doubling of yields allowed farmers to grow the same amount of food on half the land, often switching the rest to valuable cash crops and increasing their incomes. The improved crops contributed to food security additionally because they

The public sector research system continues to provide July - Sept. 2011

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

are considerably more resistant to drought than the other major food grains. Furthermore, it is clear that these new technologies primarily benefit poor consumers, because the wealthy tend to eat rice or wheat.

2. Government investments in seed production via government and private institutions. The Indian national and state governments, with the help of donors, made major investments in government seed corporations for production of the Green Revolution cultivars of wheat, rice, maize, pearl millet, and sorghum. At the same time, small private sector seed companies were permitted to enter into the seed business and make profits. Training for seedsmen in both public and private institutions was provided by the government.

The data on the spread and benefits from the improved hybrid cultivars in these crops show that hybrids can be very valuable to small farmers who grow crops in dryland conditions. Pray et al. (1991) showed that 80 to 90 percent of the benefits from the adoption of hybrids of these crops went to farmers rather than to the seed companies. The takeover of pearl millet and sorghum seed markets by proprietary hybrids nevertheless shows that private firms capture sufficient benefits to induce them to invest in research to develop cultivars for small farmers in unirrigated regions.

3. Sector liberalization beginning in the mid-1980s. Instead of allowing SSCs to become regional monopolies, the governments opened the doors to investment by large Indian firms which had been excluded from this sector until 1986; they also allowed foreign direct investment in the sector at about the same time.

The lessons from the Indian interventions to improve sorghum and pearl millet hybrids highlight three important interventions.

Liberalization has been coupled with ongoing indirect government support for private operations: continuing public investment in hybrid breeding; public-private partnerships; provision of inbred lines and germplasm for developing proprietary hybrids; and a seed law that allowed truthfully labeled seed instead of mandatory registration and government testing of new cultivars. This approach has led to a vibrant and sustainable supply of new cultivars and seed that are resistant to important diseases and pests and tolerant of drought.

1. Investments in public sector plant breeding and crop management research by national government, state governments, and international agricultural research centers. In the early days of the development of hybrids of sorghum and millets, all three contributed OPVs, hybrid cultivars, and the inbred lines which benefited farmers directly while providing the basis for private researchers to develop new cultivars.

References Bantilan, C., D. Parthasarathy, and R. Padmaja. 2003. Enhancing research-poverty alleviation linkages: experience in the semiarid tropics. In Agricultural research and poverty reduction: Some issues and evidence, eds. Shantanu Mathur and Douglas Pachico. CIAT Publication No. 335, Economics and Impact Series no. 2. Cali, Colombia: International Center for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT).

Dar, W. D., B. V. S. Reddy, C. L. L. Gowda, and S. Ramesh. 2006. Genetic resources enhancement of ICRISAT mandate crops. Current Science 91 (7): 880–884. Dayakar Rao, B., S. Reddy, and N. Seetharama. 2007. Reorientation of investment in R&D of millets for food security: The case of sorghum in India. Journal of Agricultural Situation in India 64 (7): 303–305.

Bantilan, M. C. S., and U. K. Deb. 2002. Grey to green revolution in India: Role of public-private-international partnership in research and development. Paper presented at the BAEA-IAAE conference on "Public-Private Sector Partnership for Promoting Rural Development," Dhaka, October 2–4.

Evenson, R. E., and D. Gollin. 2003. Review: Assessing the impact of the green revolution, 1960 to 2000. Science 300: 758–762. Evenson, R. E., and C. E. Pray, eds. 1991. Research and productivity in Asian agriculture. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 1995. Sorghum and millets in human nutrition. FAO Food and Nutrition Series No. 27. Rome: FAO.

Bantilan, M. C. S., U. K. Deb, and S. D. Singh. 2000. Farm level genetic diversity in pearl millet in India. Poster Paper presented at the 3rd International Crop Science Congress, Hamburg, August 18–22.

________. 2004. FAOSTAT- agriculture. Rome: FAO.

Breese, W. A., C. T. Hash, A. Sharma, and J. R. Witcombe. 2002. Defeating downy mildew: Improving pearl millet, the staple cereal crop of some of the world's poorest people, whilst keeping one step ahead of downy mildew. Poster presented at the conference on Plant Pathology and Global Food Security, at Imperial College, London, July 8–10.

________. 2007. FAOSTAT- agriculture. Rome: FAO. Fertiliser Association of India (FSA). 2004. Annual Report. New Delhi: FSA. Hash, C. T., R. S. Yadav, A. Sharma, R. Bidinger, K. M. Devos, M. D. Gale, C. J. Howarth, S. Chandra, G. P. Cavan, R. Serraj, P. S. Kumar, W. A. Breese, J. R. Witcombe. 2007. Release of pearl millet hybrid HHB 67-2: An improved downy mildew resistant version of HHB 667 produced by marker assisted selection.

CWC (Central Water Commission). 2003. Statistical report. New Delhi: Department of Statistics, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.

July - Sept. 2011

Pearl Millet and Sorghum Improvement in India

ICRISAT Highlights. Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh: International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT).

for sorghum and pearl millet in India. Research Policy 20: 315–324.

ICAR (Indian Council of Agricultural Research). 2006. Annual report. New Delhi, India: Krishi Bhavan.

Pray, C. E., and B. Ramaswami. 2001. Liberalization's impact on the Indian seed industry: Competition, research, and impact on farmers. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 2 (3): 407–420.

ICRISAT (International Crops Research Institute for Semi Arid Tropics). 1998. Annual report. Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh, India: ICRISAT.

Pray, C. E., B. Ramaswami, and Timothy Kelley, 2001. The impact of economic reforms on R&D by the Indian seed industry. Food Policy 26 (6): 587–598.

________. 2002. Research for impact: Annual report. Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh, India: ICRISAT.

Pray, C. E, S. Ribeiro, R. Mueller, and P. Parthasarathy Rao. 1988. Private research and public benefits: The private seed industry and sorghum and pearl millet in India. Research Paper-P-3980282-1-89. New Brunswick, N.J.: Department of Agricultural Economics, Rutgers University.

Mahyco. 1999. Marketing database: Benchmarking the seed market. Jalna, Mumbai, India: Mahyco. Matuschke, I., and M. Qaim. 2008. Seed market privatisation and farmers' access to crop technologies: The case of hybrid pearl millet adoption in India. Journal of Agricultural Economics 59 (3): 498–515.

Pray, C. E., and S. Ribeiro. 1990. Government seed policy, the development of private seed industry, and the impact of private R&D in India: The final report of the Indian seed industry project. New Brunswick, N.J.: Department of Agricultural Economics, Rutgers University.

MoA (Ministry of Agriculture). 2006, Agriculture statistics at a glance. New Delhi: Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Government of India. Mula, R. P., K. N. Rai, V. N. Kulkarni, and A. K. Singh. 2007. Publicprivate partnership and impact of ICRISAT's pearl millet hybrid parents research. SAT e-Journal 5 (1). ICRISAT, Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh, India.

Rai, K. N., D. S. Murty, D. J. Andrews, and P. J. Bramel-Cox. 1999. Genetic enhancement of pearl millet and sorghum for the semi-arid tropics of Asia and Africa. Genome 42: 617–628. Ramaswami, B. 2002. Understanding the seed industry: Contemporary trends and analytical issues. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics 57 (3): 417–429.

Nagarajan, L., M. Smale, and P. Glewwe. 2007. Determinants of millet diversity at the household-farm and village-community levels in the drylands of India: The role of local seed systems. Agricultural Economics 36(2): 157–167.

Ramaswami, B., C. E. Pray, and T. Kelley. 2001. The impact of economic reforms on R&D by the Indian seed industry. Food Policy 26 (6): 587–598.

Nagarajan, L., P. Pardey, and M. Smale. 2007. Seed systems and millet crops in marginal environments of India: Industry and policy perspectives. Quarterly Journal of International Agriculture 46 (3): 263–288.

Reddy, B. V. S., S. Ramesh, and C. L. L. Gowda. 2005. Forging research and development partnerships with private sector at ICRISAT: Sorghum as case study. International Sorghum Millets Newsletter 46: 6–10.

NRCS (National Research Centre for Sorghum). 2006. Annual report. Rajendra Nagar, Hyderabad, India: NRCS.

Reddy, B. V. S., S. Ramesh, S. T. Borikar, and K. Hussain Sahib. 2007. ICRISAT–Indian NARS partnership sorghum improvement research: Strategies and impacts. Current Science 92 (7): 909–915.

________. 2007. Perspective plan: Vision 2025. Rajendra Nagar, Hyderabad, India: NRCS. NSAI (National Seed Association of India). 2009. Annual report. New Delhi: NSAI.

Reserve Bank of India (RBI). 2005. Economic survey of India. Mumbai, India: RBI.

Pal, S., and D. Byerlee. 2003. The funding and organization of agricultural research in India: Evolution and emerging policy issues. ICAR Policy Paper 16. New Delhi, India: National Centre for Agricultural Economics and Policy Research.

________. 2006. Annual report 2005–06. Mumbai, India: RBI. Seetharam, A., K. W. Riley, and G. Harinarayana. 1989. Small millets in global agriculture. New Delhi: Oxford and IBH Publishing.

Pal, S., and R. Tripp. 2002. India's seed industry reforms: Prospects and issues. Indian Journal of Agricultural Economics 57 (3): 443–457.

Singh, R. P., M. L. Morris, and S. Pal. 1997. Efficiency and equity considerations in the maize seed marketing system: Role of public and private sectors in India. Indian Journal of Agricultural Marketing 52 (4): 28–34.

Parthasarathy Rao, P., P. S. Birthal, B. V. S. Reddy, K. N. Rai, and S. Ramesh. 2006. Diagnostics of sorghum and pearl millet grainbased nutrition. International Sorghum and Pearl Millet Newsletter 47: 93–96.

Spielman, D. J., F. Hartwich, and K. von Grebmer. 2007. Sharing science, building bridges, and enhancing impact: Publicprivate partnerships in the CGIAR. IFPRI Discussion Paper 708. Washington, D.C.: International Food Policy Research Institute.

Parthasarathy, D., and V. K. Chopde. 2000. Building social capital: Collective action, adoption of agricultural innovations, and poverty reduction in the Indian semi-arid tropics. Paper Prepared for Global Development Network (GDN). International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), India.

Thakur, R. P, V. P. Rao, K. N. Amruthesh, H. S. Shetty, and V. V. Datar. 2003. Field surveys of pearl millet downy mildew: Effects of hybrids, fungicide, and cropping sequence. Journal of Mycology and Plant Pathology 33: 387–394.

Pray, C. E., S. Ribeiro, R. A. E. Mueller, and P. Parthasarathy Rao. 1991. Private research and public benefit: The private seed industry

Tripp, R. 2001. Seed provision and agricultural development. London: Overseas Development Institute

(Reproduced Courtesy: IFPRI)

July - Sept. 2011

Varietal Improvement in Maize: Development of Single Cross Hybrids in India J. Kaul, R. Sai kumar and Sain Dass, Directorate of Maize Research (DMR), New Delhi

Maize (Zea mays L.) is the most widely distributed crop of the world being grown in tropical, sub-tropical and temperate regions up to 500 and from sea level to more than 3000m under irrigated to semi-arid conditions. Being a versatile crop, it adapts easily to a wide range of production environments. In India, maize is the third most important cereal after rice and wheat that provides food, feed, fodder, and serves as a source of basic raw material for the number of industrial products,viz. starch, protein ,oil, alcoholic beverages, food sweeteners, cosmetics, bio-fuel, etc. No other cereal can be used in as many ways as maize. Virtually every part of the plant has an economic worth. The grain can be consumed as human food, fermented to produce a wide range of foods and beverages, fed to livestock, and used as an industrial input in the production of starch, oil, sugar, protein, cellulose, ethyl alcohol, etc. The leaves, stalks, and tassels can be fed to livestock, either green (in the form of fodder or silage) or dried (in the form of Stover).The roots can be used for mulching, incorporated into the soil to improve the physical structure, or dried and burned as fuel. In India, maize is cultivated over 8.26 million ha with a production of 19.31 million tons having an average productivity of more than 2.4 tons/ ha, contributing 8.5 % to the Indian food basket. It occupies an important place as a source of human food (25%), animal feed (11%), and poultry feed (52%), starch (11%), brewery (1%) and seed 1% (Fig.1). The growth rate of area (2.83 %), production (30.93 %) and productivity (27.35%) over the past years, has shown a remarkable increase as compared to other principal cereal crops. No other cereal crop has shown the high growth rate as of maize.

stresses. This has been duly supported by development of vigorous, productive and genetically diverse inbred lines that have good performance per se as well as in cross combinations.

Focus on Inbred-Hybrid Technology The major mandate of AICRP (Maize) as well as DMR is to evolve and disseminate inbred-hybrid technology. With the urbanisation, specialty corn has gained a great acceptability among the masses. Their demand in Indian market has gone up. Sweet corn and baby corn hybrids/ varieties are sought to cater to the demands of periurban agriculture. Over the years 131 hybrids have been developed and released since 1961; four dozen are public-bred single cross hybrids of different maturity( extra-early, early, medium and late) and suitable for cultivation in different agro-climatic conditions of the country (zones 1to 5, kindly see the Fig .2). Since 2005, as many as 23 normal, seven Quality protein maize (QPM) and one each of baby corn and sweet corn single cross hybrids have been released. The detailed information on these hybrids including pedigree, characteristic features, area of adaptation, etc, has been provided in Table 1.

Animal Feed 12%

Starch 12%

Seed 1% Brewery

Poultry Feed 49%

Maize Breeding Activities in India Maize breeding strategy in India has gone through many phases of switch -over since the inception of All India Coordinated Research Project (Fig.2) on maize in 1957. However, the last three to five years have been the landmark years since the adoption of high yielding hybrids on farmers' fields proved as critical input for achieving high growth rate in maize. The breeding activities have therefore, been re-oriented towards the development of high yielding single cross hybrids for different agro-ecological regions of the country seeing the strength of two-parent crosses for high yield and tackling the problems posed by biotic and abiotic July - Sept. 2011

Food 25%

Fig.1: maize utilization pattern in India 59

Varietal Improvement in Maize: Development of Single Cross Hybrids in India

Fig.2 : AICRP on maize: centres and zones Table 1: Hybrids Developed and Released for Cultivation in India during last three years. S.No

Name

Pedigree

Centre

Year of release

Area of adoption

Characteristic features

DHM-117

BML 6X BML 7

ANGRAU, Hyderabad

2010

Andhra Pradesh

Medium, orange-yellow, Fint, Nutrient responsive, tolerance to lodging & stay green, avg. yield 75g/ha

DHM-111

BML 6X BML 15

ANGRAU, Hyderabad

2010

Andhra Pradesh

Medium, maturity, Yellow, semident, Nutrient responsive, tolerance to lodging & stay green, avg. yield 65g/ha

DHM-113

BML 2X BML 7

ANGRAU, Hyderabad

2010

Andhra Pradesh

Late, orange, semident, Nutrient responsive & tolerance to lodging & stay green, avg. yield 66g/ha

HM-11

HK11128 X HK-163

CCS HAU, Karnal

2009

Across the country Late maturity except Himalyan Nutrient responsive & belt (rabi) tolerance to lodging & stay green, avg. yield 66g/ha

HM10

HKI 1932 X HKI 128

CCS HAU, Karnal

2008

Delhi, Punjab, Haryana and Western Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra and, Karnataka,

July - Sept. 2011

Medium maturity, yellow, semi flint, highly responsive to inputs, resistance MLB & avg yield 72 q/ha

Varietal Improvement in Maize: Development of Single Cross Hybrids in India

S.No

Name

Pedigree

Centre

Year of release

PM H3

LM 17 X

PAU Ludhiana

2008

Nithya Shree

SKV-50 X NAI105

UAS Naganahalli

Vivek hybrid 33

V 372 X CM 212

Vivek 23

Area of adoption

Characteristic features

Delhi, Punjab, Haryana and Western Uttar Pradesh

Late maturity, orange, flint, highly resposive to inputs & avg yield 75 q/ha

2008

Karnataka (Kharif & rabi)

Late maturity,yellow-orange, semi-dent, resistant to lodging & avg yield 80 q/ha

VPKAS Almora

2008

Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand

Early maturity, yellow, dent,avg. yield 50q/ha

V 351 X V 341

VPKAS Almora

2007

Hills of Uttaranchal

Early maturity, yellow, flint, bold, moderate tolerance against TLB, tall & avg yield 45 q/ha.

Maize PAU 352

LM 15 X CML 32

PAU Ludhiana

2007

Punjab, Haryana, Delhi.

Early maturity, resistance to MLB, BSDM, ESR & avg yield 35-48 q/ha

HM 8

HKI 1105 X HKI 161

CCS HAU Karnal

2007

Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu,, Maharastra, Karnataka

Medium maturity, orange, flint & avg yield 50-68 q/ha

HKI 1105 X HKI 1128

CCS HAU Karnal

Bihar, Jharkhand, Orissa

Medium maturity, orange, flint & avg yield 60 q/ha

East UP, Bihar, Jharkhand, Chattisgarh, West Bengal, Orissa

Medium maturity , yellow, semi flint, responsive to higher doses of fertilizers, resistance to MLB & avg yield 54 q/ha

TN under irrigated & rainfed ecology

Late maturity, semi flint, responsive to high inputs, resistance to downy mildew, moderately resistance to stem borer, avg yield 4255q/ha

Irrigated areas of Punjab

Late maturity, stem is zigzag, resistance MLB, stalk rots, avg yield 52q/ha

HM 9

2007

Malviya Makka 2

HUZM BHU 185 X Varanasi HKI1105

COHM 5

UMI 285 TNAU X UMI Coimbatore 2007 61

PMH-1

LM 13 X LM 14

PAU Ludhiana

Reproduced from Krishisewa.com July - Sept. 2011

2007

Frequently Asked Questions on PPV & FR Legislation Q. Why protection of plant varieties has become an important issue?

Ans. As such those plant variety present in wilderness cannot be registered, under PPV&FR Authority. However, any traditionally cultivated plant variety which has undergone the process of domestication / improvement through human interventions can be registered and protected subjected to fulfillment of the eligible criteria.

Ans. The breeding activities and exploitation of new varieties are the decisive factors for improving rural income and their overall economic development. Since the process of plant breeding is long and expensive, it is important to provide an effective system of plant variety protection with an aim to encourage the development of new varieties of plants for the benefit of society.

Q. What are the characteristics which may be used for distinguishing a variety? Ans. The new variety should be distinct from the other varieties for at least one characteristic.

Q. What are Farmers’ rights? Ans. 1. Farmer who has bred or developed a new variety shall be entitled for registration and other protection under PPV&FR Act, 2001 in the same manner as a breeder of a variety.

Q. What are the prerequisites for filing an application form for registration of plant variety? Ans. For registration of a plant variety the following prerequisites has to be completed:

2. Farmer who is engaged in the conservation of genetic resources of land races and wild relatives of economic plants and their improvement through selection and preservation shall be entitled in the prescribed manner for recognition and reward from the Gene Fund provided that material so selected and preserved has been used as donors of genes in varieties registered under this act.

1. Denomination assigned to such variety. 2. Accompanied by an affidavit that variety does not contain any gene or gene sequences involving terminator technology. 3. Complete passport data of parental lines with its geographical location in India and all such information relating to the contribution if any, of any farmer (s), village, community, institution or organization etc in breeding, evolving or developing the variety.

3. Farmer shall be entitle to save, use, sow, re-sow, exchange and share or sell his farm produce including seed of a variety protected under this act in the same manner as he was entitled before the coming into force of this act provided that the farmer shall not be entitled to sell branded seed of a variety protected under this act.

4. Characteristics of variety with description for Novelty, Distinctiveness, Uniformity and Stability.

Q. What is the duration of protection of a registered plant variety?

5. A declaration that the genetic material used for breeding of such variety has been lawfully acquired.

Ans. The duration of protection of registered varieties is different for different crops which are as below:

6. A breeder or other person making application for registration shall disclose the use of genetic material conserved by any tribal or rural families for improvement of such variety.

1. For trees and vines - 18 years. 2. For other crops - 15 years. 3. For extant varieties - 15 years from the date of notification of that variety by the Central Government under section 5 of the Seeds Act, 1966.

Q. What comprises a plant variety protection Application Form? Ans. The application for registration of a variety is to be made in the form prescribed by the PPV & FR Authority.

Q. Can a new and distinct plant found growing in nature be protected?

July - Sept. 2011

Frequently Asked Questions on PPV & FR Legislation

1. Form I - for registration of new variety, extant variety and farmer’s variety and

Ans. Yes, the breeder shall be required to deposit the seed or propagating material including parental line seeds of registered variety to the Authority. An applicant has to submit a fixed amount of seed sample (breeder seed) with prescribed germination percentage, physical purity and phyto-sanitary standards. The applicant shall also submit along with the seed / propagating the seed quality test report.

2. Form II - for essentially derived varieties (EDVs) and transgenic varieties. 3. Technical Questionnaire attached with Form I and Form II – for detailed information of the concerned variety. These filled application forms must be accompanied by the fee prescribed by the Authority.

Q. What is done with the seeds received by the Authority?

Q. Who can apply for the registration of a plant variety?

2. any successor of the breeder of the variety;

Ans. The seed samples received by the Authority will be properly tested for its purity and germination. A part of the seed sample will be sent to the test centre for conduct of DUS tests and a part of it will be kept by the Authority in the National Gene Bank to maintain the seed samples of the registered varieties for their entire period of protection.

3. any person being the assignee or the breeder of the variety in respect of the right to make such application;

Q. Can any person get the seed samples of the registered variety or a variety undergoing the process of DUS tests?

4. any farmer or group of farmers or community of farmers claiming to be breeder of the variety; 5. any person authorized to make application on behalf of farmers and

Ans. No, any person seeking for the seed sample of a protected variety or a variety undergoing the DUS test procedure has to get permission from the Authority or the breeder of the variety.

6. any University or publicly funded agricultural institution claiming to be breeder of the variety.

Q. Can a person apply for registration of a variety which is already in the market?

Q. Which is the office for the registration of plant varieties?

Ans. Any variety which is already in the market, but not for more than a year, can be applied for registration as a new variety. Other older variety can be registered as Extant Variety.

Ans. Application for registration of a variety can be made by: 1. any person claiming to be the breeder of the variety;

Ans. Registration of plant varieties can be made in the office of Registrar, PPV&FRA, New Delhi. The address of the Office is: Registrar, Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Authority, Govt. of India, Ministry of Agriculture, NASC Complex, DPS Marg, Opposite Todapur, New Delhi – 110 012. Also any information regarding the protection, application, fee structure, etc. can be obtained from this office. Completed forms in triplicate, with fee/charges should be submitted to the Registrar with enclosures, TQ, affidavits in his New Delhi Office or can be sent by Registered Post. In the first instance do not send DUS test fee or seed.

Q. What is the cost of registering a plant variety? Ans. The fee structure as defined by the PPV&FR Authority is as below: Rupees A. Form Charges 1. Application Form Charges B. DUS test fee* 1. Rice, Wheat, Maize, Sorghum, Pearl millet, Pigeon pea, Mungbean, Urdbean, Chickpea, Fieldpea, Lentil, Rajmash

Q. Can an application for registration of plant varieties be made through an agent? Ans. Yes, a breeder or a farmer can apply for registration either in person or through his agent.

20,000/-

C. Annual Fee The Authority shall notify the amount separately in the official Gazette (in the PVJ of India).

Q. Is it necessary to submit the seed / propagating material before registration?

July - Sept. 2011

200/-

Frequently Asked Questions on PPV & FR Legislation

II. Other charges:

Q. What species can be protected?

A. Registration Charges

Ans. The Central Government has notified the following crops with their genera eligible for registration of varieties.

1 For Extant Variety of Common 2,000/Knowledge where no DUS test is needed.

S. Botanical Name No.

Hindi Name Common Name

Oryza sativa L.

Chawal

Rice

Triticum aestivum

L. Gehun

Bread wheat

Zea mays L.

Makka

Maize

Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench

Jowar

Sorghum

Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.

Bajra

Pearl millet

Cicer arietinum L.

Chana

Chickpea

Cajanus cajan (L.) Millsp.

Arhar

Pigeon pea

Vigna radiata (L). Wilczek

Mung

Green gram

Urd

Black gram

Q. What are the acts of infringement of the rights provided to the registered breeder under the Act?

Vigna mungo (L.) Hepper

Masur

Lentil

Ans. Following acts may be a case of infringement under the PPV&FR Act:

Lens culinaris Medik

Pisum sativum L.

Matar

Field pea

12 Phaseolus vulgaris L.

Rajmah

Kidney bean

2. Registration Certificate charges

5,000/-

B. DUS testsite visit charges/person/visit 500/(To be retained at DUS test site after issue of receipt) Q. What are the exemptions provided under the PPV & FR Act, 2001? 1.

Farmers’ Exemption: Farmer shall be entitled to produce, save, use, sow, resow, exchange, share or sell his farm produce including seed of a variety protected under this Act. Researcher’s Exemption: (i) the use of registered variety for conducting experiment.

(ii) the use of variety as an initial source of variety for the purpose of creating other varieties.

1. If a person who is not a breeder of a variety registered under this act or a registered agent or a registered licensee of that variety, sells, exports, imports or produces such variety without the permission of its breeder or within the scope of a registered license or registered agency without their permission of the registered license or registered agent.

Q. How to get information about General and Specific Guidelines for DUS Testing? Ans. The General and Specific Guidelines for DUS Testing of 12 notified crop species are available in Plant Variety Journal of India, Volume-1, No. 1 dated 20th February, 2007. The cost of each issue of the Journal is Rs. 100/- or Rs. 1200/- per year payable on DD to the Registrar, PPV&FR Authority. This information is also available on the official website of PPV&FR Authority.

2. If a person uses, sells, exports, imports or produces any other variety giving such variety, the denomination identical with or deceptively similar to the denomination of a variety already registered under this act in such a way that it causes confusion in the mind of general people in identifying the registered variety.

Q. From which date the PPV&FR Authority starts receiving applications for Registration of Plant Varieties? Ans. The PPV&FR Authority shall starts receiving applications for Registration of Varieties of 12 notified crop species from 21st May, 2007.

Q. Is there any punishment if any person falsely represents a variety as a registered variety? Ans. If any person falsely represents a variety as a registered variety then he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term not less than six months which can be extended up to three years or with a fine not less than one lakh which may be enhanced to five lakhs, or both. July - Sept. 2011

Q. To whom the application has to be submitted? Ans. The Application for registration of varieties of 12 notified crop species has to be submitted to The Registrar, PPV&FR Authority NASC Complex, DPS Marg, New Delhi - 110012. 64

Frequently Asked Questions on PPV & FR Legislation

Q. What are the Business Hours for receiving application and seed samples?

No applications will be received after business hours.

Ans. The Business Hours for receiving application and seed samples in the office of Registrar PPV&FR Authority are as under:

On successful submission of application, the application will receive an acknowledgement slip.

After submission of application, it will be processed according to the provisions of the Rule 29(2) of the PPV&FR Rules, 2003.

10.

After depositing the stipulated fees for conducting DUS tests, the office of the Registrar shall issue receipt and number which shall be used for all future references including the checking of the status of application on line.

Sl. No.

Crop Time

All varieties including new varieties, EDVs and Extant varieties mentioned in the schedule under Sub No. VI here in

Timing Date Time Monday to Thursday

10:00 Hrs to 15:00 Hrs

Q. What are the schedules for receiving the seed samples of 12 notified crop species?

Q. What are the guidelines for submission of applications for Registration of Plant Varieties?

Ans. Keeping in view that the seeds are living biological entities and sowing in done on cropping system basis, a Schedule for the receipt of seed samples has been developed to facilitate the DUS testing procedures which as under:-

Ans. The guidelines for submission of applications for Registration of Plant Varieties are as under: 1.

4. 5.

Every application in triplicate must be in writing and signed by the applicant or their representative. Application should be submitted in hard copy along with all essential requirements by hand till further notice. Applications will be received only on Monday to Thursday from 10:00 Hours to 15:00 hours. No application will be accepted on Friday, Saturday and Sunday and Public Holidays. Every application must have the name of the applicant, their address and nationally as well as the address of service of their agent (if Applicable). A person can file upto a maximum of three applications per day. Until otherwise notified in the plant Variety Journal of India, each application should be accompanied with an application charge of Rs. 200/- each by demand draft drawn in favour of the “The Registrar, Plant Variety Registrar, New Delhi”. The Application will be received on “first come first serve” basis.

July - Sept. 2011

S. No.

Name of the crop

Month for receiving seed sample

Rice

December to 15th April

Bread wheat

April to 14th August

Maize

December to 15th March

Sorghum

December to 15th March

Pearl millet

December to 15th March

Chickpea

April to 14th August

Pigeon pea

December to 15th March

Green gram

December to 15th March

Black gram

December to 15th March

Lentil

April to 14th August

Field pea

April to 14th August

Kidney bean

April to 14th August

EVENTS

ASTA DELEGATION VISITS INDIA FOR INTERACTIONS WITH NSAI

A delegation of American Seed Trade Association (ASTA) visited India during September 2011 and engaged NSAI in two discussion sessions at New Delhi and Hyderabad. The main focus of the discussions was to understand the Indian PVP systems and how it was impacting the seed industry, besides working out areas of mutual co-operation and trade relationships. The Team was led by Mr. Andrew Lavigne, President & CEO, ASTA and included Dr. Bernice Slutsky, Vice President (Science & International Affairs), ASTA; Prof. Miller McDonald, Professor Emeritus, Ohio State University; Ms. Dana Rewoldt, PVP Regional Expert, Syngenta Seeds Inc. and Mr. Ajai Rana, CEO & MD, Savannah Seeds. The Delhi Interaction was organized at Hotel Le Meredian on 12 September. The NSAI Team led by Director, Dr. N. K. Dadlani included among others, Dr. Arvind Kapur; Dr. P. K. Agrawal; Dr. Jai Singh; Dr. Dhiraj Pant; Dr. Vinod Kumar; Ms. Sangeeta; Mr. Tafeem Siddiqui and Dr. Seema Sehgal. At Hyderabad, the ASTA – NSAI Interaction was held on 13 September, as an 'Interactive Workshop'. After a formal welcome, Dr. P. Sateesh Kumar (President, AP Seedmen Association) presented an 'Overview of the Indian Seed Industry'. Dr. Andrew Lavigne, outlined the purpose of the visit and the interactions, which as mentioned above, were focused on working out areas for mutual cooperation besides getting a clear understanding of the Indian PVP systems. After a brief introduction by Dr. Slutsky, Ms. Dana made a presentation on 'Legal Framework of PVP and other Seed Protection in the United States'. Mr. Uday Singh, former President, NSAI then made a presentation on 'The PVP & FR Systems – India', as also a small presentation on 'Position on Patents in Plants'. Prof. McDonald, also shared his impressions of the historical perspectives of the US PVP systems. Mr. David Leishman, Senior Agricultural Attache, who was coordinating the ASTA visit with Dr. Santosh Kumar Singh, Agricultural Specialist, US Embassy in India, joined Dr. Dadlani in thanking the participants. The participants at Hyderabad Interaction, included among others, Mr. M. Prabhakar Rao; Mr. Uday Singh; Mr. Satish Kagliwal; Dr. Rakesh Chopra; Mr. Santosh Attavar; Dr. Sadananda; Mr. Ramesh Viswanathan; Mr. Venkat Reddy; Mr. S.K. Gupta; Dr. V.S. Dagaonkar; Mr. A.S.N. Reddy; Mr. S.V.R. Rao; Mr. K. Niranjan Kumar; Mr. Kamal Zunzunwala; Dr. Gowri Shankar; Mr. Raju Kapoor; and Mr. S.S.M. Khan.

July - Sept. 2011

EVENTS

NSAI – ISF – PPV & FRA INTERACTION

National Seed Association of India (NSAI), International Seed Federation (ISF) and Protection of Plant Varieties & Farmers' Rights Authority (PPV & FRA) organized an 'Interaction' meeting on 27 September 2011 at New Delhi. The 'Interaction' was chaired by Dr. P. L. Gautam, Chairperson, PPV & FRA and attended by members of the Intellectual Property Committee (IPC) - a Standing Committee of ISF, besides senior officers of Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR), PPV & FRA, Ministry of Agriculture (MoA), and members of NSAI. The ISF Team led by Dr. Marcel Bruins, Secretary General had fourteen members of IPC representing ten countries, including India (Dr. Usha Zehr). PPV & FRA was represented by Dr. Gautam (Chairperson), Dr. Manoj Srivastava (Registrar) and other staff; ICAR by Dr. J. S. Sandhu, Asstt. Director General (Seeds); Dr. Malavika Dadlani, Jt. Director, IARI; Dr. Vilas Tonapi, Head Div. of Seed Science & Technology, IARI; MoA by Ms. Smriti Sharan, Director (Seeds); Mr. R. K. Trivedi, Dy. Commissioner (Seeds); NSAI by Dr. M. Ramasami, President, NSAI; Dr. Arvind Kapur; Mr. Rajvir Rathi; Mr. Santosh Attavar; Mr. Gururaj Kulkarni; and Dr. N. K. Dadlani, Director, NSAI, besides several others. In the beginning, Dr. Marcel Bruins explained that the purpose of their visit to India was to have an exchange of views and dialogue with the representatives of Indian seed industry, policy makers and the scientific communities to explore the areas for mutual cooperation and collaboration. Dr. Arvind Kapur (Rasi Seeds) on behalf of NSAI made a presentation on the varietal regulation scenario in Indian agriculture and the salient features of the PPV&FR Act, 2001. Thereafter, Dr. Marcel Bruins, Secretary General, ISF made a brief over view about ISF's historical background, constitution, membership, activities, mission and vision and their role for the International Seed Trade at global level. The major areas of concern to the members of the ISF – IPC related to: Farmers' permission to sell non-branded seeds of protected varieties; Implementation of clauses on use of landraces and benefit sharing; security of germ plasm and information provided to testing authorities; and DUS provisions and establishment of reference collection and required data. Dr. J. Stephen C. Smith, a member of the ISF delegation made a presentation on Protection of Plant Varieties Legislations of United States (US). Citing his country's example he stated that in USA there are three kinds of legislations relating to plant variety protection. These legislations are working well to the social and political requirement of the country and there were no issues. These legislative instruments are also in conformity with International Conventions and treaties. The ISF delegation was keen to understand how the ISF could work with PPV& FR Authority to help ensure future success for the Indian systems; monitor the effectiveness of the implementation of PVP, and how could ISF provide support to improve the Indian agriculture industry. During the discussions led by Dr. Gautam, clarifications to the various points / concerns raised by ISF Committee members were provided. The three organizations, ISF, PPV & FRA and NSAI decided to work together towards ensuring an effective system for IPR in the country.

July - Sept. 2011

EVENTS

NSAI - SIMA - SICA INTERACTION MEETING BETWEEN SEED INDUSTRIES AND TEXTILE INDUSTRIES

NSAI in collaboration with South India Mills Association ( SIMA) and South India Cotton Association (SICA) organised an interaction meeting at Coimbatore in August 2011. The first of its kind interaction between the seed industries and the textile industries, enabled a review of the areas of co-operation for mutual growth and taking the Indian cotton production and utilization to the next level. The interaction was inaugurated by Mr. S. V. Arumugam, Deputy Chairman, CITI, in the presence of Dr. Ramaswami, President, NSAI; Mr. J. Thulasidharan, Chairman, SIMA; Mr. C. Soundararaj, President, SICA and Mr. K.N. Vishwanathan, Hon. Secretary, SICA, with Dr. C. D. Mayee, the eminent agricultural scientist, presiding over the inauguration. Dr. C.D. Mayee presented the ‘Key Note’ paper. The other presentations included: Dr. M. Ramasami ( Cotton Current Scenario and Future Limitation; Dr. Paresh Sharma ( Development and Production of Quality Hybrid Cotton Seeds); Mr. G. S. Gill ( How technology will help to increase production); Mr. J. Thulasidharan (Qualitative and Quantitative Cotton requirements for Textile Industry. Several industry leaders from the both the sectors participated in this important interaction.

July - Sept. 2011

EVENTS

NSAI TEAM WELCOMES NBA CHAIRMAN

A NSAI Team led by its President, Dr. Ramasami (Rasi Seeds) called on Dr. Balakrishna Pisupati, the new Chairman of the National Biodiversity Authority on 20 September 2011 at Chennai. The Team included Mr. Uday Singh (Namdhari Seeds), Dr. Gyanendra Shukla (Monsanto); Mr. Rajvir Rathi (Bayer); Dr. A.R. Sadananda (Vibha Seeds); Ms. Madhavi Char (Mahyco) and Dr. P. Karnan (Rasi Seeds), besides Dr. N. K. Dadlani (Director, NSAI). Mr. C. Achalender Reddy, Secretary, NBA assisted Dr. Pisupati in the meeting. The meeting was convened to welcome Dr. Pisupati who has recently joined as the Chairman for NBA. Various concerns of the seed industry were discussed with the NBA Team. Dr. Pisupati was of the view that most of the industry's concerns arose from poor understanding of the issues. In a new system, implementation of an act is always met with different interpretations and perceptions. He welcomed the NSAI initiative to take the process further through consultations. He agreed to the NSAI suggestion to convene a joint 'Workshop' for the NSAI and NBA technical and legal experts to sit together to develop the process for effective and clear understanding of the provisions of the NBA Act, as it applies to the agricultural R & D for developing technology solutions for the benefit of the farmers.

July - Sept. 2011

EVENTS

ICAR ORGANISES CONSULTATION MEETING ON 'PREPARING ROAD MAP FOR SEED RESEARCH IN INDIA'

ICAR organized a Consultation Meeting on 'Preparing Road Map for Seed Research in India' on 1st August 2011 at IARI, New Delhi. Dr. S. Ayyappan, Director General, ICAR, chaired the Consultation, inaugurated by Dr. Swapan Datta, Dy. Director General (CS), ICAR and attended by senior seed scientists from across the country including, Dr. H.S. Gupta (Director, IARI); Dr. R.R. Hanchinal (VC, UAS, Dharwad); Dr. J. S. Sandhu (ADG,ICAR); Dr. Malavika Dadlani (JD-R,IARI); Dr. K. V. Prabhu; Dr. A. B. Mandal; Dr. S. Rajendra Prasad; Dr. M. Bhaskaran; Dr. Vilas Tonapi; Dr. V. Krishnaswamy ; Dr. A.K. Singh; Dr. N. C. Singhal; Dr. R. K. Chowdhary; etc. The private sector was represented by Dr. Arvind Kapur; Dr. Paresh Verma; Dr. Manish Patel; Mr. V. Shankaran; Dr. V. V. Shenoy; among others. The 'Consultation' was structured to include three Technical Sessions on 'Seed Production and Quality Assurance'; 'Basic Research and Seed Quality Enhancement' and 'Variety Maintenance, Protection and Seed Testing'. At the 'Plenary Session' chaired by Dr. Swapan Datta, the recommendations of various sessions were presented by Dr. M. Dadlani. The Consultation decided to constitute a 'Core Group' representing researchers, industry, DAC, administrators and policy makers, to develop network projects to address the important key areas in the XII Plan.

July - Sept. 2011

6.49 6.54

Haryana

Rajasthan North total

177.9

91.66

6.4

GRAND TOTAL

171.5

19.35 0.5

5.5

2.6

26.5

10.07 9

51.36

6.68

18.75

30.85 5.27

34.25

15.24

43.5

13.5

Loose lint

TOTAL

Others

Karnataka Tamil Nadu South Total

Madhya Pradesh Central total Andhra Pradesh

Gujarat Maharash tra

7.42

20.45

Area

Punjab

1996-97 Prod

330

340

360

229

447

285

605

182

382

362

364

354

367

Yield

89.04

0.56

16.63

2.47

5.18

8.98

51.75

5.17

31.39

15.19

20.1

6.45

6.38

7.27

Area

158

5.75

152.25

7.5

25.5

22.5

21.5

27.25

7.25

1997-98 Prod

302

304

388

344

246

483

283

740

116

470

230

290

240

170

Yield

92.87

0.62

21.29

2.43

6.08

12.78

53.07

5.01

31.99

16.07

17.89

6.45

5.82

5.62

Area

165

8.25

156.75

1.25

39.25

5.5

8.75

92.75

18.75

26.5

47.5

23.5

11.5

1998-99 Prod

Area in lakh hectares/ Production in lakh bales of 170 kgs/ Yield kgs per hectare

State

Year

1996-97 onwards

AREA, PRODUCTION AND PRODUCTIVITY OF COTTON (STATE-WISE)

302

343

313

385

245

333

297

636

141

502

223

303

204

151

Yield

87.31

0.45

17.64

1.85

5.4

10.39

53.18

5.25

32.54

15.39

16.04

5.83

5.46

4.75

Area

COTTON up to 2010 -11

156

149

1.5

5.5

22.5

15.5

27.5

31.5

10.65

7.85

1999-2000 Prod

304

567

337

505

220

368

259

502

199

304

334

379

332

281

Yield

SEED & AGRICULTURE STATISTICS

85.76

0.64

17.75

1.93

5.6

10.22

51.98

5.06

30.77

16.15

15.39

5.1

5.55

4.74

Area

140

131

38.5

5.5

7.75

25.25

61.25

19.25

18.25

23.75

30.25

10.75

9.5

2000-01 Prod

278

266

369

484

235

420

200

647

101

250

334

358

306

341

Yield

July - Sept. 2011

Rajasthan North total

10 158

Loose lint

GRAND TOTAL 87.3

148

0.75

38.75

17.93 0.9

26.75

10.02

86.75

52.9

6.23

5.91

34.25

29.8

TOTAL

Others

Karnataka Tamil Nadu South Total

32.5

21.75

5.5

9.25

2001-02 Prod

16.87

15.57

3.47

Haryana

Gujarat Maharash tra Madhya Pradesh Central total Andhra Pradesh

6 6.1

Punjab

Area

308

142

367

425

201

454

279

546

195

328

237

343

153

262

Yield

76.67

0.53

12.81

0.85

3.93

8.03

49.79

5.45

16.34

13.54

3.86

5.19

4.49

Area

136

11.5

124.5

27.75

19.75

74.5

30.5

21.25

8.75

7.5

2002-03 Prod

302

321

368

600

216

418

254

561

158

317

267

220

287

284

Yield

76.3

0.51

12.53

1.03

3.13

8.37

50.04

5.91

27.66

16.47

13.22

3.44

5.26

4.52

Area

179

168

35.35

3.75

4.2

27.4

100.65

19.65

9.15

11.5

10.35

2003-04 Prod

Area in lakh hectares/ Production in lakh bales of 170 kgs/ Yield kgs per hectare

State

Year

1996-97 onwards

AREA, PRODUCTION AND PRODUCTIVITY OF COTTON (STATE-WISE)

399

333

480

619

228

557

342

565

191

516

399

452

372

389

Yield

87.86

0.68

18.28

1.29

5.21

11.78

53.22

5.76

28.4

19.06

15.68

4.38

6.21

5.09

Area

COTTON up to 2010 -11

243

231

5.5

32.5

141

15.5

16.5

2004-05 Prod

470

250

428

725

261

469

450

472

311

651

466

427

424

551

Yield

SEED & AGRICULTURE STATISTICS

86.77

0.79

15.86

1.4

4.13

10.33

54.01

6.2

28.75

19.06

16.11

4.71

5.83

5.57

Area

241

229

143

2005-06 Prod

478

215

472

668

268

527

450

494

213

794

464

397

379

610

Yield

July - Sept. 2011

74 9.72 3.78

Andhra Pradesh

Karnataka

280

Grand Total 91.44

1 268

Total Loose Lint

0.71

521

239

94.14

0.76

307

1 295

192

110

554

224

603

687

337

690

522

540

330

772

514

415

528

563

Yield

94.06

0.84

19.16

1.09

4.08

13.99

61.21

6.25

31.42

23.54

12.85

3.02

4.56

5.27

Area

290

2 278

170

7.5

17.5

2008-09 Prod

524

405

594

780

375

644

472

490

335

650

516

422

522

565

Yield

20.34

1.04

4.55

14.75

67.39

6.11

35.03

26.25

14.62

4.44

5.07

5.11

Area

103.1

0.21

16.35

0.99

4.03

11.33

62.47

6.3

31.95

24.22

14.56

3.69

2007-08 Prod

Others

551

850

270

630

477

505

274

733

549

437

4.83

6.04

Area

0.54

172

103

481

672

Yield

Orissa

14.5

61.36

Central Total

6.39

Madhya Pradesh

South Total

31.07

Maharas htra

Tamil Nadu

23.9

Gujarat

3.5

Rajasthan 14.87

5.3

Haryana

North Total

6.07

Punjab 15

2006-07 Prod

Area

Area in lakh hectares/ Production in lakh bales of 170 kgs/ Yield kgs per hectare

State

1996-97 onwards

AREA, PRODUCTION AND PRODUCTIVITY OF COTTON (STATE-WISE)

COTTON up to 2010 -11

295

1 283

176

14.75

14.25

2009-10 Prod

486

315

552

817

336

599

444

417

306

635

465

421

495

474

Yield

SEED & AGRICULTURE STATISTICS

5.3

312

201

102

2010-11 Prod

475

1133

453

474

654

318

507

471

444

351

659

488

458

481

513

Yield

Source : Cotton Advisory Board

110.61

0.3

0.75

24.4

1.3

5.34

17.76

72.57

6.51

39.73

26.33

13.59

3.34

4.95

Area

HONOURS & AWARDS

Kaveri Seeds in Forbes Asia's Best under 1 Billion List In three and half decades of fruitful existence in seed and agribusiness, the Kaveri Seed Company Ltd. nurtured a competitive edge in the industry as a national premier company marketing quality seed of hybrids and varieties of field crops and vegetables. Sri Gundavaram V. Bhaskar Rao, Chairperson and the Managing Director, Kaveri Seed Company Ltd. is a technocrat with business acumen. As a seed entreuprenuer, Sri Rao was instrumental to startup seed production programme of public bred hybrids & varieties of corn, bajra, sunflower and paddy in family owned farmland in the year 1974. In a step wise accretion, he steered the company to new heights in seed and agribusiness to become a public listed company in the year 2007. The company's image received a big boost by figuring in Forbes listing under top 200 companies, under a billion in Asia - Pacific region.for 2010 The Company with vast experience in seed production of major agricultural crops is backed by a very strong in-house R&D that has the recognition by the Department of Science and Technology, Govt. of India Due to their long standing in seed production and commitment for quality, Kaveri has carved a niche in the seed market. All the hybrids and varieties developed are marketed in the brand name of Kaveri Seeds. An extended arm of Kaveri is the Microteck, which produce and market innovative bioproducts - micronutrients and biopesticides. With over 600 acres of Company owned farm land six seed processing plants and dedicated team, the company strives hard to design and develop productive hybrids. that excels in performance. Being India's leading Seed Company, focus centers round conjunct use of conventional breeding and biotechnology to advance the yield frontier and stabilize it through incorporation of genetic resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses. The company reins enviably in its product portfolio - both in number and performance.Concurrently, Kaveri Seed Company is laying emphasis to high value agriculture by way of protective cultivation of premium vegetables. Hybrid rice with huge trade off is still the major attraction for the Company's investment. The company is looking forward to break new grounds by exploring overseas markets and envisioned a green growth strategy for the future The growth and success of the Company once again recognized by Forbes- by listing under top 200 companies, under a billion in Asia - Pacific region. For 2010 ,for the year 2011, a hat trick well accomplished Kaveri Seed's principal activity is to develop and commercialize various seed products. The company's products include corn, tomatoes, sunflower, okra, pearl millet, chilies, grain sorghum, watermelon, cotton and rice. Plants are located at Ranga Reddy, Karimnagar, West Godavari and Medak districts of Andhra Pradesh and Bellary district of Karnataka.

July - Sept. 2011

NEWS ABLE for speedy clearance of BRAI, Seed Bill

Institute of Nutrition (NIN), said people would have a choice. “Food Labelling Bill would make it mandatory for companies to indicate whether something is GM food or not,” he said. Dr Dravid said labelling would be done, if need be.

States' approval mandatory for field trials of GM crops With some States putting up strong resistance to allow field trials of GM (genetically modified) crops, the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) has decided to issue approval letter for field trials only after receiving 'no objection certificate' (NOC) from the State Governments concerned. In its meeting held on July 6, the GEAC said the idea was to promote their involvement in activities related to GM crop field trials and factor in their views in this regard.

Association of Biotechnology Led Enterprises (ABLEAG), which represents agri biotechnology industry in India, has called for speedy clearance of Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India (BRAI) and Seed Bill 2010.

Non-governmental organisations have welcomed this development. “It upholds States' right to have a say in activities related to agriculture which is a State subject. It allows greater monitoring by States. All these years, the Centre has beenoverriding on this right, particularly in allowing field trials,” Ms Kavitha Kuruganti, Convenor of Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture (ASHA), told Business Line.

“These two would go a long way in addressing food security of the nation and improve productivity,” Dr P S Dravid, Member-Managing Committee of ABLE-AG, said. Addressing a press conference here on Saturday, he discounted apprehensions on safety. “It is absolutely safe to eat genetically modified food,” he said.

There is no zero risk in agriculture; biotech is a necessity.

For farmers, it was important to reduce cost of production, while improving productivity. “Cotton farmers have benefited a lot from biotechnology. It needs to be replicated in other crops. Last year, it was an unusual year that saw record output. In drought years, output could be far less,” he said. Biotechnology could offer resistance to both floods and drought. Any delay in decisions could delay release of good technologies beneficial to farmers. Refuting criticism from non-governmental organisations, he said such arguments were not based on scientific facts. “India has the toughest regulatory norms. There is absolutely no reason to fear,” he said.

'We need to have simple, responsible regulations' Mr Clive James, who is the Founder and Chairman of ISAAA (International Service for the Acquisition of

Dr B Dinesh Kumar, Deputy Director of National July - Sept. 2011

Agri-Biotech Applications) is a strong votary of biotechnology in agriculture. He says biotechnology is not a panacea for the food problems of the world. It, he emphatically says, is a necessity. Mr James was in Hyderabad to address a global meet, on Demystifying crop biotechnology – issues and concepts for mass media, recently. In an interview, he talks on the growth prospects for biotech in agriculture, challenges and on the concerns about the safety of genetically modified (GM) food.

people. The next five years would witness much faster growth of biotech crops. Indications show that the number of countries that adopted biotech in commercial agriculture would grow to 40-42 by 2015 from the present 29. Growth would more accentuated in developing countries in Asia and Africa. Potential is quite huge. Maize, soybean, cotton and canola collectively represented 150 million hectares of biotech crops last year. There is a scope to reach out to 150 million more hectares.

You are arguing that biotech crops are a must to feed the world but there have been widespread apprehensions about their safety. How do you explain?

Vibha donates seeds to Chenchu tribals

There is no zero risk in agriculture. This holds good for conventional crops as well. But biotech maize and papaya have been introduced in countries such as the US and China. BT maize, in fact, showed reduced levels of micro toxins.

Vibha Seeds Group has donated common varieties of quality vegetable seeds to Banjara Development Society so that the malnourished Chenchus, a primitive tribal group, can farm. The aboriginal Chenchus have not progressed from the food gathering stage to the food cultivation stage.

You have seen reports of people getting killed after consuming food with E.coli in Germany. That is conventional technology.

Vibha Seeds Group made the donation through corporate social responsibility arm Vidya Sagar Foundation (VIFOU). Seeds worth over a lakh have been given for the cultivation. Vegetable seeds were distributed to 60 Chenchu families of Chinnaartula of Dornala mandal in Prakasham district.

I can tell you that there is no suggestion of any health risk (in biotech food). But regulatory framework that governs biotech crops is very weak, particularly in developing countries. People are more concerned about this. How to ensure foolproof supervision of trials?

The move is aimed at helping tribals improve their health by consumption of vegetables grown in their backyard. According to the plan, BDS would pack 11 common varieties of quality seeds in small pouches and distribute among 4,500 Chenchu families situated in highly scattered habitations over 2,000 sq.km of Nallamalla forest areas of Andhra Pradesh. In addition, BDS would monitor the sowing of seeds, watering, deweeding and protection from pests.

Regulation has been there in the last 15 years to guide the growth of biotech crops. In the beginning scientists had asked whether it poses a risk. But evidence shows that it is safe. We have to use 15 years of experience (in building regulation). We need to have simple and responsible regulations. About 1,000 people are dying every hour due to hunger and malnutrition. Countries like India need biotech in agriculture.

According to statement, this is seen to be a boon to the tribal groups living in the Nallamalla forest areas.

Resistance is fast building up to technology. Also, utter disregard in sparing space for refugia too is a concern. This results in contamination and increase prospects of development of resistance.

The adoption of genetically modified crops

Refugia are just one element of managing resistance. It has been 15 years of biotech in maize and cotton and resistance has not broken down yet. Also, resistance is not a problem that is limited to biotech crops. We need to use new genes that back up.

Where genetically modified crops are grown THE world's farmers planted 148m hectares of genetically modified crops in 29 countries last year, according to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, an industry body. America is by far the biggest GM farmer, with 66.8m hectares under cultivation, 2.8m more than in 2009. As can be seen in our map, GM technology has been enthusiastically embraced in the Americas and in many Asian countries. By contrast, many European

How do you see biotech in agriculture growing in the next few years particularly in the light of growing opposition from some sections? You need to have biotech crops in order to feed the world. By 2050, the world would have nine billion July - Sept. 2011

INDUSTRY WOES

countries are subject to severe restrictions on growing GM crops. Developing countries are planting GM crops at a more rapid rate than rich countries. Brazil has added some 10m hectares since 2008 and overtook Argentina as the second-biggest grower in 2010. India, too, increased its area by over 10% last year. The most popular crop is soya, while the most common modification is tolerance to herbicides.

Meanwhile, the industry expressed serious concern over shortage of labour. “This could impact the industry adversely. We need farm mechanisation to face this problem,” Dr Sateesh said, talking to reporters later. The industry, which was growing at an annual rate of 1012 per cent, expected a normal production this year. “There was a let up of 10 days from incessant rains. Barring Prakasam, all other districts reported normal season for all seed farmers,” he said. He also asked the State Government to clear subsidy dues for 2009 and 2010. “We request the Government to rationalise testing fee for evaluating findings of trials,” he said. Responding to the industry's plea, Mr C. Damodar Raja Narasimha, Deputy Chief Minister, asked the industry to come forward with proposals early so that it could begin talks in February-March to finalise pricing. He said the university (Acharya N G Ranga Agriculture University) should be more vibrant.

Seed sector wants early decision on Bt cottonseed pricing

Vidya Sagar Foundation (VIFOU) Distributes Vegetable Seeds to Banjara through BDS in Prakasam district, AP. July 15, 2011, Hyderabad: Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has always been an integral part of the vision of the Vibha Seeds Group and has been the cornerstone of its core value of good corporate citizenship. The Company is committed to welfare through discretionary philanthropic practices. VSG has sponsored the Vidya Sagar Foundation (VIFOU) with the principal objective of promoting the cause of progress in plant breeding and seed technology, and to provide charitable services to the society particularly to the farming community. VIFOU trains young graduates in various skills of agriculture including seed production.

The Rs 8,000-crore seed industry has asked the Andhra Pradesh Government to finalise prices of Bt cotton seeds by February-end every year. “It is important for us to have the price tags by that time in order to prepare the packets and send them to dealers well before the season starts in mid-May,” Dr P Sateesh Kumar, President of Seedsmen Association of Andhra Pradesh, said.

In a brief function, arranged on July 14, 2011 under VIFOU by SINNOVA of Vibha Seeds Group in cooperation with Banjara Tribals Development Society, quality seeds of several vegetable crops worth several thousand rupees were distributed to 60 tribal's of Nallamala forest areas in Dhornala area of Prakasam district,

Addressing the 16{+t}{+h} annual general meeting of the association here on Thursday, he pointed out how hard it was for the industry because of the inordinate delay in finalising the Bt cottonseed price. “We need enough time to print maximum retail price before despatching seed packets to different parts of the country,” he said. July - Sept. 2011

This is to enable the tribal's to grow vegetables and gain good income, besides improving their nutrition.

research programmes in specialized technology areas. Vibha Seeds Group Companies have a great reputation nation-wide for quality seeds distribution of 15 field and 20 vegetable crops, besides catering to floriculture and horticultural enterprises and also established massive R&D facilities in plant breeding, seed technology, biotechnology etc and one of the World's largest Seed Conditioning plant. Signing of MOU with JNTUH marks an important milestone for VIFOU, which was established in 2010 by Mr. Vidya Sagar Parchuri and his family members in Hyderabad, India. VIFOU aims at fulfilling the urgent need for upliftment of the rural masses through deployment of modern farming practices and employment-generating training. VIFOU has started two PG Diploma Courses in Advanced Plant Breeding and Advanced Seed Technology of one academic year duration each for freshly passed candidates with Master of Science or an equivalent examination in botany, plant breeding, genetics, biotechnology, seed science & seed technology and also horticulture with specialization in vegetables to impart advanced knowledge, skills and hands on practical training to enhance the employability potential of such candidates in seed industry.

Banjara tribals being distributed vegetable seeds free through BDS at Nallamala-Dornapadu area.

Mr. Nagi Reddy and Mr. Shivaramakrishna of Sinnova participated on behalf of Vibha Seeds Group. This vegetable seeds distribution programme by VIFOU will continue in Prakasam and Kurnool districts to more tribal's of the BDS. The gesture by VIFOU of the Vibha Seeds Group received appreciation from BDS and tribal participants. It was acknowledged by members of Vibha Seeds Group and local participants as well as the Representative of Banjara Development Society, that this service would prove to be a great boon to tribals of this area from Vidyasagar Foundation and also promote vegetable seed production by tribal welfare society members for the benefit of their members and local people. (VIFOU).

Vidya Sagar Foundation (VIFOU) Signs MOU with JNTUH for Post M.Sc. PG Diploma Courses & Other Collaborations

JNTUH & VIFOU Participants at MOU exchange ceremony at JNTUH

Mr. Vidya Sagar Parchuri, Chairman, VIFOU stated that the objectives of VIFOU are to fulfill several corporate social responsibilities (CSP) in advanced education, research, social and charitable activities. The first step was to start the specialized PG diploma courses in advanced plant breeding and advanced seed technology to eliminate the shortage of plant breeders and seed technologists with specialized skills by improving their employability potentials in seed industry in the country.

July 29, 2011, Hyderabad: Vidya Sagar Foundation (VIFOU) signs a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with JNTUH Hyderabad at the Chambers of the Honorable Vice-Chancellor Dr. D. N. Reddy on July 28, 2011 for affiliation of the two PG Diploma courses. This is for the first time that a top-ranking Agribusiness Seeds Company of the stature of Vibha Seeds Group with VIFOU as a CSR arm of the Group signed the MOU with JNTUH for educational and

July - Sept. 2011

NEW 1

NSAI

Goldking biogene Pvt. Ltd.DF-1,2,3,4, Krishna Complex, Opp. Essar Petrol Pump, Sarkhej Sanand Road, Ahmedabad-382210

MEMBERS

Karnataka Maize Development Association 131, 6th Main, 4th Block, Jayanagar, Bangalore-560011

Pokar Agrotech Pvt. Ltd. 305, Akik Tower, Opp.Rajpath Club, S.G. Highway, Bodakdev, Ahmedabad-380015

Green Gold Seeds Ltd. Gut No. 65, Narayanpur Shivar, Waluj, Tq. Gangapur, Dist. Aurangabad-431133

Harvest Plus Building No. 303, C/o ICRISAT, Patancheru-502324 (A.P)

Nongwoo Seed India Pvt. Ltd. No. 2018, B Sector, Double Road, (Mother Dairy Road), Yelahanka New Town, Bangalore-560106

Swami Seed Agencies 12, Ramdwara Mandir, Main Bazar, Opp. Indra Market, Old Subzi Mandi, Delhi-110007

Virgin Seeds Pvt. Ltd. 1st floor, E-Wing, Bharat Bazar Complex, API Corner, Aurangabad-431001 (Maharashtra)

Bansal Seeds Pvt. Ltd. Vill & Post Pratappur, Ramnagar Road, Kashipur-244713 U.S. Nagar (Uttarakhand)

July - Sept. 2011

Griba Nursery India Pvt. Ltd.B2/105, Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi-110029

Magazine Advertisement Tariff Back Cover Inside Cover (Front) Inside Cover (Back) Inside Page (Full)

Rs 40,000 Rs 30,000 Rs 30,000 Rs 25,000

Inside Page (Half) Rs 15,000 Inside Page ( Quarter) Rs 8,000 Full Year Booking 25% off on website advertisement of 6 months Full Year Booking (4 issues)- 15 % discount on the total Amount

Website Advertisement Tariff Left Rectangle Space Discounted rates à

3 Months 24,000 21,600

6 Months 48,000 40,800

1 Year 96,000 75,800

Center Rectangle Space Discounted rates à Leader Board Banner Discounted rates à Bottom Rectangle Space Discounted rates à

24,000 21,600 30,000 30,000 27,000 24,300

48,000 40,800 60,000 51,000 54,000 45,900

96,000 75,800 1,20,000 96,000 1,11,000 88,800

Horizontal Strips Space 9,000 18,000 36,000 Discounted rates à 8,100 15,300 28,800 1 year or 6 months booking entitles you to a single insertion full page or half page color advertisement at a discount of 50% respectively on in the NSAI Magazine For advertising with us please write at e-mail: nsai.tulika09@gmail.com or call at 011-43533241-45

July - Sept. 2011