May / June 2010 1

While many leading researchers in Africa including Kenya, say the continent will con-

tol but not eliminate malaria, Professor Awa Marie Coll-Seck, Executive Di-rector, Roll Back Malaria Partnership says we now have before us a realistic opportunity to drastically reduce malaria deaths, start eliminating the disease and eventually eradicate it.

The Island of Zanzibar has set a gold standard example in succeed-ing in reducing malaria deaths by more 71 percent. With remarkable tenfold increases in funding for ma-laria control since 2004, countries like Eritrea, Swaziland, Botswana, Equatorial Guinea, Zambia among other countries have reduced malaria deaths and cases by 50 percent through widespread application of effective measures, Prof Coll-Seck said in her World Malaria Day speech at UN headquarters in New York.

Universal coverage is not target-setting for its own sake. It is based on solid scientific evidence, which

shows that malaria control interven-tions work and that this contrib-utes to achieving broader health and development goals, she added.

Vol. 10 May - June 2010 Kshs. 100 Tshs. 2000 Ushs. 3000V

AFRICA’S LEADING PUBLICATION ON SCIENCE INNOVATION AND DEVELOPMENT

Cont’d on page 4

Cont’d on page 18

African Biotechnology Stakeholder Forum Supplement. Pages 10-11

The Director of Kenya Agricultural Research Institute Dr Ephraim Mukisira receives the pioneering publication ‘Science, Innovation and Development’ from Professor Sir Gordon Conway, a co-author of the book. The book clearly links science and technology with socio-economic development and provision of basic human needs. It helps both the public and experts including interested policy makers understand the role of science and innovation as the driving force behind economic development or transformation. ScienceAfrica will serialize edited versions of the publication in our subsequent issues.

Africa Can Eradicate MalariaZanzibar Reduces Malaria deaths by 71 percent

AFRICA has the largest mushroom in the world, Termitomyces titanicus – with a diam-eter reaching a metre - found in West Africa and Southern Africa nations like Zambia where it is locally known as Chingulungulu. Termitomyces titanicus is a species of fungi in the Lyophyllaceae family.It has a repu-tation for being the largest edible fungi in the world. They grow on woody fragments excreted by termites. Even more it is edible and a potential goldmine for mushroom researchers and growers in Kenya and other parts of Africa. Africa also has the world’s sweetest plants that are 3000 times sweeter than sugar and is used to sweeten porridge in Ghana where it is known as ‘Ego.” It is protein hence has nutritional, medicinal and other economic activities.( Extracted from the African Academy of Sciences Journal- Discovery and Innovation).

AFRICA’S RICH BIODIVERSITY

TECHNOLOGY

WATER

Insuring Maize Crop ... p3

African Science Manifesto- Prof. Osita Ogbu ....................... p6

Special Q&A: Chest Expert, Plant Breeder and Biotechnologist

...................... p7, p8, p12

Climate Change: Africa Adaptation Programme

........................... p15-17

Obituary: Dr. Cyrus Ndiritu ..................... p18

Counting Malaria Out!

....................................... p19

Farmchem Farmers Club.......................... p12

INSIDE THIS ISSUE:

CLOSE analysis easily shows that there is plenty of water for all in the whole of Nile Basin especially if the counries in the region focus more on innovative water conservation activities and food production instead of direct and indirect display of power and the sharpening skills in the field of intimidation. With “more science” the River Nile should be a sustainable source cooperation, prosperity, progress and peace in Africa and more so for the countries - Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, Congo DRC, Sudan, Ethiopia, Egypt and Somalia - in the Nile Basin Initiative.

However, the current bickering championed by polit icians and

Africa Has World’s Largest Edible

Mushroom

Nile Basin Conflict: Inject More Science

What seemed as theoretical and abstract has turned into a reality with unlimited implication in the 21st century ICT world. Researchers at Hewlett Packard Labs have proved the exis-tence of memory resistor-memristor- which is now the fourth basic element- after capacitors, resistors and inductors- in integrated circuits. It could efficiently replace transistors- the tiny switches used in chips. Combining the memory and processor – could result in com-puting systems that retain information even after power is off and there is no wait for the system to boot after turning on computers.

Computers: New Miracle Building Block

Prof. Awa Marie Coll-Seck, Executive Director, Roll Back Malaria Partnership served as

Senegal’s Health Minister.

Get the Right Maize Variety Using Moblie Phone

Farmers in Kenya can receive an SMS for the recommended maize varieties in their area or division. ‘Go to Write Mes-sage on cell phone or handset and type ‘MAIZE#DIVISION’ then send message to 2964. The farmer will receive details of seed varieties recommended for the particular area or division.( www.kephis.org )

Our Clients include NGOs, UN agencies, International Organizations

and Parastatals.Specialists in Mechanical Services, Panel Beating, Spray Painting &

Upholstery for All Types of Vehicles

Ngong Road, Opp Race CourseP.O. Box 69494

Tel. 254-722-735682; 578244Nairobi, Kenya

May / June 20102 May - June 20102

Potential Partners:African Academy of Sciences (AAS)Lake Basin Development Authority Friends of the Lake (osianala)Other relevant NGOs and CBOs

Introduction and Challenges:

Overview of Lake VictoriaThe Lake Victoria is the largest of all

African Lakes and is also the second wid-est freshwater body in the world1. The lake occupies a wide depression near the equa-tor, between the East and West Great Rift Valleys. and serves towns such as Kisumu (Kenya), Entebbe (Uganda), Bukoba, Mu-wanza and Musoma (Tanzania).1The main occupation of the people living in towns adjacent to the lake is fishery farming with Nile perch (Latus niloticus) constituting 60% of the total fish catch in the lake.1

ChallengesIn spite of Lake Victoria being a fresh-

water body, its water is not directly con-sumed by the population living around it. This is due to the high level of pollution present in the lake mainly from discharge of raw sewage into the lake, dumping of domestic and industrial waste and influent of fertilizer and chemicals from farms.2 Water obtained from the lake has to be purified through a number of expensive purification techniques such as reverse osmosis, flocculation using iron (III) hydroxide, and use of ultra filtration membranes to get rid of the pollutants present in the water. As a result, a large

percentage of the population is highly disadvantaged and sometimes results to consuming the water in its unpurified form leading to a number of water borne diseases that aggravate the levels of mo-tility and mortality. It would therefore be imperative to provide a low cost method of water purification that would be afford-able especially to low income generating communities living near the lake.

Proposed solutionOur solution is a low-cost and friendly

environmentally-based water purifica-tion technique that uses seeds from the Moringa oleifera and other species of this genus that can produce a 90.00% to 99.99% bacterial reduction in previously untreated water, according to research undertaken by AFORNET Grantees and a recently published article in Current Protocols in Microbiology.3

Moringa spp. is a vegetable tree which is grown in Africa, the Indian subcon-tinent, Central and South America and South East Asia and it exhibits drought resistant qualities. It is considered one of the world’s most useful trees, as almost every part of the Moringa tree can be used for food and has many other beneficial properties.

In the tropics, it is used as forage for livestock, and in many countries, Morin-ga tree is used as a micronutrient powder to treat diseases. As it is a traditional food plant in Africa, this little-known vegetable has potential to improve nutrition, boost food security, foster rural development, and support sustainable land care.4

Purification Technique:Moringa tree seeds are crushed into

powder then used as a water-soluble extract in suspension. The seed kernels contain significant quantities of low molecular-weight, water-soluble proteins that have a positive charge. When the crushed seeds are added to raw water, the proteins produce positive charges acting like magnets and attracting the predomi-nantly negatively charged particles of pollutants and impurities such as clay, bacteria, and other toxic particles in wa-ter. Once the positively charged proteins bind to the negatively charged molecules in the water, formation of larger sediment-ing particles known as flocs occurs. These flocs are easily removed by either allow-ing the water to settle or letting the flocs sink to the bottom or through filtration.5

This process ensures the clarification of highly turbid water as well as the purification of untreated pathogenic lake water leaving the water clear as well as microbiologically more acceptable for human consumption.3 Purification using Moringa tree seeds can be further devel-oped to industrial scale where commercial plants can be established by local com-munities councils in small scale as well as town and city councils in large scale and mass clarification done on water for domestic consumption.

Furthermore, the Moringa tree roots have similar clarification properties as the seeds and therefore, planting of these trees near the shorelines would create an ongoing purification process

that does not involve any additional labor or cost.

Practicality and affordability of this method:Due to the fact that Moringa trees grow very fast in tropical climates from cut-tings and seeds, the ease of cultivating them as well as the low cost of seeds el-evates their utility margin. The process of crushing of seeds is a low cost procedure that requires minimal equipment while filtration and sedimentation are both low cost and requires minimum labor.5

Conclusion:The high percentage of bacteria reduction resulting from clarification of water using Moringa tree seeds makes this method of water purification very effective, low cost and practical methods for low income populations living around Lake Victoria and ensures that these populations have a sustained supply of clean water for domestic use.

References:1. International Lake Environment

Committee2. Wikipedia Encyclopaedia – Lake

Victoria3. Scientific blogging4. Lost Crops of Africa, volume II:

Vegetables (National Academic Press)

5. Gate: Technical Information W1e (GTZ)

6. AFORNET occasional papers. �

African Academy of Sciences (AAS), Nairobi, KenyaContact : i.kone@aasciences.org, iba_kone@yahoo.com.

Low Cost Purification of WaterFrom Lake Victoria using Wonder Tree

The wonder tree Moringa oleifera has leaves that are rich in proteins and the fruits called drumsticks are equally nutritious. The seeds and the roots are powerful water purifier and have anti bacterial properties. It clears water through coagulation, flocculation and sedimentation. The leaves contain more vitamin A than carrots, more calcium than milk, more iron than spinach, more Vitamin C than oranges, and more potassium than bananas and the protein quality rivals that of milk and eggs.

May / June 2010 3

AATF Marks Second Anniversaryof Water Efficient Maize for Africa

Insuring Maize Crops Pays

The Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) proj-ect marked its second year anniversary by announc-

ing significant progress made to bring higher yielding drought-toler-ant Maize to smallholder farmers in Africa. The objective of the project partnership is to develop and avail drought-tolerant maize varieties royalty free to smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Formed in March 2008, WEMA is a public-private partnership aim-ing to help smallholder farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa mitigate, the risk of drought on maize production thus increasing food security. Maize is the most widely grown staple crop in Africa and it is estimated that over half of the African population depend on it as their main food source.

The project seeks to use advanced plant breeding and biotechnology to develop more drought-tolerant maize varieties. The partnership is coordinated by the African Ag-ricultural Technology Foundation (AATF), a not-for-profit organiza-tion focused on the delivery of ap-

propriate agricultural technologies for use by resource-poor smallhold-er farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa.

AATF has been working along-side the non-profit International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT); the private ag-ricultural company, Monsanto; and the national agricultural research systems in the participating coun-tries of Kenya, Mozambique, South Africa, Tanzania and Uganda. The partnership is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates and Howard G. Buffett Foundations.

The partners expect the combi-nation of advanced breeding and biotechnology to increase grain yields on a more consistent basis during drought. It is estimated that the maize products developed over the next decade could increase yields as much as 20 to 35 percent under moderate drought conditions compared to current varieties. This double-digit increase would translate into an estimated two mil-lion additional tons of food during drought years in the participating countries meaning 14 to 21 million people would have more to eat

and sell.The benefits and safety of these

maize varieties will be assessed by national authorities according to the regulatory requirements in each of the five countries. “Farming in any area of the world has risks, but it is a more risky enterprise in Sub-Sa-haran Africa,” says Dr. Daniel Ma-taruka, executive director, AATF. “Access to seeds that can perform well during moderate drought stress is a strong step towards helping to reduce some of the risk of crop failure and will help break the cycle of food insecurity for farmers and

their families. We anticipate this will become increasingly important in the face of climate change.”

Over the past two years, a team of more than 60 scientists from across the partner organizations have worked together building the necessary scientific testing, regula-tory procedures and protocols for the proper evaluation of the maize in this project within each of the five countries.

“Our participation in this proj-ect especially the development of confined field trial sites and in the trials have additional benefits for our country, which includes build-ing our capacity to improve other important regional crops” said Dr. Alois Kullaya, WEMA country coordinator, Tanzania.

South Africa’s Agricultural Re-search Council planted its first WEMA transgenic trial in Novem-ber 2009 at Lutzville, a testing site developed in North Cape, to screen for drought-tolerance performance under both optimum and low soil ni-trogen, a condition commonly faced by many African farmers. This screening will gather data to help

identify hybrids that will continue to yield in the face of drought stress and low soil nitrogen levels.

The breeding initiatives by CIMMYT and Monsanto using conventional breeding and state of the art molecular marker technol-ogy are also making a contribution towards the development of hybrid maize varieties that can achieve high yields under water stress.

“We are eager to move forward and start to use some of the products especially conventional drought-tolerant maize lines to develop an array of varieties in the country,” Dr. Godfrey Asea, a maize breeder and the WEMA-Uganda country coor-dinator at the National Agricultural Research Organisation adds.

In the next 12 months, pending necessary regulatory approvals, it is expected that scientists will be able to proceed with the planting of biotech trials in Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda. Mozambique will take steps towards completing the devel-opment of testing sites and secure regulatory approvals with a goal of planting in 2011.

Agricultural Biotechnology

By Rosalia Omungo

Jane Simon is a maize farmer from Nanyuki, Kenya, who has been at the mercy of rains for long, and this has cost her repeated crop failure. The

area is mostly semi arid, and last year was particularly bad.

“I bought eight kilograms of maize seed and planted. They did not even reach flowering stage. I lost everything,” she recalls. Julius Koech, a farmer in Moiben in the North Rift, the country’s bread basket, also suffered loss. He grows maize and wheat on his five acre farm. “Last year we started well. But two months down the line, the rains stopped,” he told ScienceAfrica.

The plight of Jane and Julius mirrors that of millions of other small scale farmers in the Africa, Kenya included. Erratic weather patterns are a common phenomenon, and farmers are weary of this. Drought is one of the reasons for low investments in improved seeds and farm inputs as farmers are scared of losing both their crops and investments.

It has boxed them into a vicious cycle of low productivity and poverty. But a new agricultural micro insurance initiative promises to reduce losses from extreme weather, by insuring seeds, fertilizers and chemicals. Known as Kilimo Salama, Swahili for safe agriculture, the insurance product has been designed by a partnership of three companies, to be affordable to deliver and administer using modern technology. The two technologies here are an unmanned weather station and the mobile phone with unique software developed by Syngenta foundation. This software allows the farmer to easily pay

for his insurance premium to UAP using the mobile provider Safaricom MPesa service.

Agro dealers in this scheme are equipped with a camera phone that scans a special bar code on purchase, which immediately registers the policy with the UAP insurance throughout the Safaricom data network. Upon registration, one gets a short message service (sms) which contains insurance details and policy number. The insurance company has tried to make the service friendly and affordable

“We insure farmers before the season starts, and stop selling insurance just before

beginning of the season,” says Isaac Magina, insurance underwriter at the UAP insurance. Magina says the idea is to allow the farmers to make sound informed decisions so that they learn to trust insurance.

The premium is charged at 5 percent of the price of farm inputs. This means if you spent Kshs.3000 on seeds and fertilizer, you pay a premium of 150 shillings for the entire season which may last nine months. Magina says it has not been an easy task convincing farmers to join, given the negative image of insurance in this country, and con games that happened in recent past through unscrupulous

multilevel marketing “Farmers have to learn to appreciate

insurance. Its not a pyramid scheme,” he notes. So far, the scheme has borne fruit though, with plans to go countrywide. “I decided to try it because of the droughts we experience. We have seen a lot of projects being promoted so I did not give it too much thought. But the compensation made me happy,” says Simon Macharia.

At a cost of 4000 dollars, that’s an equivalent of 320,000 shillings, automatic weather station has been installed to measure rainfall, humidity and wind speed. These parameters are relayed every 15 minutes over the Safaricom network to the UAP insurance server where it is monitored.

“We don’t predict weather conditions, but we use the weather station to measure rains to be able to insure farmers,” explains Rose Goslinga of Syngenta foundation. And at the end of the season, payouts to farmers are computed using this data. 30 similar weather stations have so far been installed for smallholder farmers other Kenyan towns including Busia, Bungoma, Eldoret, Embu and Homabay.

And the farmers are getting used to the technology. “I was wondering how they were going to pay without visiting my field. When I received payout, I thought they are good people,” said one farmer from Moiben, near Eldoret. Trust is slowly being built among those in the scheme. The strategy has made agricultural micro insurance affordable and attractive for smallholder farmers. The insurance is unique in the sense that compensation is

Cont’d on page 5

May / June 20104

lawyers struggling to come up with a new agreement on usage of Nile waters, could easily lead to a lage scale armed conflict or water wars- within and between the 10 Nile Basin States. The core issue for the Nile Basin Council of Ministers should be how to improve the “quality and quantity” of Nile waters. Discussion purely focusing on allocations is recipe for the unfolding conflicts.

The Ministers recently failed to finalise the Cooperative Framework Agreement at Sharm El-Sheikh in Egypt. Ministers from Egypt and Sudan refused to sign while others intend to have it signed on May 14th 2010 and even ratify the “Agreement” in a years’ time. Egypt and Sudan insist on their historical rights of the Nile water over the New Nile Waters Agreement. On the other hand, the upper riparian countries - Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, and Democratic Republic of Congo - made it clear that the 1929 agreement between Egypt and the colonial Britain and later in 1959 between Egypt and Sudan.1959 are null and void. The two seem to hold onto the absolute rights to use “100 percent” of the Nile water according to the past agreements.

Thus greatest threat to peace and scientific collaboration in sustainable use of of the ever-lasting Nile waters is “politics of ill-will.” Egypt –more than Sudan- finds herself depicted as the big

bully dictating the terms of cooperation especially after unfortunate predictions by some of Egypt’s past top leaders.

It is said that after declaring peace with Israel President Anwar Sadat in 1979 said that only Nile water could take Egypt to war again. Almost decade later in 1988, foreign minister Boutros

Boutros-Ghali, who was later the United Nations’ Secretary-General, predicted that the next war in the Middle East would be fought over the waters of the Nile.

It may be said that these statements which may have been actually intended to emphasize the importance of River Nile to the survival of the people of Egypt and were nota declaration of hostility against other users the water. .

However, war over Nile waters has to be ruled out and replaced with innovative efforts aimed at sustainable use of the waters. Despite past belligerent utterances and ongoing wardrums, it is not possible for Egypt even if joined by Sudan to win such unfortunate and unnecessary conflict that seem to underrate the potential positive impact of science in availing adequate water for all the Nile Basin Initiative nations and beyond. Such conflicts could mushroom even within individual nations and expand to include other natural resources.

Egypt is relatively advanced in its military science. However, nations or communities that once had spear-throwing armies nowadays have well armed and highly trained military units. In other

words, Egypt is better off resorting to its admirable historical influence and brotherhood with Afican nations that it also helped liberate from colonialism. Equally other nations need to be reminded the issue goes beyond mere allocation of water and that they have not effectively conserved other national water resources thus directly and indirectly contributing to decline of the quality and quantity of the Nile Water.

It has to be repeatedly said that whatever happens at the source or along Nile River affects the physical and mental wellbeing of Egyptians. However, there is room for a new approach to the use of Nile waters for peace and development. According to Egypt’s Irrigation Minister, Mohamed Allam, the failed negotiations were not the end of the road, and there will be further negotiations to settle pending disagreements.

The countries against the 1929 and 1959 agreements assert the principle of “equitable utilisation,” according to the 1997 International Fresh Water Convention. However, at least 160 million people depend on the Nile River for their survival and there is need to find solutions based on sound science and determination to live peacefully. Next installment will look at technical aspects, innovative approaches, strengths and weaknsses in the management of the Nile. �

Nile Basin Conflict: Inject More Science

By Peter Wamboga-Mugirya

Performance of two genetically-modi-fied (GM) cotton technologies under trial in Uganda since mid-2009 have been rated as ‘impressive’ by scientists

and farmers based on initial results- from-tests to keep destructive pests and weeds at bay.

The research is being conducted by the Na-tional Semi-Arid Resources Research Institute (NaSARRI)—one of the constituent bodies of the state-run National Agricultural Research Organisation (NARO).

The cutting-edge research involves testing Bollgard II [Bacillus Thuringiensis (Bt), an anti-bollworm variety bred with a gene-inbuilt to resist bollworms that eat up cotton-bolls while green before they burst into cotton fibre. The other, also a biotech-derived GM technol-ogy, is the Herbicide tolerance (Ht) developed with a gene that enables cotton to withstand glyphosate or round-up chemicals when sprayed against weeds.

The Bollgard II is a product of U.S-based international seed multi-national, Monsanto, and varieties on research in Uganda were im-ported from Monsanto—South Africa, under the USAID-funded Agricultural Biotechnology Support Project (ABSP II).

The Bt and Ht varieties were planted mid-2009, separate from each other, but in the same plot of land two acres large at a Confined field Trial (CFT) site at NaSARRI in Serere, Soroti District over 300 kilometers east of Kampala.

“We have generally agreed that CFTs be repeated, to authenticate our research findings,” the Principal Investigator (PI) also Director of NaSARRI, Dr. Thomas Emeetai Areke, re-cently told Members of Parliament at another CFT government prison farm at Mubuku, in Kasese—western Uganda—where a trial similar to the one in Serere is in progress to determine how the two technologies perform in

a different agro-ecological environment [com-pared to older site at Serere, eastern Uganda]. Areke says although data collection from the two trials is still ongoing and being evaluated, initial indicators show effective performance of the two GM technologies in the grassland, light sandy soils (Serere-0-eastern Uganda) and alluvial heavy volcanic soils below mountain Rwenzoris [Mubuku—western Uganda].

Data collected includes growth attributes of cotton under the different treatments, the ecosys-tem including weeds, pests, predators, diseases and the economics of the technologies being test-ed, says Elobu—the Trial Manager at NaSARRI. Elobu also confirmed that Bt Cotton retained a high number of bolls with little or no bollworm damage and it yielded very good amounts of lint.

However, Dr Areke says they are yet to weigh the actual plot yields in order to get the yield per land size planted. ”But many of the bolls on the sympodia (first fruiting branches) retained their bolls, a sign that there was effec-tive bollworm control by the in-built Bt genes,” Areke said, a month-and-half after picking the cotton begun at NaSARRI.

Elobu adds: ”Ongoing picking of the GM cotton at NaSARRI, Serere site in Soroti District and at Mubuku will be followed by ginning of the samples which will be subjected to tests for various lint characteristics.”

Farmers are equally excited by the sight of a cotton variety, that is ‘immune’ to attacks from the notorious bollworms—responsible for 80-100 percent yield losses in Africa. Mereki Byabasaijja, Chairman of Nyakatonzi Growers’ Cooperative Union Ltd, says since the two varieties have shown early indicators of pest-resistance and herbicide-tolerance, they should be hurried to enable farmers cut costs incurred in weeding and spraying. Byabasaijja says the high cost of cotton production has dis-heartened them over the years. “Many farmers

have abandoned cotton growing and more others are considering edging out,” says Byabasaijja, himself a farmer. Farmers argue that if scien-tists are researching for technologies that would solve pest and weed agonies, then they shouldn’t be delayed any further. Mzee Saul Mate, Chair-man Maliba sub-county--one of the largest cotton-growing areas in Uganda—asks: “What assistance can we offer to speedup research? I know it’s not possible anyway to release this technology within a shortest period, but if it can be done in less than two years we’ll be glad.” But Areke, says although tests are promising, both varieties would not be rushed, as more time was needed to check on compliance to national bio-safety guidelines that oversee operation of biotechnology as interim framework before enaction of a national Biotech-safety law.

These explanations—scientific as they are—dampen spirits of farmers.

GM cotton is the second GM crop currently being tested after a GM anti-black sigatoka bananas introduced 2007.

Stakeholders, including ginners, MPs, the media and technocrats from several ministries were updated on GM cotton research this during end-of-2009 Open Forum on Agricul-tural Biotechnology in Africa (OFAB)—Uganda Chapter meeting: ”The Status of Biotechnology Research for a Genetically-Modified (GM) cotton for Uganda: The Opportunities and challenges” hosted in Kampala with support of Nairobi-based AATF, UNCST and PBS. Once researchers have finished evaluat-ing these technologies under confinement for two to three cotton seasons and with a proper biotechnology policy in place, multi-location trials will be conducted before the Government decides on commercialization. Regulation of the cotton industry in Uganda [production of quality-seed, its distribution, quality-assurance of lint and development of cotton farmers groups] is overseen by the

state-run Cotton Development Organisa-tion (CDO), which in 2004 recommended research for a GM variety with less vulner-ability to the numerous pests and diseases. Cotton was introduced in Uganda in 1903 as an export crop. Its peak production of 500,000 bales of lint was realized in the late 1960s and early 1970s. It accounted for over 40% of foreign earnings and benefited over 10% of the population through sale of produce and employ-ment in textile industries.

Later in late 1970s-todate, there has been a drastic drop in cotton production and exports, due to constraints like pests, weeds, diseases, declined soil fertility, changing climate, poor agronomic practices, inefficiency in the local marketing system and collapse of world cot-ton prices.

GM cotton has already been commercialized in some African countries like Burkina-Faso and South Africa, where results have shown significant economic benefits to smallholders farmers. 60 per cent of cotton produced in the world is GM.

Scientists and cotton dealers say since cotton is a world crop whose market is uncontrollable, it’s time African farmers increase production an productivity to compete favourably. GM tech-nology will possibly assist farmers to double their yields, they agree.

Dr Areke affirms that GM cotton varieties will help Uganda reduce on her annual cotton losses of 100,000 bales—equivalent to $20m (about Ug. Shs40b) in annual export-value. In 2000, Uganda Government set a target of pro-ducing a million bales of lint cotton by 2010, to increase export earnings from $40m-50m, to $200m per annum.

Families engaged in cotton production were also projected to increase to at least 418,000 from 350,000. The government had also targeted increasing cotton acreage production from 1.2 acres to two acres per family. �

Uganda GM Cotton Trials Win Praise

May / June 2010 5

The Editorial Team

Editor: Otula Owuor

Consulting Editors: James Njoroge Wachai

Uganda Editor:Esther Nakkazi

Associate Editors: Daniel OtungeDick Agudah

Revise Editor: Naftali Mungai

Marketing & Advertising: Lucas Oluoch

Operation & Co-ordination: Leo Ogwago

Florence Choka

Layout Design: James Chunguli

Contributors: Prof. Shaukat Abdulrazak, Dr. Kevin Urama, Felix Mbole, Clementine Osodo, Henry Neondo, Esther Nakkazi,

Elijah Bizibu, Lizzy Awuor, Lawrence Mbae and George

Achia

www.scienceafrica.com, Email:info@scienceafrica.com

AACP Countries’ Stand on Climate Change

Climate Change

Representatives of Government from Africa, Asia, Caribbean and the Pacific, representing some of the countries’ most vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change have voiced their con-cern over the pace of change to Earth caused by human-induced

climate change.The heads of state and ministers singled out as

worrying the accelerating melting and loss of ice from Greenland, the Himalayas and Antarctica, acidification of the world’s oceans due to rising CO2 concentrations, increasingly intense tropical cyclones, more damaging and intense drought and floods, including Glacial Lakes Outburst Floods, in many regions and higher levels of sea-level rise than estimated just a few years ago. They said these changes risked changing the face of the planet and threatening coastal cities, low lying areas, moun-tainous regions and vulnerable countries the world over.

They asserted that anthropogenic climate change poses an existential threat to our nations, our cultures and to our way of life, and thereby undermines the internationally-protected human rights of our people – including the right to sustainable development, right to life, the right to self-determination and the right of a people not to be deprived of its own means of subsistence, as well as principles of international law that oblige all states to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States.

The leaders noted that although AACP countries lie at the climate front-line and will disproportion-ately feel the impacts of global warming, in the end climate change will threaten the sustainable development and, ultimately, the survival of all States and peoples. They reiterated that the fate of the most vulnerable will be the fate of the world.

Hence they declared their determination, as low-emitting countries that

are acutely vulnerable to climate change, to show moral leadership on cli-mate change through actions as well as words, by acting now to commence greening our economies as their contribution towards achieving carbon neutrality.

They affirmed that such swift action will enhance the objectives of achieving sustainable development, reducing poverty and attaining the internationally agreed develop-ment goals including the Millennium Development Goals. All countries, they urged, should follow the moral leadership shown by the Republic of Maldives by voluntarily committing to achieving carbon-neutrality.

Achievement of carbon neutrality by developing countries will, however, be extremely difficult given their lack of resources and capacity and pressing adaptation challenges, without external financial, technological and capability-building support from developed countries.

They called upon developed countries to provide public money amounting to at least 1.5% of their gross domestic product, in addition to innovative sources of finance, annually by 2015 to assist de-veloping countries make their transition to a climate resilient low-carbon economy. This grant-based finance must be predictable, sustainable, transparent, new and additional – on top of developed country commitments to deliver 0.7% of their Gross National Income as Overseas Development Assistance.

Underline that financing for mitigation and adaptation, under the authority of the Conference of Parties to the UNFCCC, should be on the basis of direct access to implement country-led national

Low-Carbon Development Plans and Climate Resilient Development Strate-gies, and the process to allocate and deliver the finance must be accessible, transparent, consensual, accountable, results-orientated and should prioritise the needs of the most vulnerable countries. �

The fate of the most vulnerable will be the fate of the world

strictly in terms of the farm inputs that grant farmers a lifeline for the farming activities.

Telecommunications partner Safaricom pays the premium through money service MPesa. Safaricom chief technical officer John Barorot says the aim is to provide affordable service through linkages in the remote stations with the central system that analyses data.

“We will come up with a special tariff to provide linkages cheaply,” he said during the launch of the project. Through the scheme, farmers can now invest in good seeds. Julius Koech and Jane Simon are all smiles talking about their gains.

“The scheme has enabled me buy seeds through the premium I got,” said Jane. “If there is a failure, you get a fall back,” added Julius. Indeed in case of a good season, all is still not lost. Farmers get constant updates on planting season, what fertilizer to use and what activity to be doing on their farm. When the concept began, it was difficult to wipe out the dented insurance image.

“For the smallholder farmers in remote regions cannot distinguish between true insurance people from the fake ones, but with this technology, we have seen good response,” says Jane Sang, an agro vet dealer in Eldoret. Sentiments also echoed by Fritz Brugger, for whom the project was a trial basis.

The project was piloted in Nanyuki last year, and so far 8000 farmers have signed up to the scheme. And farmers like Jane and Koech can smile again. Alice Wanja, another beneficiary of the scheme says this was an eye opener. “When they said they would pay if the crop fails, I was fifty- fifty because I was not sure they would pay. But they kept their promise”

James Muchina however hopes the insurance will expand its boundaries. “The insurance is limited because it doesn’t take labour into consideration. Can you insure non germination of maize?. Indeed Syngenta says it is planning to expand the insurance cover to include pests and diseases such as potato blight. �

The leaders noted that although AACP countries lie at the

climate front-line and will disproportionately

feel the impacts of global warming, in the end climate change will threaten the sustainable

development and, ultimately, the survival

of all States and peoples. They reiterated that the fate of the most

vulnerable will be the fate of the world.

From page 3

Insuring Maize Crops Pays

The Minister for Higher Education, Science and Technology Hon. William Ruto (centre) officially launched Kenya’s National Biosafety Authority on 13th May, 2010. He was acompanied by the Ministry’s Permanent Secretary Prof. Crispus Kiamba and Prof. Miriam Kinyua one of Kenya’s eminent scientist and a top plant breeder (see Q&A page 16 ) is the Chair of the Authority’s Board. Full Story on the launch of Authority in our next issue.

KENYA NATIONAL BIOSAFETY AUTHORITY LAUNCHED

May / June 20106

Q: Dr. Aluoch, I understand that this is the 1st National Scientific Lung Health Conference in Kenya yet chest disease like TB, pneumo-nia, asthma have been with us for almost a century, why now?

A: True. Kenya has had a number of challenges and one of them is; very few number of chest special-ists. For instance, in 1975 to 1985, I was the only chest specialist in the country and between then and now, I have trained, mentored several doc-tors and a lot of whom have become chest specialists. I have written so many training materials for medical students to read especially on tuber-culosis and lung diseases. Today, we have many doctors in this field though not as many as the need be.

Q: Recently, 1st National Scientific Lung Health Conference was held in Nairobi and you received an award, what led to this award?

A: The Award is in honour of the late James Ang’awa and it is awarded to a person who contributes excellently in advancing Public Health Gains in Lung health.

For the last 10 years, I directed TB research programme (focusing on the best treatment) and this treat-ment has fortunately been adopted by the whole World. I directed it here at KEMRI though it involved Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania and Zimbabwe. So far, there is no other research that has ever received that kind of appreciation like this one. This pro-gramme is a short programme where patients are put on medication for 6 months instead of the long course of 24 months for the same treatment.

I previously worked with the gov-ernment for 19 years in the field of lung medicine, I have lectured in The University of Nairobi in the school of Medicine on Chest Health for 10 years, I have been in charge of TB control in the country for more than 10 years, I have been in charge of TB and respiratory diseases for 10 years at KEMRI. I was among the first directors at KEMRI. I have contributed so much in controlling and training more chest doctors in order to put TB at bay.I was the 1st African person to be selected to be in charge of TB control. I have personally drafted a number of training manuals to teach doctors about tuber-culosis and lung diseases and nurtured KAPTLD to its current state.

Q: What is your low point in the fight for a healthy lung?

A: It is very embarrassing for us scientist in this field of lung health to have not come up with many molecules to heal tuberculosis that is killing many people faster than HIV/Aids.

TB is more than 100 years old yet no vaccine that we have come up with to cure it. HIV/Aids is only 25 years old yet scientists in that field have done so much that may be very soon they are likely to come up with a HIV/Aids vaccine.

Q: What is tuberculosis?A: Tuberculosis is an infectious disease caused by bacteria called Mycobacterium tuberculosis which usually hits the lungs but it can also attack any part of the body except the hair, nails and teeth.

Q: How is tuberculosis spread?A: It can be spread from one person to the other through air droplets. When an infected person who is not on medication coughs or sneezes, the bacteria gets into the air and any per-son who inhales it especially if their immune system is compromised, then they contract the disease.

Q: What are the symptoms of tuberculosis?A: There are so many symptoms of tuberculosis. If there is persistent cough that last for two weeks or more, high fever and excessive sweating especially during the night, loss of weight, fatigue, bloody spu-tum; just to mention a few: it is good to test for tuberculosis.

Q: Who is at risk of getting in-fected with tuberculosis?A: Nobody is immune to contract-ing tuberculosis. Anybody can get infected. But the most vulnerable persons are those in very close con-tact with infected people, children because their immune system is low, elderly people, diabetic persons, people on steroids, malnourished people, pregnant mothers, cancerous people, people on other drugs that af-fects body’s defense system, people who are HIV positive, people in overcrowded or poor housing envi-rons, people who dependent on drugs or alcohol, people in the prisons, and people with chronic poor health can be infected with tuberculosis.

Q: How soon do symptoms appear?A: Incase active TB develops; it may take two or three months after infec-tion for the symptoms to appear.

Q: What is the difference between TB disease and TB infection?

A: Most people who breathe in tuberculosis bacteria and become infected, but their body is able to fight the bacteria stopping further growth or increase. The bacteria become inactive but they remain alive in the body and can become active later [TB infection]. People with TB infection have no symp-toms, do not feel sick, can’t spread TB to others, usually have a positive skin test reaction and can develop tuberculosis later in their life. Most people who have TB infection will never develop TB disease. In them, TB remains inactive for a life time without causing disease. But in other people whose immune systems may be weak, the bacteria may become active and cause TB disease.

Q: How has HIV/Aids affected your work?

A: Since early 1990s, TB has been on the rise globally as well as throughout Africa. In Sub Saharan Africa, TB is the most common op-portunistic infection for people liv-ing with HIV/Aids and contributes to high death rates. The majority of patients who have completed TB treatment still die due to HIV related complications and a good number develop tuberculosis within a year of treatment completion.

Q: How is the situation of tuber-culosis worldwide?

A: Tuberculosis is one of the diseases that continue to be a public health concern in the World. It is one of the World’s deadliest dis-eases. About a third of the World’s population is infected with TB. Each year, nearly 9 million people around the world become infected with TB, there are almost 2 million TB-related deaths worldwide and it is the leading killer of people living positively with HIV/Aids. Accord-ing to World Health Organization a quarter adult deaths in the develop-ing world are due to tuberculosis.

Q: Globally and regionally how is the spread of tuberculosis?

A: Nine of the World’s 22 TB high burden countries are in Africa. South Africa is number 4, Nigeria 5, Ethiopia 7, DR Congo 10, Kenya 13, Tanzania 14, Uganda 15, Mo-zambique 17 and Zimbabwe 20th position. Other countries that have high tuberculosis burden are India as number 1, China 2, Indonesia 3, Ban-gladesh 6, Pakistan 8, Philippines 9, Russian Federation 11, Viet Nam 12, Brazil 16, Thailand 18, Myanmar 19, Cambodia 21 and Afghanistan 22.

Q: How common is tuberculosis in Kenya?A: Kenya is one of the 22 high tuber-culosis burdened countries in the world which collectively contribute 80% of the global tuberculosis disease burden. Kenya is experiencing a generalized TB epidemic affecting the young economically productive age groups of between ages 15 and 44 year old. Males are 1.4 time more likely to have tuber-culosis than females. Nyanza and Rift Valley Provinces are leading with 20% tuberculosis burden followed closely by Nairobi with 16%, Eastern 13%, Coast 10%, Central 9%, Western 8% and North Eastern province with 3%.

Q: What could have led to high increase of tuberculosis?A: Poverty, HIV co-infection, others factors like poor housing, overcrowd-ing, poor ventilation, malnutrition, poor nutrition, poor access to health care, low quality of health care.

Q: When did MDR-TB screening start in Kenya and how many cases have been identified and are on medication?A: DR TB screening started in 2003 and up to May 2009, there are 401 cases traced and due to many challeng-es that are drawing back war against tuberculosis, only 82 people are being diagnosed. There are 7O MDR TB cases on treatment, 6 PDR tuberculosis cases, 1 XDR TB patients have been initiated on 2nd line of treatment.

Q: What are the arrangements so far made to end deaths from tuberculosis and other strains that develop due to poor management of the disease?A: In Kenya, there are 4 MDR TB centers: Kenyatta National Hospital, Moi Teaching and Referral Hospital in Eldoret, Homa Bay District Hos-pital and Blue House. The govern-ment has trained 150 people on how to handle MDR-TB patients with the dignity they deserve without infecting themselves, 250 health care givers have been sensitized about MDR and XDR-TB. MDR TB guidelines are being revised and 2 staff members have been trained in Brisbane on second line DST.Q: Globally, how many MDR-TB patients have been confirmed and how many cases are yet to be put on treatment in Kenya?A: Globally, the World Health Organisation, WHO estimates that there are 2,026 MDR-TB cases and most of these cases are in develop-ing countries. It is shocking to learn that MDR-TB has highly affected the cream of the population in that it is highest within the ages 15-44 with majority being men. MDR-TB treatment is done in both private and public hospitals. Private hospitals started in 2006 while private hospi-tals started in April 2008. There are 72 MDR-TB case already detected but are spread in different provinces. Nairobi North has 21, Coast 15,

Nyanza North has 12, Nairobi South has 6, Western has got 6 cases, North Eastern has 6, South Rift 6, Eastern South 4 and North Rift has got only one case. Eastern North and Nyanza South have no case so far.

Q: What are the essential actions for effective TB Infection control safety without stigma? A: Include patients and community in advocacy campaigns, develop an infection control plan, and ensure safe sputum collection, Promote Cough Etiquette and Cough Hy-giene, Triage TB suspects for “fast-track” or separation, Assure Rapid Diagnosis and Initiation of Treat-ment, Improve Room Air Ventila-tion, Protect Health Care Workers and Capacity Building, Monitor infection control practices. Q: Is it too expensive to treat tuberculosis?

A: Treating any disease can be expensive as well as manageable. If the patients follow the doctors directives on how to take their drugs and complete their dose; then, any ailment can be managed.

If tuberculosis can be mismanaged, it can lead to a Multidrug resistant condition [MDR-TB] which is very expensive to treat. Treating a single case of MDR-TB needs Ksh. 1.3 mil-lion for medication only and a period of 2 years to take drugs. If MDR-TB is still not well taken care of, it can lead to XDR-TB which is damn expensive to treat. 1 XDR-TB case calls for Kshs. 3 million on medication only. Q: What would you recommend be put in place to make Kenya a tuberculosis free nation? A: Rapid scale up of TB ICF, strengthening linkage at service delivery points, improve documenta-tion since TB is over 80 years old in the country yet very little is docu-mented about it compared to HIV/Aids that is 25 years old and there is so much information and many programmes in place on HIV/Aids. Q: Can MDR-TB be cured?

A: Absolutely. A patient diag-nosed with MDR-TB in 2006 and put on medication in mid 2007 com-pleted his dose in July 2009 and now all the sputum tests that have been done turn out negative. He cooper-ated with the doctors, followed all the advices given and took all the drugs as advised and he is now a healthy man. He has even gotten a job and he up on his toes again.

Q: Dr. Aluoch, you have done much on lung health and you are a very prominent personality, what is your philosophy?A: Live and let’s live.Q: What is one thing in your life you would feel that you need a change?A: I have never thought of it. �

Health: Lung Diseases

Dr. Joseph Aluoch is one of Africa’s most experienced chest specialist; ScienceAfrica Correspodent Venter Mwongera interviewed him on the resurgence of lung diseases.

Dr Joseph Aluoch

Chest Specialist Regrets TB Resurgence

Q&A

May / June 2010 7

Towards Science Manifesto

February / March 2010 7February / March 2010

Africans are s t i l l searching for their voices in the global community. The

space is getting narrower and narrower as we move from economic liberalization of the 80s to globalization of the 21st century. In the field of Science, Technology and innovation (STI), a combination of factors, both internal(domestic) and external, have almost forced African’s viewpoints off the global agenda.

When STI are discussed in the world stage ,every other continent, developing o developed are in-vited as contributors to global sci-entific knowledge except Africa whose presence simply completes the number. Yet Africa needs STI more than any other continent as tools to deal with the myriads of her development challenges: low productivity: food insecurity: high incidence of debilitating disease conditions: the MDGs: and pov-erty in general. If Africa is not a scientific knowledge contributor, is it the assumption that it would use other people’s ideas, STI to develop? Why did the multilateral arrangements imply this and why did the African leaders scholars acquiesce?

It has not always been like this. Africa is the cradle of civi-lization and provided the two most important foundations for science, technology and civilization: writing and math-ematics. In addition, African’s traditional knowledge systems helped pre-colonial Africa to deal with disease conditions, agricultural productivity, pro-vision of tools; water scarcity, eco-system equilibrium etc. Its knowledge system is still con-tributing to the global stock of knowledge without acknowl-edgement. Without belaboring the point, the colonial system trenched this application of STI to their everyday problems. Their approach was deemed inferior and “uncivilized”. The self-doubt that this engendered and the associated inferior-ity complex and knowledge

dependence, among leaders and researches, killed African’s ad-vance in science and technol-ogy- a situation Africa is yet to recover from. With self-doubt, everything Africa is still re-jected by Africans even if they come from our best minds. In the wake of inept African lead-ership, a debilitating STI infu-structure and policy process, our best minds left the shores of the continent. The multi-lateral ar-rangements reinforced the false notion that scientific knowledge was generated in the North and consumed by Africa.

Credit must, however, go to the early post-independent Af-rican leaders who saw the need to use science and technology to accelerate Africa’s develop-ment and made serious invest-ments in higher education and in some research infrastructure. Subsequent leaders succumbed to the neo-liberal ideology of market determinism and failed to prioritize investments in sci-ence and technology, including investments in higher education within the limited sources. De-velopment partners did not help matters.

When they provided sup-port, science and technology sector was an unlikely recipi-ent and when they did, it was under the multilateral and bilat-eral arrangements that put the donor on the driver’s seat and did not allow for African par-ticipation and ownership: and did not recognize the social and cultural milieu required for STI to thrive. It’s no wander that in spite of billions of dollars spent on the International Agricultural Research System, Africa is yet to witness a green revolution.

It’s against this background that institutions such as the Af-rican Technology Policy Stud-ies Network (ATPS), The Afri-can Union – NEPAD platform on science and technology ; the AU and ECA S&T divisions emerged to provide Africans perspectives on STI and to wid-en African’s participation in the global STI discourse and to ag-

itate for African’s scientific sov-ereignty. It has not been with-out serious challenges. These institutions rely significaly on donor assistance, which is yet to be embedded in true partner-ship to make African voices to be heard. In addition, African leaders continue to treat S&T matters as if they are not crucial for development, with Minis-tries of Science and Technology treated as a third- tier Ministry, often with limited resources and weak leadership.

But there is now a glimmer of hope. The new environment: democratization of the political space; emergence of new and confident, accountable leader-ship; the decline of the market-deterministic dogma; an emerg-ing new incentive structure for Professors and Researches; and a paradigm shift in the donor-relations and multilateral ar-rangements with respect to STI for Africa, all provide a new im-petus for advancing the use of STI for development in a new and significant way.

In order to seize the moment and include other neglecter ac-tors and segments of the society in the dialogue, the proposed African Manifesto is very auspi-cious and useful. The manifesto is a call to duty to all Africans living in Africa and beyond Africa. Its purpose is to build a comprehensive framework in which existing problems are

solved, recurring development challenges are met and African is effectively mainstreamed into the emerging global order as a continent not perpetually de-pendent on other worlds for ex-istence, but one that can address its own challenges a through science, technology and inno-vation.

The ManifestoThe African Manifesto is a

tool for creating a sustainable platform for shared visions, for generating world-class knowl-edge, restoration of confidence & African’s sovereignty over STI ,which facilitates the par-ticipation of a variety of voices and Africa’s global inclusion.

The specific Objectives of the Manifesto are:

� Restoration of Confidence

� Building of STI infrastruc-ture

� Establishing the link between science and Society

� Facilitating Knowledge Plu-rality

� Recognizing the Social and Cultural Dimension of STI

� Making a case for African’s Scientific Sovereignty

� Establishing a Regulatory Framework for STI

Restoration of confidence

This Manifesto would have had a major impact if African re-searchers can once again regain their confidence and trust their capacity to do world- class sci-ence and innovate, and if Afri-can leaders can be convinced that home-gown solutions are not inferior. To break the cycle of knowledge dependence and improve the demand for Afri-can knowledge and ideas would require a quick major scientific breakthrough to occur, it would require a critical mass of Afri-can scientists working together

on a major African concern. This implies the creation of a regional platform and centers of excellence of utilizing already existing ones. But more impor-tantly, it will require the contin-uous education of the political class, and retooling and greater support for STI policy advocacy institutions. In tackling the issue of confidence, African scientists abroad can play a significant role. They can bring cutting-edge knowledge and collabora-tion with home-based scientists in a non-condescending way. Development partners can fa-cilitate these collaborations in a manner that encourages mul-tilateral dialogue and shared vi-sion for African’ development

But more importantly, devel-opment partners must de-link knowledge and AID and return to the core principles of the Paris declaration, if confidence is to be restored. The autonomy to determine development and research priorities by Africans must be assured and donors must acquire the longevity of venture capitalists. The rate at which they change their pro-grams and personnel cannot argue well for truth partnership; while Africans, policymakers and all, must acquire the disci-pline for accountability. Aid can be effective once we avoid the traditional donor behavior: mis-trust of the system; lack of trust in the capacity of Africans to deliver; inability to appreciate that leaning involves provisions for curiosity and mistakes; ex-cessive use of ill-equipped ex-patriates who have very little knowledge of the local condi-tions. This assumes that Afri-cans will do their part, acquire superior knowledge, use its ca-pacity wisely and drive the dia-logue with confidence.

Africa Needs STI More Than Any Other Continent

By Prof Osita Ogbu

Prof Osita Ogbu, a top economist and multi-talented development expert who constantly reminds Africa to focus more on science, technology and innovation, served as an economic adviser to the Nigeria government under former President

Olushegun Obasanjo. He was the Executive Director of the African Technology Policy Studies Network (ATPS) and worked with International Development Research Center (IDRC), Regional Office for Eastern and Southern Africa as the Senior Program

Specialist-Economics/Principal Progam Officer. He also worked with the World Bank.

PART I

This is the firts of a three part series on Africa’s need of STI more than any other continent

May / June 20108 February / March 20108

Q: What is ABNE?A: The African Biosafety

Network Expertise is a continent-wide initiative of the AU-NEPAD office of Science and Technology seeking to build functional Biosafety systems in Africa and empower African regulators and policy makers to make informed decisions. It is an Africa-based, Africa-owned, Africa-driven and Africa-led initiative set up through a consultative process to promote interaction on Biosafety/biotechnology between African countries and to facilitate South-South and South-North collaboration.

In terms of background, ABNE draws on the recommendations that were adopted during the first conference of the African Min-isterial Council for Science and Technology (AMCOST), held in South Africa in 2003, where Ministers adopted a resolution that Africa should harness the safe application of biotechnology for economic development. In addi-tion, the ABNE initiative fulfills one of the key recommendations of the report of the AU/NEPAD’s High-Level African Panel on Modern Biotechnology (Freedom to Innovate: Biotechnology in Africa’s Development, Juma and Serageldin, 2007 which states that biotechnology and biosafety should co-evolve so that technol-ogy and regulations together can help promote innovations

Q: Why ABNE when there are other bodies doing similar work?

A: ABNE was established by NEPAD Office of Science and Technology to address the problem of shortage of bio-safety expertise and experience, as well as limited networking among the available expertise and institutions on the conti-nent. The network is tailored to national and regional needs in order to optimize the use of available expertise, resources and infrastructure at national, regional and continental levels and, where need be, develop additional capacity and linkages. Yes there are several initiatives

that are currently involved in capacity building in biosafety on the continent. The role of ABNE is to consolidate the work of these initiatives so that progress is monitored and the developed capacity is effectively and ade-quately utilized. A unique feature of ABNE is to provide technical assistance, biosafety related tools and resources to members of the National Biosafety Com-mittees (NBC), the Institutional Biosafety Committees (IBC) and staff of the plant quarantine agencies (PQs) so that the mem-bers are better able to make their own science-based regulatory decisions towards implement-ing national biosafety regulatory frameworks. These regulatory support services will be provided through designated regional and continent-wide nodes to be established by to ABNE.

Q: Why was Burkina Faso as the host country?

A: Using specific criteria and requirements, the ABNE team and Task Force selected Burkina Faso as the host country for the first node of the network. According to current plans, the Ouagadougou “hub” will be responsible for co-ordinating ABNE activities across the entire continent. Additional hubs in East Africa, and Southern Africa countries are under con-sideration, but are not expected to be operational for another two to three years. Thus, the ABNE Secretariat in Burkina Faso will play a crucial role in getting the Network off the ground, devel-oping procedures for network interaction, proposal preparation, evaluation, and response).

Q: What is ABNE’s man-date?

A: ABNE was formed to of-fer multidisciplinary expertise to service broad components of Biosafety systems, e.g. food safety, environmental Biosafety, socio-economic impact, intel-lectual property and legal issues. Our other principal mandate is to work closely with members to build sound regulatory systems

for decision making by African regulators on modern biotech-nology products by providing needs-based and tailor-made services and products. In addi-tion we are mandated to provide a range of services to regula-tors, including science-based Biosafety information through a web portal, training programs (workshops, short courses, in-ternships and study tours) and expert consultations. To achieve these objectives, we have estab-lished an interactive web portal developed to share credible, science-based, accurate and ac-cessible Biosafety information, initially in English and French, focusing on the safety of crop biotechnology products. Q: What do you see as the role of ABNE in safe use of agricultural bio-technology in Africa? A: In order to effectively ad-vance the science of biotech-nology on the continent, Africa needs to adopt a co-evolutionary approach in which the function of regulation is to promote in-novation, while at the same time safeguarding human health and the environment. In the light of such a safety-conscious ap-proach, the African Ministerial Council on Science and Tech-nology (AMCOST) resolved to develop a 20 year biotechnol-ogy strategy whose specific regional technology goals is to implemented through Regional Economic communities (RECs).

All this is to ensure the promo-tion and application of regional regulations which will in turn, guarantee a safe use of modern biotechnology. A key element in the resolution is a need to develop regulatory systems in which there is a balance be-tween promoting learning and creativity and protecting public interests. The lag in development of a governance capacity for biotechnology is apparent in the current status in the development of National Biosafety Frame-works (NBFs). Eighty nine percent of African countries that are signatories to the Cartegena Biosafety Protocol have been making slow progress towards developing the key components of the NBF which comprise of: a policy on biotechnology; laws and regulations on biosafety constituting a regulatory regime for biotechnology; an admin-istrative system for handling applications and issuance of permits; and a mechanism for public participation in biosafety decision-making. ABNE’s role is to help member countries to speed up the process of establish-ing functional NBFs.

Q: What are some of the major constraints that you seek to address?

A: If I may emphasize, the constraints of inadequate policies and legal frameworks are a concern and therefore need urgent atten-tion. To that end, it is none other than Africans who should address such concerns in order to achieve credibility in the eyes of African governments, the African civil society, and the African peoples. While science is moving forward, the inability to evaluate the po-tential environmental and food safety risks (that might be posed by biotech-derived products is delaying decisions about whether or not to utilize these products) in Africa. There is no credible resource base currently available to decision makers that would provide science-based regulatory data and information with a focus on biotechnology products for Af-rica. There are many projects and

programs focusing on building bio-safety capacity in various countries on the African continent. However, most of these projects and efforts are time-bound, country-focused and targeted to specific crops and technologies. ABNE, as an African initiative ran by Africans, seeks to address such constraints and concerns from sustainable and all-encompassing points of view.

Q: Who do you foresee working with to realize your strategic objec-tives?

A: As a Network we believe in forging strong strategic part-nerships to be able to deliver our mandate.

It is imperative to note that limited involvement of public and private institutions in biosciences. R&D has been identified as one of the key factors that have con-tributed to Africa’s falling behind in biosciences. We will directly engage the private sector in our R&D programs by building in-ternal collaboration and linkages on the continent. Participation in the ABNE activities is open to national, regional and continental institutions, public and private organizations that are willing to share their expertise, facilities and other resources with the Network. ABNE will partner with existing organizations/initiatives and be linked to international Biosafety expertise for technical backstop-ping for members of the National Biosafety Committee, Institution-al Biosafety Committee and Plant Quarantine in the Ministries of Agriculture in African countries. It is crucial that people involved in biotechnology regulation are brought together to build a strong ABNE. This will involve linkages with institutions within Africa and globally to ensure that there is an exchange of knowledge, skills, ideas, expertise and innovations among various institutions. In that regard, Michigan State University and Development Alternatives, Inc. are the first two partner in-stitutions from outside Africa to be involved in establishing the network. �

Prof Diran Makinde,Director ABNE

Biosafety

Network to Build African Biosafety and Regulatory Capacity Launched

The African Biosafety Network Expertise (ABNE) was launched in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso, on April 9, 2010, as part of Africa’s effort to build its biosafety capacity to facilitate safe and responsible adoption of modern agricultural biotechnology. The launch was attended by

government ministers (including Ghana Minister for Environment, Science and Technology, Ms Sherry Ayittey); top officials from The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (including Ms Martha Choe and Mr. Lawrence Kent), experts from the Michigan State University, USA; University

of Ouagadougou, and top officials of the NEPAD Planning and Coordinating Agency (including the CEO, Dr Ibrahim Mayaki). To find out more about the organization, our Associate Editor, Daniel Otunge, spoke to ABNE Director, Prof. Diran Makinde. Excerpts

May / June 2010 9

Strategic Approaches To Restore The Mau

February / March 2010 9

Reversing back the Path

This option is premised on the logic that severe impacts of deforesting

the Mau have been felt much more in the recent years, giving pointer that our recent actions on the Mau may be responsible for these emerging consequences. This thinking therefore raises the persuasion that, in attempt-ing to re-forest the Mau, we can structure our strategy in such a way that we begin by restoring land that was recently excised followed by earlier excisions as sequenced by time. In doing so, the 53,376 hectares deforested between 2000 – 2009 will be targeted in Phase 1 of the re-forestation program, followed by 28,828 hectares deforested between 1986 – 2000 that will be targeted for Phase 2 and 10,635 hectares deforested between 1973 and 1986 to be targeted in Phase 3.

Pursuing this approach means that Phase 1 will target reforest-ing 16,139 hectares in Narok North; 13,406 hectares in Molo; 12,699 hectares in Kuresoi; 9,464 hectares in Konoin; 1,020 hectares in Narok South; 578 hectares in Kipkelion; and 57 hectares in Belgut. A total of 36 Sublocations will be reforested in all seven constituencies in Phase 1.

Phase 2 will target refor-estation of 16,983 hectares in Molo; 6,828 hectares in Kuresoi; 2,181 hectares in Narok North; 1,474 hectares in Konoin; 716 hectares in Narok South; 480 hectares in Kipkelion; and 156 hectares in Belgut. A total of 40 Sub-locations will be reforested in all seven constituencies in Phase 2.

In Phase 3, the reforestation will target 4,647 hectares in Molo; 2,743 hectares in Kuresoi; 2,243 hectares in Narok North; 550 hectares in Kipkelion; 404 hectares in Konoin; 45 hectares in Belgut; and none in Narok South. A total of 35 Sub-loca-tions will be reforested in six constituencies in Phase 3.

Using Elevation as CriteriaThis is the option I strongly

recommend. The option takes an ecosystem approach. It rec-ognizes the relationship between elevation and tree species, soil types, and climate. Using eleva-

tion, soil type and climate, ecolo-gists can easily prescribe the type of tree species to be grown. This option categorizes the Mau into two: areas at elevations above 2,500m and those below 2,500m, the former being target land for Phase 1 of the restoration pro-gram and the latter for Phase 2.

Thus, Phase 1 will target to re-forest 39,571 hectares, being the area of the Mau above 2,500m that was deforested between 1973 and 2009. Phase 2 will target to reforest 53,269 hectares which is the area below 2,500m that was deforested between 1973 and 2009.

At constituency level, land to be reforested under Phase 1 will be as follows: 21,333 hectares in Molo; 9,251 hectares in Narok North; 8,568 hectares in Kuresoi; 419 hectares in Kipkelion; and none in Belgut, Konoin and Narok South. A total of 34 Sub-locations in four constituencies will be re-forested in Phase 1.

Phase 2 will see reforestation of 13,703 hectares in Kuresoi; 13,703 hectares in Molo; 11,341 hectares in Konoin; 11,312 hectares in Narok North; 1,736 hectares in Narok South; 1,189 hectares in Kipkelion; and 258 hectares in Belgut. A total of 45 Sub-locations will be reforested in all seven constituencies in Phase 2.

Using Proximity to Current Forest as Criteria

This option uses distance from the current forest as basis and advances the thinking that the closer a deforested parcel of land is to the forest, the higher the priority it assumes for re-forestation. In this regard, three ranges of distance were defined

to create three implementation phases. Phase 1 focuses on de-forested land between 0 – 3 Km from the current forest and will yield reforestation of 62,688 hectares. Phase 2 focuses on deforested land between 3 – 7 Km and will see 25,711 hectares reforested while Phase 3 focuses on deforested land between 7 – 12 Km and will target reforesta-tion of 4,441 hectares. Based on distance, Phase 1 will target to reforest 23,270 hectares in Molo; 19,645 hectares in Narok North; 10,640 hectares in Konoin; 6,626 hectares in Kuresoi; 1,608 hect-ares in Kipkelion; 615 hectares in Narok South; and 258 hectares in Belgut. Phase 1 will enable reforestation in 49 Sub-locations in the seven constituencies.

Phase 2 will target to refor-est 11,686 hectares in Kuresoi; 11,377 hectares in Molo; 1,029 hectares in Narok South; 918 hectares in Narok North; 701 hectares in Konoin; and none in Belgut and Kipkelion. This Phase will enable reforestation in 30 Sub-locations in five con-stituencies.

On its part, Phase 3 will tar-get to reforest 3,959 hectares in Kuresoi; 389 hectares in Molo; 93 hectares in Narok South; and none in Belgut, Kipkelion, Konoin, and Narok North. Phase 3 will enable reforestation in 17 Sub-locations.

Budget Estimates for Tree Seedlings and Labour

Based on this study, my esti-mation is that the Government of Kenya will require Ksh. 40 billion (USD 540 million) to restore the portion of the Mau Forest south of Londiani. This

amount will cater for the full spectrum of activities from re-settlement to reforestation. For obvious reasons, I hesitate to delve into breaking down the resettlement bit of the budget but I instead give a take on reforesta-tion with focus on purchase of tree seedlings and labour for land preparation. I derived the budget estimate for tree seedlings and labour using a consolidated unit prize of Ksh. 30 to cater for the cost of the seedling, digging of holes and transport. I calculated the target number of tree seed-lings based on the total target area for reforestation, less 30%. The 30% caters for patches within the deforested areas that already have trees, are rocky, or are wetlands and therefore will not be replanted.

If 70% of 92,840 hectares (the total area of the Mau south of Londiani that was deforested between 1973 – 2009) were to be reforested, then the number of tree seedlings required for planting at a spacing of 1.5m2 per seedling will be 433,253,013. The budget estimate for purchas-ing tree seedlings and labour to re-forest the Mau is therefore 433,253,013 seedlings x Ksh. 30 = Ksh. 12,997,590,390. Based on the same logic, the budget lines for the three options de-scribed above are as follows:

Option 1: Reversing back the Path:Phase 1: Ksh. 7,472,640,000Phase 2: Ksh. 4,035,920,000Phase 3: Ksh. 1,488,900,000Option 2: Using Elevation as Criteria:Phase 1: Ksh. 5,539,940,000Phase 2: Ksh. 7,457,660,000Option 3: Using Proximity to

Current Forest as Criteria:Phase 1: Ksh. 8,776,320,000Phase 2: Ksh. 3,599,540,000Phase 3: Ksh. 621,740,000

Budget Assumptions:The above budget assumes the following:� The detailed budget for

resettlement of families will be handled separately.

� The Kenya Forest Service and/or Kenya Wildlife Service in collaboration with local communities will be responsible for the Management of the re-grown forest and will therefore budget for that component separately.

� S e e d l i n g s w i l l b e purchased.

� Labour costs will mainly go to digging of holes.

� Each seedling will be planted within an average spacing of 1.5m2

� Planting will be done by volunteers (i,e through mobilizing students/pupils,

� p u b l i c / p r i v a t e s e c t o r employees, etc).

ConclusionThe restoration of the Mau should be approached from a highly empirical platform. Suf-ficient data must be collected, reliable information must be derived, and sound ecological knowledgemust be employed. We will be doing grave injustice to the res-toration process if forerunners, as some corporate organizations have started, begin trickling into the Mau in large numbers withthe good intention of planting trees but without good back-ing of science. The forerunners should first wait for guidance regarding which trees are suit-able to be grown where, both in terms of their ecological survival and ecosystem value. Certainly we do not wish to see a repeat of the fiasco that the eucalyptus tree and the prosopis shrub have caused on the environment.

- The writer is a Remote Sensing Expert. ekhamala@rcmrd.org

By Erick KhamalaAttempts made in the last section of this paper to provide budget lines for each strategy, especially concerning purchase of tree seed-

lings and labour for re-foresting the Mau.

Mau Scientific Approaches

FINAL PART I

May / June 201010 February / March 201010

BackgroundABSF aims to create an enabling environment in which Africa can par-ticipate and benefit from biotechnol-ogy in a responsible and sustainable manner. The association, through the dissemination of information, aims to enhance the understanding and awareness about biotechnology and its overall context.

Driving ForceBiotechnology is a key Asset for Africa in the new millennium. Agricultural, medical and environmental biotechnol-ogy offers Africa formidable tools to address food insecurity, disease, envi-ronmental pollution and poverty.

Who We AreThe African Biotechnology Stake-holders Forum (ABSF) is a not-for-profit, non-political and non-sectarian association formed in the year 2000 for providing a platform for sharing, debating and understanding all issues pertaining to biotechnology in agri-culture, health, industry and environ-ment. Through its membership, ABSF is the window and voice of millions of biotechnology stakeholders in Af-rica representing farmers, scientists, students, consumers, manufacturers, politicians and government bodies.

Our MissionABSF’s Mission is to create an in-novative and enabling Biotechnology Environment in Africa through Edu-cation, Enhanced Understanding and Awareness creation on all aspects of Biotechnology, Biosafety and Intel-lectual Property Rights.

Overall ObjectivesTo provide a forum for sharing and exchanging experiences and practices in biotechnology with a view of strengthening its application for increased food security, health improvement, poverty alleviation, industrialization and environmental conservation in Africa. To improve public understanding of biotechnology through provision

of accurate and balanced informa-tion to consumers, media and policy makers to ensure that biotechnology is accurately represented at all levels of society. To explore innovative and appropri-ate biotechnology applications and facilitate their adoption and use in sustainable development and pov-erty alleviation in Africa. To create capacity for information generation, dissemination and wise use of bio-technology. To facilitate research, development, education, capacity building and training on biotechnol-ogy as well as policy and infrastruc-ture development for meeting Africa’s needs in biotechnology.

What We DoABSF provides a forum that brings together all groups and individuals with a stake in biotechnology to de-bate and dialogue issues surrounding biotechnology. Our primary focus is Africa but because of the global character of biotechnology, we also represent Africa’s views and activities in world-wide fora. ABSF through its member groups fosters dialogue with and a steady flow of information about biotechnology to African policy mak-ers, governments, scientists, farmers, consumers, manufacturers, mass media and institutions of learning. We are actively engaged in creating linkages and networking throughout Africa and facilitating outreach on biotechnology in the region.

What We OfferAccurate and balanced information to decision makers, media, producers and consumers on national and inter-national biotechnology and biosafety developments and application. Opportunities to participate in ABSF working groups and task forces ac-tivities. Platform for interacting with governments and other stakeholders and voicing views on biotechnology Forum for linking and interacting on behalf of its members, with interna-tional biotechnology fora.

Mechanisms of facilitating identifi-cation and development of new bio-technological products and services in Africa.

Some of Our Achievements Led stakeholders in drafting and dis-cussing the biosafety bill and lobby-ing for passage of the bill into law and its eventual assent by the President of Kenya. Currently we are engaged in the process of drafting the biosafety regulations. Held the 1st ever all Africa congress on biotechnology that was held in Ke-nya in September 2008 with over 4oo delegates from all the continents. Led stakeholders in drafting and dis-cussion the biodsafety policy which was later approved by the cabinet. Proactive communication mecha-nisms with stakeholder groups at all levels developed. Interactions with government of-ficials, politicians, consumers, media and scientific communities. Wide media coverage and support from a cross-section of stakeholders. Secured wide recognition as a cred-ible biotechnology Association for Africa Lobbied legislation and ac-tive implementation of the biosafety system in Kenya and enhancement of novel biotechnology products Initiated journalists and scientists training in biotechnology commu-nication and reporting. Organized workshops and seminars as well as held press conferences with local and international guest speakers Established international contacts and networking in Africa.

ABSF KEY PROGRAMME AREAS

Capacity Building 1. Capacity Building in Biotechnology• Biotechnology Networking Pro-• grammeBiosecurity Capacity Building • ProgrammeBiotechnology for Secondary • Schools Programme

Capacity Building for Scientists as • CommunicatorsCapacity Building of Educators• Farmer Capacity Building in Tis-• sue Culture Banana CultivationCapacity Building for National Bio-• technology Policy DevelopmentCapacity Building in Genetically • Modified Crops and Food Capacity Building in Intellectual • Property RightsCapacity Building in Biotechnol-• ogy Risk AssessmentCapacity Building in Biosafety • and BiotechnologyCapacity Building for the Seed • IndustryBiotech Training/Education Program•

Biotechnology Public Awareness2.

Role of Government Institutions• Role of the Media in Public • AwarenessRole of the Public and Public • Interest Groups

Biotechnology Research 3.

Biotechnology Perception surveys• Participatory Field Research/• TrialsSocioeconomic surveys• Institutional surveys• Agro-Ecological Mapping Surveys• Policy Based surveys• Crop mapping surveys• Graduate Programme Research• Laboratory Based Biological Research• Knowledge Database in Biotech-• nologyAfrican Journal of Biotechnology • and Agriculture (AJBA)Institutional surveys• Knowledge Based surveys•

Biotechnology Inputs Promotion 4.

Food Security 5.

Biotechnology & Environmental 6. Conservation

AGRICULTURE BIOTECH-NOLOGY NETWORK IN AFRICA (ABNETA)

The Agricultural Biotechnology Network in Africa (ABNETA) runs as Semi-Autonomous unit by the

African Biotechnology Stakehold-ers Forum (ABSF). The ABNETA is made up of people (stakeholders) from across Africa who may affect and/or be affected by the development of agricultural biotechnology in Af-rica. These, basically are people from all sectors who may want to discuss, support, present concerns, develop or use biotechnology in support of agriculture on the continent.

The ABNETA community be-lieves that the responsible use of biotechnologies, in combination with conventional plant breeding, can contribute to the food security and poverty reduction in Africa, thus the need and enthusiasm to share information and other resources through the network. The main focus of ABNETA therefore, is to promote communication and collabora-tion between researchers, breeders, farmers, entrepreneurs (businesses), journalists, policy makers donors and other biotechnology stakeholders.

To achieve communication and collaboration among stakeholders, ABNETA applies a multi-approach kind of strategy that appreciates both the differences in stakeholder socio-economic characteristics as well as the enormous potential held by advances in information and communication Technology. One of the avenues that has proved to very efficient and highly effective is the ABNETA web-site (www.abneta.org) The website has a number of important features ranging from the basic definitions of biotechnology related terms for non biotechnology professionals through a database of the various researchers, policy makers, scientific facilities such advanced laboratories, events to membership registration.

The second approach is through the innovative country-coordinator approach. The ABNETA secretariat has entered into a working collabora-tion with high ranking biotechnol-ogy stakeholders in several countries across the continent. The country co-ordinators collect country specific in-formation in their respective countries

Prof. Norah OlemboExecutive Director

Mr. Joseph WekundaChair, ABSF Board

Dr. Felix Mmboyi,Senior Programs Officer

Christine Nambiro,Accountant

Leah AmbaniProgram Officer National

Outreach

Jared ObieroOffice Assistant

Kennedy Oyugi Program Officer

ABNETA

Risper AtuyaExecutive Secretary

Rose AdongoAdministrative

Assistant

May / June 2010 11February / March 2010 11

and relay it to the ABNETA secretariat for compilation and dissemination to other stakeholders across the continent. Likewise, the secretariat also compiles information and sends to the various country coordinators for dissemination to the stakeholders in their respective countries and regions of operation.

The third means of operation is the field activities. The ABNETA co-ordinator at the secretariat organizes field activities in which the staff meet various stakeholders for the purpose of sharing information and deliberating on any concerns. Such field activities include farmer field-days, regional workshops and regional agricultural shows among other forms of engage-ment. These field activities provide an avenue for face-to-face interaction which in turn provide ample time for discussion among stakeholders.

In addition to the above methods of stakeholder engagement, ABNETA also runs a monthly online biotechnology Newsletter which is sent to members to facilitate information sharing. The newsletter gets input from various members from across the continent and even outside Africa. To have your article published in this widely circulat-ing Newsletter, please contact the AB-NETA coordinator, Mr. Kennedy Oyugi through koyugi@absfafrica.org.

Being a network of a wide range of stakeholders, members are able to access a number of benefits including clear information on issues related to biotechnology and a forum for its members to discuss issues, ideas and challenges related to agricultural bio-technology. The ABNETA community will also access information on the sta-tus of biotechnology research around Africa related to personnel, technical skills, laboratory facilities, protocols and the projects, crops and traits which they study. This help member stake-holders (researchers, policy makers, farmers, traders, students, journalists, donors etc) identify potential col-laborators on their topic of interest, or with whom they may be able to share ideas, expensive equipment or advice on sophisticated techniques or common topics.

Though most of the ABNETA resources have free access on the net-work’s website, some information my only be available or sent to members whose profile and contact details are with the secretariat. Such privileged information may be limited to (for example), invitations for certain mem-bers to attend a specific-stakeholder

targeted conference/workshop, calls to provide technical expertise/consultan-cies and other recruitments in addition to some information which the secre-tariat may, for one reason or the other feel it suits members only. Currently, the ABNETA family consists of over 1,500 members, and 12 country coor-dinators. Given the dynamic state of the biotechnology industry and related stakeholders, recruitment of members is ongoing and is free. To register, visit the Network’s website at www.abneta.org. Go to the home page and on the left hand side and below the “Related Link” tab, click on Register Now. You will be led to a list of stakeholders. Click on the stakeholder category that best describes who you are e.g farm-ers, journalist etc. Fill in the details and submit. We will contact you to acknowledge your membership.

Regional OfficesABNETA/ABSF have recently opened two regional offices in Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania at the Mikocheni Agricul-tural Research Institute, Biotechnol-ogy Centre and in Kampala, Uganda at the National Council for Science and Technology. These offices will serve as liaison centres where ABSF will coordinate the execution of its biotechnology programmes in the East African region.

Country CoordinatorsABNETA has also nominated

country coordinators in various Af-rican countries to oversee imple-mentation of ABSF biotechnology programmes. The following countries serve as ABNETA country coordina-tion offices in Africa: Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Rwanda, Malawi, Zimba-bwe, Namibia, Ethiopia, South Africa, Mauritius, Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Ghana and Nigeria.

For more information please con-tact the ABNETA Coordinator at ko-yugi@absfafrica.org or ABSF through absf@absfafrica.org

Regional Secretariat Head OfficeIn an effort to consolidate itself as a major player in African biotechnology development, ABSF has acquired a new ultra modern 3 storied complex that will house the Regional Sec-retariat Head Office in Nairobi. It will house the Head Office and its ABNETA portal hub. The offices are equipped with conferencing facilities, training center for (scientists, students, media, and policy makers), famers’

technology transfer & training center for Africa, and a laboratory complex. The new ABSF office block is lo-cated between ILRI campus, BECA hub, AATF, ISAAA Africenter, the University of Nairobi’s Faculty of Agriculture & Veterinary Medicine and the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute along the Waiyaki Way High-way, Mountain View Estate, Gate No. 123. This makes the organization to posses the largest office space among its biotechnology partners not only in Kenya but also in Africa. The new acquisition is in line with the organiza-tion’s repositioning and development of new biotechnology programmes that will be implemented in over 20 countries in Africa.

Regional Secretariat Human Resource BaseThe ABSF secretariat has adequate, motivated and highly qualified profes-sionals who have been instrumental in implementing the organization’s pro-grammes. Some of the personalities are renowned scientists in their fields.

Regional EngagementsIn Africa, ABSF interacts and works with the following organizations:

African Agricultural Technology • Foundation – AATFCGIAR Centres – ILRI, ICRISAT, • ICRAFNational Agricultural Research • Institutions – NARsNational and Regional Universities• African Union Dept. of Rural • Economy and AgricultureAfrica-Bio• ISAAA Afri-Centre• Association for Strengthening • Agriculture Research in East and Central Africa –ASARECAAfrica Harvest Biotech Foundation • InternationalForum for Agricultural Research • in Africa – FARABio-Sciences East and Central • Africa – BECARegional Public Institutions i.e. • relevant government ministries & departmentsEast African Seed Traders As-• sociationEast African Grain council• East African Federation of Agricul-• tural Producers

International EngagementsIn international circles, ABSF inter-acts and works with the following organizations:

Croplife International•

International Food Policy Re-• search Institute – IFPRIBiotechnology Institute for • Genetically Modified Agricul-tural Products (BIGMAP)of Iowa State UniversityAmerican Grain Council – AGC• Center for Science in the Public • Interest, Washington DCUnited Nations Educational, • Scientific and Cultural Organiza-tion – UNESCOUSAID/USDA Washington DC• Monsanto International• Syngenta Foundation for Agricul-• tural DevelopmentInternational Maize and Wheat • Improvement Centre – CYMMITFood and Agriculture Organiza-• tion (FAO) of the UNBiosafe Train•

Strategy & PerspectivesThe organization has been imple-menting its activities through an An-nual Work Plan for the past 10 years. However, ABSF has just completed its 5 year strategic plan that runs from 2010 – 2014. The long term vision has been necessitated by recent trends in biotechnology development and the predictability of the direction of the technology in Africa. A recent needs assessment in biotechnology capac-ity building in Africa has indicated that significant opportunities still arise in training various groups in all major areas of biotechnology. In this respect, ABSF has consolidated itself by developing more than 10 areas of capacity building in biotechnology in Africa. These programme areas will be implemented in partnership other with relevant training and biotechnology institutions in capacity building of various stakeholders in biotechnol-ogy in Africa. ABSF has developed a database of biotechnology proces-sionals and consultants who will be instrumental in implementing the capacity building programme. ABSF will be one of the only few biotech organization in Africa to possess the capacity and consolidate biotechnol-ogy capacity building on the continent. The programme will be implemented through the Agricultural Biotechnol-ogy Network in Africa – ABNETA.

Current ActivitiesBiotechnology awareness and par-• ticipation programme for media, farmers, consumers, schools and groups.Capacity building programme in •

various aspects of biotechnologyAgricultural Biotechnology Net-• work in Africa country coordinators programmeTissue culture banana farmers proj-• ect in western KenyaOrganizing seeing-is-believing • tours for stakeholdersOrganizing media training work-• shops for science reporting jour-nalistsThe national biotech outreach pro-• gramme in KenyaWorking towards establishing a • journal of biotechnology in AfricaImplementing the 1st all Africa • congress on biotechnology recom-mendationsImplementing the BioAware Strat-• egy with Ministry of AgricultureWorking as a member of the Na-• tional Biosafety Committee in KenyaInternship programme for un-• dergraduate and post graduate students

ConclusionsABSF will continue to consolidate

its position in Africa and engage more partners including donors and development foundations in order to realize its long term vision of a food secure continent through use of bio-technology in agricultural production. ABSF is currently in discussion with a number of development partners with a view to mobilizing additional resources for the implementation of its strategic plan, programmes and projects. We are confident that with the current human resource capacity and engagement with biotech industry players, the organization’s activities will be actualized towards realization of its objectives in the short term, me-dium term and long term projects.

ABSF is similarly ready for col-laboration with research institutions, nongovernmental organizations, farmer organizations, development agencies, consumer groups, other civil society organizations and governmental institu-tions and agencies in implementing ben-eficial biotechnology applications that seek advance humanity and society.

For more information on what we do, please visit our two websites at: www.absfafrica.org AND www.abn-eta.org and for general inquiries you can write emails to fmmboyi@absfa-frica.org or absf@absfafrica.org

The new ultra modern 3 storied complex recently acquired by the ABSF Regional Secretariat Offices in Nairobi.

Professor Norah Olembo, The Executive Director of ABSF receives President Mwai Kibaki of Kenya, Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka and the Agriculture Minister William Ruto at an ABSF exhibition held during a recent Ministry of Agriculture event in Nairobi, Kenya. ABSF has political outreach to all the highest offices in Kenya. Looking on from the right is another member of

ABSF staff, Jeniffer Mwai.

May / June 201012 February / March 201012

The term “science and technology diplomacy” is used to mean the provi-sion of science and tech-

nology advice to multilateral nego-tiations and the implementation of the results of such negotiations at the national level. It therefore cov-ers activities at both international level and national level pursuant to international commitments.Science and technology have be-come key drivers of international relations and knowledge of trends in key fields is an essential prerequisite to effective international negotia-tions. Knowledge of trends in Sci-ence and Technology is also a key element for the successful national implementation of international agreements. Agribiotechnology for instance has spurred public debates the world over and is expected to induce changes in International relations among countries. The Globalization wave is evident in all sectors of the world economy and science and technology is no exception. Since we cannot down-play its tremendous effects to shape and influence how we do business, and relate with other countries, the fundamental question is to address how we can utilize Science and technology for diplomatic purposes. The country need not wait for its competitors in tourism, horticulture

tea, and coffee to capture its markets and then cry foul, we can adapt to changes in the global environments through international relations to enhance our competitiveness.Most of the global challenges fac-ing the 21st Century such as climate change, food security, water and en-ergy shortages, poverty eradication, and nuclear non-proliferation are no longer possible without the use of Science Technology and Innovation (STI). Science—particularly in the form of international collaborative partnerships—must play a pivotal role in addressing these issues. Hu-manity now faces many common challenges that can be addressed most effectively if nations pool and leverage their assetsThere are two key features of the growth of scientific and techno-logical knowledge that are central to international negotiations. Firstly, scientific knowledge is becom-ing increasingly specialized and therefore demands greater expert input into international negotia-tions. Secondly, the application of science and technology to develop-ment requires the ability to integrate the divergent disciplines that are needed to solve specific problems. The influence and effectiveness of diplomats and international civil servants increasingly depend upon the extent to which they can

mobilize scientific and technical expertise in their work. This should spur human resource development in science and technology to meet these global demands.Scientific collaboration allows for opportunities for training and research through the international exchange of researchers, joint re-search and international distribution of Science and Technology related information. Indeed it has enabled the success of joint projects in ad-vanced research fields for instance space and marine sciences. Closer home the Kenya- South Africa col-laboration in Science and Technol-ogy has enabled researchers in the two countries to undertake research in water and human medicine through research grants availed by the two Republics.

Science and technology diplomacy has contributed to capacity building in developing countries through the financial assistance and human capital from developed countries through their ODAs e.g. JICA, SIDA, DAAD to mention but a few. Through cooperation in sci-ence and technology developing countries and Kenya included can appreciate emerging technologies like nanotechnology, GMOs.Opportunities for Kenya through STI Diplomacy include: Establish-ing systems in which Kenya and other governments collaborat-ing with her help each other by strengthening capabilities to be able to independently resolve their problems and become self-reliant. For instance the establishment of Universities of excellence within the East African block would help the member countries to train their countrymen using modern infrastructure already available in other countries to help cut costs and reduce duplication; Sending Kenya’s excellent research results to the world has the potential to increase the country’s competi-tiveness by proposing its use for the benefit of human society. M-pesa is a classical example;Promote international exchanges and networking of science and tech-nology human resources e.g. en-

couraging “sandwich programmes” for postgraduate studies so that the students spent part of their study period in another country, research-ers exchange programmes, science attaches in foreign missions and by encouraging Kenyans to take up international jobs;Magnify Kenya’s image in the inter-national arena by establishing an in-ternational brand image of Kenya’s excellent Science and Technology. This can be achieved when Min-istries dealing with International trade, Science and technology liase closely with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs which then acts to “deliver Kenya” to the world.The greatest challenge however ex-ists in the establishment of mecha-nisms for sharing experiences and perspectives on issues of common interests between scientists and political leaders. A strategy for promoting science diplomacy that respects these different outlooks deserves support.Science is best done collaboratively because then, we will have a much better vision of how to improve it. In the global science and technology enterprise of the future, it will be best if we all succeed together.

Author: Secretary/CEO, National Council for Science and Technol-ogy, sadulrazak@yahoo.com

Science And Technology Diplomacy For Global Competitiveness

PROF. SHAUKAT ABDULRAZAK

Su

bsc

rip

tio

n F

orm

Subscription FormTo subscribe to ScienceAfrica, kindly fill in your details below:Cut along the dotted line and send to the address provided.

Cheques payable to:ScienceAfricaP.O. Box 57458 - 00200Nairobi, Kenya

Subscription Enquiries to:The Circulation ManagerTel: +254 (020) 2053532Email: info@scienceafrica.com

Subscription Rates:Kenya Kshs. 1,200/- East Africa $70/- Rest of Africa $90/- Rest of the World $170/-

Name/Organisation:

Postal Address:

Town/City:

Country:

Email:

Tel:

Number of Copies:

Authorising Officer’s Name: Sign:

Amount:

sOver 300 biotechnol-

ogy experts from all

regions of Africa and

other continents arrive in

Nairobi to discuss the con-

tinent’s advances in various

fields of biotechnology.

These include genetics,

molecular biology, policies,

b io informat ics , e th ics ,

r e gu l a t i on , g enomi c s ,

indigenous knowledge and

biotechnology tools.

The one week congress

beginning September on 22,

2008 is organized by African

Biotechnology Stakeholders

Forum and African Union in

collaboration with various

organization in biotechnology

network.

The experts work in national

and international research

institutions, universities,

regulatory authorities, farming

comm

unities, government

min is t r i es , the p r iva te

sector, media and N

GO

s.

According to prof N

orah

Olembo, director of ABSF the

congress will help Africans

know exactly where they are

in terms of the biotechnology

advancements.

The congress has attracted

160 abstracts on biotech

research and development. �

First Biotech Congress Comes to Nairobi

“African children

are still dying from

measles when an

effective vaccine

exists.” Dr Tom

Egwang, Executive

Director African

Academy of

Sciences

Quotable

Why is Africa full of bad

news w

hen it comes

to basic human needs?

Generally it may seem

difficult to tell the world that A

frican

scientists are working hard to solve its

problems.

The current food crisis, disease

epidemics, high fuel costs, decaying

infrastructure, poor housing and low returns

from trade in raw m

aterials should warn

African leaders and scientists to revisit

the notion of science-led development in

a very frank manner.

However, the policy makers, m

any of

them “form

er” experts in various science

fields seem addicted to giving science and

technology a raw deal.

They have no money for science even

when researchers revive indigenous rice

facing extinction into the productive New

Rice For Africa (NERICA) with varieties

that require no irrigation. Yet the continent

is not poor. It has lots of money. N

early a

third of the countries have oil - the black

gold they all dreamt about- generating

billions of dollars.

Still there could be adequate funding if

just one percent of the price of a kilogram

of rice or maize was faithfully put into

R&D

kitty.

How

ever, five decades after independence

few A

frican nations including African

Union have their own national or regional

awards for innovations.

African Scientists’ Ti

“Monty Jones and his team

turned

the wild or native African rice on

the path to extinction into New Rice

for Africa with varieties that need

no irrigation. It is a major indicator

of untapped scientific prowess that

deserve sustainable funding but

African governments assum

e it is

the duty of donors”

Cont’d on page 3

New Rice for Africa (NERICA)

Prof. Norah Olem

bo

Executive Director ABSF

Senegal’s President Abdoulaye Wade

has harsh words for African experts

dedustrialization tha

nable Kenya prosper and

ain its Vision 2030. P2

IUCN at 60

As International U

nion for

Conservation and N

ature

marks 60th anniversary,

the Director G

eneral, Julia

Maron-Lefevre w

as Nairobi

which has becom

e regional

headquarter for Eastern and

Southern Africa, headed by D

r.

John Mugabe P.16

Malaria Vaccine

Africa must set aside m

oney

for malaria vaccines now. The

region needs to curb deaths

and illness that occur despite

availability of effective drugs

and vaccines. P.8

Two decades ago highly

toxic waste from

Europe

was dumped in Koko, Ni-

geria. It showed the global

need to ban cross border

movem

ent of hazardous

wastes. P.20

Lethal Waste

Rainfall

Drought in 10 Eastern Afri-

ca countries is to end as near

normal seasonal rainfall is

predicted. P.18

Also See P.5 and P.9

The Best Analysis of Well Researched Science and Technology Activities in Africa.

Septeber

ctober 1

Why is A

frica full of bad

news w

hen it comes

to basic human needs?

Generally it m

ay seem

difficult to tell the world that A

frican

scientists are working hard to solve its

problems.

The current food crisis, disease

epidemics, high fuel costs, decaying

infrastructure, poor housing and low returns

from trade in raw

materials should w

arn

ican leaders and scientists to revisit

science-led development in

any of Still there could be adequate funding

just one percent of the price of a kilogr

or maize w

as faithfully put

African Scientists’ Time to W

ake Up

ni

earne

ricen

The International Centre for

Insect Physiology and Ecology

collaborating with various

African universities has

trained close to 300 Doctor

of Philosophy level insect

scientists and 170 Master of

Science graduates.

This has been done

under its African Regional

Postgraduate Programm

e in

Insect Science initiated 25

years ago and is marking its

Silver Jubilee.

A further 250 postgraduate

students have trained at ICIPE

through Desertion Research Internship

Programm

e where they spend half of their

time at the centre.

The information is contained in

a statement by Prof Christian

Borgemeister, ICIPE director

general and chairman of

ARPPIS academ

ic board.

The statement is carried in

special newsletter focusing

on the Silver Jubilee.

“The vision of the

programm

e has always been

the training of young African

scientists to take regional and

international leadership in insect

science,” says Prof Borgem

eister.

ICIPE: 300 PhDs in Insect Science

Food Security Attainable

BR

IE

FS

ol. 2 Septem

ber 1 -

ctober 1 200

Kshs. 100 Tshs. 2000

shs. 000

oA

FRI

AS

E

AI

I

ATI

S

IEE

IATI

A

EE

ET

The inauguration of the $500,000

maize drought research site at K

iboko,

Kenya coincided w

ith farmers field

day. Agriculture assistant m

inister Gideon

Ndambuki said that the facility will help farm

ers

grow drought resistant crops.

Those present included executive director

KA

RI D

r. E. A. M

ukisira and Dr. A

lpha Dialo,

regional director International Maize and W

heat

Improvem

ent Centre with Spanish acronym

CIM

MY

T. P.13

Cont

on pae

New

Rice for Africa (N

ERIC

A)Senegal’s President Abdoulaye W

ade

has harsh words for African experts

ome

rown

Industrialiation

Starts There are credible indica-

tors that Kenya Industrial

Research and D

evelop-

ment Institute is quietly

and effectively putting the

country on the path to what

has eluded Kenya and other

African nations for over

four decades. Hom

e grown

industrialization that could

enable Kenya prosper and

attain its Vision 2030. P2

een

ine

eath o

ae C

ha

S Satelite

ictures

an

I at

0

As International U

nion for

Conservation and N

ature

marks 60th anniversary,

the Director G

eneral, Julia

Maron-Lefevre w

as Nairobi

h has become regional

r Eastern and

alaria accine

Africa m

ust set aside money

for malaria vaccines now. The

region needs to curb deaths

and illness that occur despite

availability of effective drugs

and vaccines. P.8

for Twelve Issues.

Cawaal Guest House offer a wide array of services that range from accommodation, Conference and Meeting Facility, Meals, Corporate Deliveries, Office tea (in house service and outside deliveries) Events Catering and Logistics.

If you are looking for a serene, quiet, leafy and convenient grounds for Accommodation, Conferencing, Family getaways, Honeymoons or Church retreats, CAWAAL Guest House provides an exciting range of quality services for competitive prices.

Cawaal Catering services offer executive food,

based on the premise of healthy eating. A wide array of both cold and hot beverages, sandwiches, snacks and main meals are offered, covering both African dishes and international cuisines. The pricing has been designed to provide value for the time you spend at Cawaal.

Located in Karen, off Langata Road at the junction to Marist International College, Cawaal Guest House also provides perfect grounds for Weddings and other Private Functions.

Cawaal Guest House is based on strong family values. Visit us to have your personal experience.

P O Box 56638-00200, Nairobi, KenyaTel: 254-20-2018695; 254-722-329644; 254-734-532927; 254-722-984368

Website: www.cawaal/.com; email: info@cawaal.com

CAWAAL GUEST HOUSEYour Home Away From Home.

May / June 2010 13

By Alice Kaudia, Environment Secretary, Kenya

This is a function of its kind for us living at this historic point in time; and in our

geographic location of Africa and Kenya. Climate change and variability has manifested its impacts and effects more extensively in Africa than in the rest of the world. In Kenya, we have experienced increased in-cidences of floods and extended droughts that has resulted in miseries and economic loses that will take long to recover from if at all.

Unless we urgently and ef-fectively address the challenges posed by climate change, it would be impossible to achieve the Millennium development goals and Vision 2030. Where-as we expect Kenya’s economy to grow at the rate of 10% p.a. largely through agricul-ture, tourism, manufacturing and energy sectors, there is little convincing evidence that such development would be sustained in view of the hap-hazard exploitation of natural resources; and now threatened by climate change. Deforesta-tion, degradation of land and destruction of water towers in Kenya is a real threat and a great challenge not only to Kenya but the entire world.

In addressing climate change

challenges, concerted efforts are required right from the smallest human institutions such as households and com-munities to massive national, regional and global level estab-lishments. In this respect, the approach taken in implement-ing the African Adaptation Pro-gramme is inclusive of all and is therefore both appropriate and reasonable. This is so be-cause effects of climate change cannot be confined within the boundaries of one nation. As a result, conflicts often arise out of competition for the scarce resources. This programme has been designed to cover 21 African countries; hence the name African Adaptation Programme or AAP.

Apart from Kenya, AAP extends to Ethiopia, Ghana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mauritius, Na-mibia, Tanzania, Nigeria, Mo-zambique, Sao Tome & Principe, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Con-go, Gabon, Morocco, Tunisia, Rwanda, Niger and Senegal.

Our Kenya Component of the AAP which is a two year programme like it is in all other countries. We are all stakeholders and partners in environmental matters and we are here to start off this pro-gramme together. As you well know, there are many emerging

Climate Change Impact Manifested Extensively in Africa

opportunities such as carbon trade that are widely spoken about yet many of us here know very little about. There are also many approaches to environ-ment management that have been tried out by institutions over the years yet we still have the problems with us.

We hope that this forum and the ones to follow will expose us all to the emerging opportu-nities and equip us for the best win-win interventions so that we may make informed deci-sions as we invest in climate change opportunities. May we all be determined to fully participate in this workshop and ensure that by the time we leave this place tomorrow we will have acquired enough knowledge on how to move for-ward as individuals and institu-tion in beneficially responding to climate change.

One of the outputs of the AAP programme is Introduced Dynamic, long-term planning mechanisms to manage the inherent uncertainties of cli-mate change introduced. This inspires hope for success in attaining sustainable develop-ment, peace and prosperity. The other outputs are equally im-portant and aim at addressing leadership, policies; financing options and generating knowl-

edge on adjusting national de-velopment processes to fully in-corporate climate change risks and opportunities. All these will be possible because the govern-ment of Japan has financed the programme at a cost of US$ 5,469,726. As such I must very sincerely thank the Government of Japan very much for financ-ing this programme.

Those representing govern-ment ministries will now have an opportunity to include neces-sary climate change adaptation and mitigation measures in your work plans and budgets so as to offset the effects as we forge for-ward. Without doing so, there would be no effective forward movement in some sectors.

I commend all ministries that effectively participated in the development of the Kenya Climate Change Response Strategy. This has put Kenya ahead of all African countries and will complement the im-plementation of AAP.

Edited Version of Speech by Kenya’s Environment Secre-tary Dr Alice A. Kaudia during the Inception Workshop in Nairobi on African Adaptation Programme.

Deforestation, degradation of land

and destruction of water towers

in Kenya is a real threat and a great

challenge not only to Kenya but the entire

world.

Minister John Michuki

PS Lawrence Lenayapa

The country is over-loaded with political activities that seem to swallow unique

emerging successes resulting from attempts to cope with not just climate change but other serious environmental problems linked to pollution and defores-tation. These include ongoing rehabilitation of Nairobi River, major water towers or Catchment areas like the Mau. The focal point of these efforts is the min-istry of Environment and Mineral Resources in close collaboration with the Prime Minister’s Office and the Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife. ScienceAfrica begins to serialise its edited versions of the foreword and executive summary of the publication ‘Kenya Na-tional Response Climate Change Response Strategy’ (NCCRS).

The document has ten chap-ters that cover: history of climate change, challenges and interna-tional efforts to combat climate change. It gives evidence and im-pacts of climate change; strategic focus of the NCCRS including the linkages between the NCCRS and the Vision 2030; adaptation

and mitigation interventions; communication, education and awareness programmes; vulner-ability assessments; research, technology development and transfer; policy, legislation and institutional framework; as well as action plan, implementation framework and resource mobili-sation plan, respectively

According to the foreword by John Michuki, the minister for environment and mineral resources “ the integration of climate information into Govern-ment policies is important be-cause climate is a major driving factor for most of the economic activities in Kenya although cli-mate information has not been easily understandable. Climate change has not been adequately factored into sectors of the econ-omy including policies and plans like the current Government’s blue print; ‘Vision 2030.’

The minister says that the NC-CRS aims is to put in place robust measures needed to address most, if not all, of the challenges posed by climate variability and change. “We have had consultative work-shops -two national and nine

Kenya Excels in Climate Change Response regional- targeting parliamentar-ians Government offiials, private sector, civil society organisa-tions, development partners, the youth, and women’s groups, faith-based organizations, and the media, among others, Mr Michuki adds.

According to the minister, recommendations in the docu-ment should be translated into policies that benefit communi-ties and trigger the process of active involvement in factoring climate information into all relevant activities. For climate change threats to be appreciated, the document has recommended massive awareness campaigns so that the public can be sensi-tised and mobilised to adapt to and mitigate against impacts of climate change.

It is first time this country has developed a document dedicated to addressing the threats posed by climate change as well as taking advantage of any opportunities that may arise. Future climate change programmes and projects will be in line with the provisions of this Response Strategy.

According to the permanent

secretary Lawrence Lenaya-pa Kenya acknowledges that change in the Earth’s climate and its adverse effects are a com-mon concern of humankind.

Thus the Ministry of Envi-ronment and Mineral Resources recognised the need to enhance coordination of climate change activities in the country with a view to ensuring a climate proof socioeconomic develop-ment anchored on a low-carbon path.

The PS says that technical and financial resources come from Danida/Sida supported Environmental Programme Support (EPS) and other de-velopment partners including UNDP, UNEP, International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) Climate Prediction and Applications Centre (ICPAC); as well as the Departmental Committee on Agriculture, Livestock and Cooperatives in the awareness campaign workshops. The next instalment will begin with the Executive Summary.

CLIMATE CHANGE AAP

May / June 2010 13

May / June 201014 May / June 201014

There are very strong indicators that Kenya may be among the top coun-tries in Africa aiming to join the path to an integrated and comprehensive

approach to climate change adaptation that will lead to enhanced environment management for economic growth with equitable access to energy services and response to climate change. There should be integration of climate change into national development frameworks according to the Japanese Funded Africa Adaptation Pro-gramme. The project objective is to strengthen Kenya’s institutional and systemic capacity and leadership to address climate change risks and opportunities through a national approach to adaptation. It is executed by the Ministry of Environment and Mineral Resources.

Some of the expected outputs that were also discussed in recent workshops and in-clude: having dynamic, long-term planning mechanisms to manage the inherent uncer-tainties of climate change introduced; there should be strengthened leadership capacities and institutional frameworks to manage climate change risks and opportunities in an integrated manner at the local and national levels; climate-resilient policies and measures in priority sectors be implemented; financing options to meet national adaptation costs at the local, national, sub-regional and regional levels expanded; and finally knowledge on adjusting national development processes to fully incorporate climate change risks and opportunities generated and shared across all levels. Implementing agencies include United Nations Development Programme with the World Food Program and United Nations In-dustrial Development Organization(UNIDO) being responsible parties for certain activities. Among the collaborating partners are the Of-fice of Prime Minister, Ministry of Northern Kenya, Ministry of Planning; Ministry of Gender, Children and Social Development and even the district development commit-tees. Among other collaborating partners are the parliament, media, research and academic institutions.

The beneficiaries of the project are ex-pected to be the local communities and other vulnerable groups, such as women and pasto-ralists, when their capabilities to deal with the impacts of climate change will be enhanced through support from various stakeholders including UN agencies, the Government, com-munity based or service organizations, private sector and through responsive policies and long-term planning mechanisms at the local and national levels.

Other key beneficiaries will include national institutions responsible for main-streaming climate change policies in planning and budgeting processes. This Project is be-

ing implemented by UNDP through or with the Ministry of Environment and Mineral Resources, which officially coordinates all climate change affairs in Kenya.

UNIDO and WFP serve as Responsible Parties for certain activities. These agencies and institutions will work with collaborating partners drawn from other government min-istries, departments and institutions as well as civil society organizations, private sector and research/academic institutions, parliament and the media so that they can play more effective roles in formulating and implementing climate change responsive policies and programmes together with lobbying for and disseminating relevant information on various climate change issues and themes

Problem and Root Causes

Kenya is a country that is particularly at risk from the impacts of climate change because of its geography and reliance on rain-fed agriculture, pastoral livestock pro-duction systems and tourism which are all

heavily dependent on nature. Only about 18% of Kenya’s land is classified as arable and it supports almost 75% of the country’s 37 mil-lion people. Half of the agricultural sector’s production is for subsistence, with the rest for export and contributing about 26% of the country’s GDP. The major agricultural prod-ucts in Kenya include tea, coffee, horticulture, maize, wheat, sugarcane, dairy products, beef, pork, and poultry.

Annual rainfall in Kenya follows a bimodal seasonal pattern with the long rains generally occurring in March to May, while the short rains occur in October to December. These seasonal patterns have become unreliable resulting in frequent droughts and crop fail-ures. Most farmers also lack relevant weather forecast data and information that would assist them to reduce their losses and/or to diver-sify to more suitable crops, such as drought resistant crops during the dry periods and the slow-maturing varieties when the conditions are wetter than normal.

The unpredictable seasonal patterns affect both subsistence production and cash crops

that are produced by both small and large scale producers. For example, Kenya is the world’s fourth-largest producer of tea, which provides nearly 25% of the country’s export earnings. About 10% of the population are directly or indirectly employed in the tea industry, with small holder farmers growing about 60% of the country’s tea, while the large estates grow the rest. Therefore, when adverse weather condi-tions affect tea producing areas, it is mainly the small holder farmers who are most affected because they have less capital to invest in equipment or inputs to cope.1 In 2008, there was depressed tea production largely due to ad-verse weather conditions, such as frost and low rainfall2. Further, if temperatures were to rise by 2°C, large areas of Kenya currently suited to growing tea would become unsuitable.

Approximately 80% of the country’s land mass is arid or semi-arid and supports more than 20% of the country’s population. These arid and semi-arid lands (ASALs) host about 70% of the national livestock population and are home to over 90% of the country’s wild-life, which supports the tourism industry, the second largest foreign exchange earner after agriculture. Despite their potential, the ASALs have been historically marginalized both eco-nomically and politically and currently have high poverty rates of more than 70%, which is well above the national average3. The ASALs are particularly prone to recurrent droughts and flash floods.

The Horn of Africa and the Great Lakes Region are a global hot-spot that generates thousands of refugees annually. Kenya however, unlike other states in the region has had relative peace since independence in 1963. Kenya is therefore a safe haven for the influx of refugees from the neighbouring countries, including Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan, Congo DR, Rwanda and Burundi. It is estimated that, as of May 2009, Kenya had approximately 357,635 documented refugees in different parts of the country. Nairobi had 34,436, Kakuma Refu-gee Camp 51,336 and Dadaab Refugee Camp 255,748. The majority arrived during the 1990s due to civil conflicts in Somalia and Sudan4. Al-though most refugees are normally classified as “political refugees”, environmental hazards also contribute to the phenomenon of environmental refugees. In addition, the refugees contribute to the degradation of the environment, especially due to the concentration of large populations in areas that are ecologically fragile. As the impacts of climate change continue to be felt, the refugee situation will be compounded, both by an increase in environmental refugees and also increased environmental degradation of the refugee hosting areas which shall become even more susceptible to degradation due to climate change.

CLIMATE CHANGE AAP

Kenya and the Africa Adaptation Programme (AAP)

AFRICA’S LEADING PUBLICATION ON SCIENCE INNOVATION AND DEVELOPMENT

The Best Analysis of Science, Technology and Innovation in Africa Tel: 020-2053532 / 2473370

Cont’d on page 15

May / June 2010 15

UNDP’s Innovative Approach to Climate Change Adaptation in Africa

Funding from Government of Japan

Much of the support for various aspects of climate change adaptation in Africa, especially Kenya, has been associ-

ated with Britain’s Department of Foreign and International Development (DFID) and Canada’s International Development Research Centre (IDRC). However, UNDP, with funding from the Government of Japan, recently launched a new programme that uses an innovative approach to climate change adaptation in Africa.

Under this programme, UNDP will assist 21 African countries in implementing integrated and comprehensive adaptation actions and resilience plans. The projects will ensure that national de-velopment processes incorporate climate change risks and opportunities to secure development gains under a changing climate. UNDP will help countries establish an enabling environment and develop the capacity required to design, finance, implement, and monitor long-term and cost-effective adaptation policies and plans.

The programme, entitled Supporting Integrat-ed and Comprehensive Approaches to Climate Change Adaptation in Africa, has a budget of US$92.1 million over three years. It will fund na-tional activities supported by regional services.

StrategyThere is growing scientific, economic, politi-

cal, and social consensus that effective climate change adaptation will require long-term plan-ning and explicit consideration of the risks involved at all decision-making levels. Moving beyond isolated climate change risk management initiatives would help reduce associated mal-adaptation costs and secure additional financing to meet the remaining costs of adaptation.

To achieve the kind of transformational change that is required, climate change risks need to be routinely considered as part of poverty reduction and sector-specific strate-gies, policies, and measures. The present programme, entitled Supporting Integrated and Comprehensive Approaches to Climate Change Adaptation in Africa, intends to establish such a dynamic and enduring approach to adaptation that cuts across sectors.

The goal of the programme is to assist de-veloping countries in securing and expanding national development gains under a chang-ing climate. The objective is for 21 African countries to adjust their national development processes to incorporate climate change risks and opportunities.

This programme approach will provide two avenues of support to countries: a National Component, and an Inter-Regional Technical Support Component.

National Component Countries will receive direct support to help

them develop the planning mechanisms, institu-tions, policies, financial options, and knowledge base needed to respond to climate change in the years to come. Each national project will be developed in close consultation with relevant stakeholders and tailored to meet specific country climate circumstances and needs. The 21 participating countries are: Burkina Faso, Cameroon, the Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Gabon, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Mau-ritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Sen-egal, Tanzania, Tunisia, and Zambia.

Inter-Regional Technical Support Component This component will provide a coherent and integrated package of support to the programme countries to help link country projects together to ensure they all benefit from and contribute to a much wider knowledge base based on best practices. The platform is inter-regional because it spans two of UNDP’s geographic regions: sub-Saharan Africa, led by the Regional Bureau for Africa (RBA), and the Arab States bordering the Mediterranean Sea, led by the Regional Bureau for Arab States (RBAS). This technical support will be key for delivering expertise, training, and tools to countries as they develop and implement their country projects.

CLIMATE CHANGE AAP

Following the disputed 2007 general elec-tions, an estimated 600,000 people were dis-placed, with about 300,000 of them ending up in camps for internally displaced and the rest seeking refuge with relatives and friends. Even before the 2007 elections there were thousands of internally displaced people, due to decades of land conflicts. Despite the efforts of the government and humanitarian organizations to resettle the IDPs, many continue to refuse to return to their original homes, due to con-tinued hostilities from the communities that resulted in their displacement5. The impacts of climate change are going to exacerbate an already volatile situation that includes land and resource conflicts. Further, as communi-ties get displaced from areas that are more agriculturally productive, they are settling in more marginal areas thereby accelerating the rate of environmental degradation. There is also an increase in the conflicts between pastoralists and farmers and among pastoralist groups from different ethnic communities.

Climate variability has had far-reaching effects on human health. Extreme weather events, such as high temperatures and intense rainfall events, are critical factors in malaria epidemics especially in the highlands of west-ern Kenya. From 1920 to 1950, the highlands of eastern Africa experienced infrequent malaria outbreaks; however, since then, the current pattern is characterized by increased outbreak frequencies, expanded geographic range, and increased case-fatality rates. Temperature affects the development rates of vectors and parasites while rainfall increases the availability of mosquito breeding sites.6 Outbreaks of water borne diseases, such as cholera and typhoid tend to follow heavy rains and the resultant flooding both in rural areas and in urban areas due to their poor water and sanitation infrastructure.

HIV/AIDS makes people more vulnerable to the effects of climate change. Faster deterio-ration of people infected with HIV is observed when they are exposed to diseases such as malaria, typhoid and cholera, the incidence of which increases under conditions of flooding, drought and changing patterns of rainfall.

According to the Global Invasive Species Programme (GISP)7, invasive species will have increased impacts with increasing cli-mate change. Extreme weather events, such as floods and droughts tend to alter the micro-climate and nutrient availability, which in some cases contributes to the spread of inva-sives. Research by Tyndall Centre in the UK8, predicts an average increase in air temperature of 3.5 °C for the for Lake Victoria area: in-creasing water temperatures and low water levels will be the consequence with negative impacts on the fishing industry, food supply, hydro energy supply and boat transport.

Livestock production has also been af-fected by the impacts of climate change. In addition to widespread livestock losses due to frequent droughts that are becoming more severe, pastoralists are also affected by dis-eases whose prevalence has been heightened by climate change. For example, Rift Valley Fever (RVF) is a viral disease that primarily affects livestock but can be passed on to hu-mans causing fever. It is spread by the bite of infected Aedes spp. or Culex spp. mosquitoes, which pass on the RVF virus, a member of the genus Phlebovirus. In 1998, the virus claimed the lives of over 400 Kenyans. Heavy rains

Kenya and the Africa Adaptation Programme (AAP)in the North Eastern and Coast Provinces of Kenya in 2006 caused floods, thereby creat-ing breeding grounds for mosquitoes which spread the virus from infected livestock to humans. By the end of January 2007, RVF had caused 148 deaths and forced the closure of livestock markets in North Eastern Province affecting the economy of the region. The out-break later spread to parts of Central Province and Nairobi causing many people to boycott the eating of meat, which adversely affected many businesses. By March 2007, the Kenyan government declared RVF as having dimin-ished drastically after spending an estimated Ksh. 2.5 million (approx. US$30,000) in vaccine and deployment costs.

Tourism, which is another major source of revenue for Kenyan is also affected by climate change (See Box 1). Droughts that result in livestock deaths in the ASALs also affect wildlife numbers and increase poaching and encroachment risks. Other related factors include elevated seawater temperatures, like those that were experienced in 1998 caused by the El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO). The resultant 1.5°C rise in temperature, resulted in 50% - 90% coral mortality along the Kenyan coast9. Changes in seawater temperatures also adversely affect fisheries.

The energy sector is particularly vulnerable to climate change: reliance on biomass and hydropower creates risks as both these natu-ral resources are at risk from climate change impacts. Hydro-electricity accounts for 75% of the electricity generated in the country, with the rest coming from geothermal sources and a limited amount from fuel-powered generators. During periods of drought the level of water in the hydroelectricity dams drops resulting in reduced power supply. For example, in

June 2009, the Masinga Dam, which is the largest hydro-electric dam in Kenya was shut down due to low water levels caused by the prolonged drought causing anxiety among manufacturers and the general public because of the eminent power shortages. Heavy rains, coupled with poor soil management practices in the surrounding farming areas have also contributed to a reduction in the volumes of water in these dams due to siltation.

In terms of primary energy consumption, biomass still represents 68% of consumption in the country and over 75% of Kenyans rely on biomass in the form of charcoal and fuelwood as their main source of energy for cooking and heating10. The high demand for charcoal results in the unsustainable harvesting of trees both in the fragile ASALs as well as from the few remaining forests. At the same time, char-coal production for sale is one of the coping mechanisms used by poor communities who lack alternatives when their crops and livestock are affected by adverse weather conditions. Forests and woodlands, whilst sensitive to a warming climate, also play an important ame-liorating role to climate change impacts.

The transport and infrastructure sector, which is still underdeveloped in Kenya has also been adversely affected by extreme weather conditions, especially floods that destroy roads and bridges.

Root Causes of Climate Change Vulner-ability - Non-climate related causes

Most of the people in Kenya are vulnerable to the impacts of climate change because of their poverty; with about 46% of the population classified as poor11. The reliance of the majority of the population on rain-fed agriculture and livestock production puts them in a vulnerable

position first because of the negative impacts that adverse weather conditions have on their production systems and also due to fluctuating market prices for their produce, both locally and internationally. Systemic inequalities be-tween a small percentage who control the ma-jority of the wealth and the vast majority who are poor further compound the situation.

A long history of environmental degrada-tion, especially deforestation, pollution of wa-ter bodies, conversion of wetlands, unsustain-able agricultural practices, and overgrazing are contributing to the current high level of climate change vulnerability of many communities. After independence, the Kenya government continued with centralized policies for the management of key natural resources, such as forest, water, wetlands and wildlife. However, it gradually emerged that the institutions that were vested with the authority to manage these resources were poorly financed and prone to political manipulation. Politicians increasingly used forests as a resource to be parcelled out in exchange for political patronage. The forest cover therefore dwindled from an estimated 12% of the total country’s area to less than 2% by the 1990s. The Forest Department; which was the key government institution to manage the gazetted forest estate; was under funded, understaffed and prone to corruption, making it unable to stop this destruction.

Other factors that have contributed to the degradation of natural resources include a complex land tenure system which is governed by many statutes that are often poorly under-stood by the public and which have resulted in limited security of land tenure. Limited security of tenure among many communities results in low investments in conservation

Cont’d on page 16

From page 14

May / June 201016

Farmers can now come together and enjoy the benefits of being members of a club that deals exclusively with their farming

needs. Farmchem, a regional distributor of seed and crop protection products has introduced the Farmchem Mkulima club, the first of its kind to be started by a seed and crop protection products company.

In an initiative dubbed ‘Angaza Mku-lima’ the club was started to strengthen the partnership between Farmchem and its customers, and to increase the companies understanding of their cus-tomers business challenges and farming needs.

“Angaza Mkulima members have access to various benefits, that include obtaining access to crop production fi-nance and arranging for crop insurance

against natural perils,” says Farmchem MD Charles Mulinge. Some regions across the country continue to experi-ence bumper harvest following the short rains while others have experienced loss of harvest due to the same rains. “With benefits such as crop insurance, farmers will no longer have to worry about debt payment incurred due to the loss of their harvest or crop destruction by natural perils,” says Mr Mulinge.

“Obtaining access to crop production finance will allow farmers the freedom to expand their crop investment and stand to gain increased harvests and profits,” adds Mr Mulinge.

With no registration fee, enrolment to the club is via mobile phone and is open to all farmers and agro dealers in the countrywide distribution system. Club

registration is carried out on an SMS platform, where the potential members create a new message

ENROLL*Firstname,Lastname,Divison and then send it to the number 6426. They then get a registration number and password. The registered members can then log on to the ‘Angaza Mkulima’ site on www.angazamkulima.com us-ing their registered phone numbers as user names.

Farmchem MD Charles Mulinge, sees the ‘Angaza Mkulima’ initiative as a great way to help the Kenyan farm-ing community in their endeavours to increase their farm productivity.

“We need to constantly find ways to improve the well being of the farm-ers,” says Mulinge, “and the ‘Angaza Mkulima’ initiative is one way of doing

this.” Farmchem has in the past shown

its dedication to the well being of the farming community, by introducing new packaging of its products to fight coun-terfeiting of farm inputs that has plagued the farming community for a long time. Mulinge says that joining the Farmchem Mkulima Club, will be of great benefit to the farmers and agro distributors, and he hopes that they will realise the benefit of becoming club members.

“The agribusiness community is a key contributor to the Kenyan economy, and when farmers come together, to share information that benefits and improves on the well being of this community, then the long term effects will begin to show through economic growth,” says Mr Mulinge. �

Farmchem Starts Farmers Club

One of Africa’s leading plant b r e e d e r s , P r o f M i r i a m Kinyua, of the department of Biotechnology, Moi University

in Eldoret, Kenya, talked to ScienceAfrica’s Lizzy Awuor on her experience regarding career and achievements during the recent launching of ISAAA 2009 Global Status of Biotech Crops held in Nairobi.

Q: How did you develop interest in Agriculture?

A: It is just those things which happen, and are not much under your control. In the final analysis you seem to like and fit in it. I hated agriculture and gave it less thought. I wanted to do medicine, and so did my father. While carrying out a science practical my specimen revived from the effect of chloroform and started moving while I was “operating’ on it. I shuddered that this can happen when am operating on a human being and that was my turning point. I already was in science, so I could not change to arts. The next choice therefore was agriculture.

Q. How did you become a plant breeder?

Again it is interesting that destiny took the course. I got married just after college. The duty station for my husband, who was already working, was near a research station, so common sense had it that I request to be posted there. At the station, I wanted to do anything else but breeding- we considered breeding as the most challenging unit in agriculture. Unfortunately, just before I reported, two breeders left. While all other new employees were given a chance to choose the section they wanted to go to, I did not have that opportunity, and had to fill up the vacant breeding position.

Q: What are some of your top achievements? I have released close to ten crop varieties, including release of double haploid breeds where the chromosomes are chosen not paired, maize pollination called wide hybridization, I have traveled to all continents in the world apart from the Arctic and Antarctica. I have made presentations to those who matter in society in agricultural science. I have received numerous awards, raised a very successful family and we love each other. But what I consider my greatest achievement is to have farmers stop me and say thank you for that demo, we are getting more yields and our wheat is good. When I can sit with them on round table or on the grass and we discuss good farming, and they leave there and practice it, I feel very fulfilled. I have seen this happen, and i consider it my greatest achievement: to see their satisfaction derived from my work, especially the small scale farmers. I had the opportunity of being in charge of wheat breeding, and later in charge of a plant breeding centre in agric research, and this

gave me the opportunity to feel achieved. Q. What is the state of biotechnology in Africa at large?This depends on who is looking at it. If you ask my opinion, we in Africa still need to decide what we want in biotech. It is a very powerful tool, but we have not yet settled on what we can do with it. Everybody is acting according to their drive. Some because of funding- tied aid, some because of curiosity, and some have found themselves there and therefore are carrying out assignments. Effective policies need to be developed and followed. We need to borrow what has been proved useful, and study with others, what has not yet been known. We need to chart our course clearly. Q. What is the future of biotechnology in Africa?Again if you ask my opinion, the future is bright. Let’s not close our eyes we still have a long way to go but the continent is making remarkable strides and I am hoping that if more efforts will be applied, we will achieve a lot more in years to come. Q. What are some of the challenges facing African breeders?Africa breeders face a lot of challenges among them `many crop and animal constraints to address, inadequate un-tied funding and facilities to do the research, capacity to breed, inadequate support nationally and brain-drain. These challenges need to be addressed for the continent’s agricultural potential to be unlocked fully.

Prof. Kinyua was appointed by the President to chair of the Board of the National Biosafety Authority soon after this interview which was conducted during the launch of ISAAA 2009 Biotech report in Nairobi.

Meet Africa’s Leading Plant Breeder who wanted to be a doctor

Q&A

“My greatest achievement is to have farmers stop me and say thank you for that demo, we are getting more yields and our wheat is good”

and a tendency to exploit the available resources for quick economic gains. Prac-tices such as charcoal production, illegal and unregulated timber harvesting and the trapping of wildlife for game meat have all contributed to the current level of environmental degradation.

The country’s policy on agriculture has been to promote cash crops, such as tea, coffee, pyrethrum and horticultural produce for the export market. However, this has meant that not enough attention has been paid to ensuring that the coun-try can feed itself. This has resulted in a consistent deficit between the amount of food consumed and that which is produced within the country, thereby necessitating the import of food, such as the staple food, maize and also wheat and sugar. When farmers are unable to rely on the seasonal rains, the deficit between what is needed and what is produced increases. It is predicted that that only 20 million bags of maize would be harvested in 2009 against an annual consumption of 30 million bags. Virtually all food producing regions registered a shortfall because of the failure of the “long rains”. The provisions of the Agriculture Act that require that appropriate soil and water conservation measures are practiced on farms have not been effectively imple-mented. Further, the extension services have faced many challenges, including limited financing and staffing, which has in turn resulted in limited technical assistance being provided to farmers. The percentage of the national budget allo-cated to agriculture has been criticized by analysts as being too low to ensure food security. This allocation rose from 4.5% of the national budget to 8% in 2009. However, analysts recommend that the amount should be raised to at least 20% of the national budget.

Climate Change Strategy will include recommendations for a suitable institu-tional framework, including the policy, legal and organizational arrangements, to promote climate change adaptation and mitigation measures. The Draft National Climate Change Strategy is scheduled to be ready by December 2009, in time for COP 15 of UNFCCC in Copenhagen. �

From page 15

May / June 2010 17

By Daniel Otunge

A NEW REPORT on challenges facing agricultural production concludes that transforming the agricultural sector to meet the

challenges of climate change, high population growth, and global financial crisis will require radical changes.

This is even more imperative in sub-Sa-haran Africa, where agricultural productivity has been on the decline due to poor soils, less use of fertilizers, low adoption of innovative seeds, lack of access to credit and general poor investments in agricultural research and development.

The report calls for urgent reforming of the current “fragmented global system of research and development,” in order to better serve the small-scale farmers, while making food pro-duction more sustainable and more resilient to future climatic and energy shocks.

Funded by various development agen-cies, including the World Bank, European Commission, and the UK Department for International Development, the report was a befitting curtain raiser for the first Global Conference on Agricultural Research for Development (GCARD), held 28-31 March in Montpellier, France.

The conference, which was tasked by the G8 to turn priorities on future needs in agriculture into constructive actions to reshape its future, brought together nearly one thousand participants, including World Food Prize Laureates, heads of international organizations, agriculture ministers, farmers, civil society groups, community development organizations, leading scientists, and private sector innovators.

According to World Bank estimates, some 1.4 billion people were already living in pov-erty in 2005, well before the 2007 food price increases and the 2008 financial crisis. Since the financial crisis, an additional 100 million people are now believed to have joined the ranks of the poor and hungry, according to both FAO and World Bank estimates.

“It is clear that the Millennium Devel-opment Goal of substantially reducing the world’s hungry by 2015 will not be met. A major cause has been a steady decline in policy attention to agriculture and rural de-velopment,” said Uma Lele, the lead author of the report and Former Senior Adviser at the World Bank.

In fact little has been done by developed and developing countries alike to deal with the daunting challenge of hunger with long term- development assistance to agriculture and rural development. Although over the 1981 to 2007 period, the share of net aid flows to developing countries has become negative, less of it has been going to agriculture.

Although there has been remarkable progress in food production over the past half-century, with historically unprecedented improvements when agricultural research and development were given primacy, those benefits were spread unevenly. Substantial changes are needed to level the playing field and to enable Africa, for example to develop their suitable agricultural models.

The report predicts that the global popula-

tion will likely reach 9 billion by about 2050, mostly from developing countries. Urban populations will increase from today’s 3.4 billion to well over 6billion. With higher in-comes and different tastes, diets in developing countries will shift from low- to high- value cereals, poultry, meats, fruits and vegetables. While this will constitute an improvement for many, this major shift in consumer preference for nutritional security is also likely to be accompanied by hunger and poverty in the countries with the poorest populations.

The authors contend that there should be enough knowledge and resources available—or that can be mobilized—to tackle the prob-lems of poverty and hunger, if the system for doing so could be massively overhauled. The report sets an approach for transforming the current global system of cooperation in agricultural research for development into “a coherent whole so as to achieve more rapid, scaled-up and sustainable impacts on food security, poverty, and the environment.”

This pattern of concentration parallels what is happening in overall science spending throughout the world, according to the report. In developed countries, agricultural R&D has also become increasingly concentrated in a handful of countries, with just four coun-tries (the United States, Japan, France, and Germany) accounting for 66% of all global public R&D conducted in 2000. Similarly, just five developing countries (China, India, Brazil, Thailand and South Africa) undertook just over 53% of the developing countries’ public agricultural R&D in 2000—up from 40% in 1981. Meanwhile, in 2000, a total of 80 countries with a combined population of approximately 625 million people conducted only 6.3% of total agricultural R&D.

To meet the backlog of underinvestment alone, the report calls increasing agricultural research investments in developing countries to 1.5 percent of agricultural GDP, more than double or triple the current investments in scientific capacity and institutions and de-livery mechanisms at both the national and international levels.

Some analysts say that to meet FAO estimates of food demand in 2050, annual investments in developing countries of about US $210 billion gross or US $83 billion net would be needed annually after allowing for depreciation of the existing stock of capital. This is an increase of almost 50% over cur-rent levels. These needs would decline over time with increased efficiency in agriculture and decelerating demand for food, say the global authors.

Currently, the Consultative Group on In-ternational Agricultural Research (CGIAR), which was set up by the World Bank and

wealthy country donors in the 1970s to de-velop new crop varieties, farm management techniques and innovations to farmers in the developing world, constitutes about 4-5% of the total global public sector expenditures on agricultural research, according to the report. The CGIAR’s Strategic Results Framework has estimated that public agricultural research and development for developing countries would need to increase from the current $5.1 billion to $16.4 billion by 2025 of which the $1.6 billion would need to be the CGIAR element.

Options deployed over the previous five decades for ensuring big productivity gains to meet the enormous and diverse food needs of the future are no longer on the table or the most sustainable options, say the authors.

To get the production increases needed, the authors call for a broader approach to agricul-tural research for development that departs from the traditional approach that keeps scien-tists who develop a technology separate from the process that delivers that new technology to farmers. The report calls for greater partici-pation amongst a broad range of stakeholders in the seed-to-table chain of events—from the rural farmer to the scientist, in addition to the players in between, including extension offi-cers, the private sector, national and regional agricultural programs, and civil society.

It also calls for recognizing and drawing on the tremendous innovation of farmers them-selves. According to the authors, agriculture is highly context-specific and needs to move away from the expectation that research ad-vances can be applied as one recipe—or single models as silver bullets—developed globally and applied locally. �

Radical Changes Needed to Boost World Food Production

Agricultural Economics

Annual investments in developing countries of up to $210 billion required to get agriculture moving again.

By Maina Waruru

Scientists and wildlife authorities are starting field trials of the first promising vaccine for a devastating cattle disease that plagues farmers across East Africa.

Malignant catarrhal fever (MCF) is trans-mitted from wildebeest to cattle during the annual migration of over a million wildebeest across the Serengeti and Maasai Mara in Kenya and Tanzania. The cattle die five days after symp-toms are observed.

About a tenth of the around 100,000 Maasai livestock are ravaged by MCF ev-ery year according to Sarah Cleaveland, an expert in animal diseases and local liveli-hoods at the United Kingdom’s University of Glasgow.

Scientists had been searching for a vaccine for 50 years but, two years ago, researchers from the University of Nottingham in the UK, in collabora-tion with wildlife authorities in Tanzania, developed what they say is the first potential vaccine for the disease.

They will spend the next three years conducting field trials in Tanzania to gauge the vaccine’s efficacy before venturing into commercial production in about five years, according to lead researcher David Haig, professor of animal infection and im-munity at the University of Nottingham.

The vaccine is given through the nose and so makes immedi-

ate contact with the virus, which cattle pick up from the ground while they are grazing.

Haig said that previous vaccines failed because they were injected into the bloodstream.

He added that the vaccine works under experimental conditions in the UK. “We are confident it will work

in the field but it may require some further im-provements,” he said.

MCF is harboured by wildebeest calves born during the migration. To avoid it, pas-toralists move their cattle to higher ground.

This exposes the cattle to other diseases such as East Coast fever and trypanosomia-sis, said Mathew Kibaara , Kenya’s former deputy director of veterinary services.

The vaccine, if successful, would be of great help not only to the Masai, who depend

solely on livestock for their livelihoods, but also to other pastoralists and farmers in eastern and

southern Africa. Organisations involved in the research include the Tanza-

nia Wildlife Research Institute, Tanzania National Parks and VETAID, Tanzania. The project is part of a £13m initiative funded by the UK’s Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Re-search Council and the Department for International Develop-ment.

- Source SciDev

Cattle Fever Vaccine on TrialWildebeest on their annual migration pass the virus on to local livestock

May / June 201018

Malaria

By Dora Shey in Doula, Cameroon

When a patient ar-rives at a health center in Camer-oon with a fever,

headache, and temperatures of over 40 degrees, he is first treated for malaria before any other diag-nosis is carried out.

This is because the most com-mon disease diagnosed in health centers in Cameroon is malaria. When one visits a health center in the country most of the patients, especially children admitted suf-fer from malaria. Malaria affects people of all ages. A minimum of 3 million cases of malaria are reported each year in Cameroon by the health facilities. Children of 0-5 years and pregnant women are the most affected group. But the fact remains that every person has a minimum of one malaria crises each year even though he may not have it treated in a health facility. In the schools head teach-ers say malaria accounts for more than75% of cases of absenteeism from classes. In the public and private sectors, employers say a major cause of absence from work can be attributed to malaria.

Statistics from the malaria con-trol unit show that malaria was re-sponsible for 40% of cases seen in out- patient consultations in chil-dren and 42% of cases in pregnant women in health structures in the country. Malaria was also seen to be responsible for 65% of deaths in children below 5 years and 5% of deaths in pregnant women. In other words children and pregnant women are the most vulnerable groups. Malaria accounts for 40%

of deaths in children of less than 5 years. There is no doubt that these figures are underestimated since they are not obtained from all the health units and where we know notification is usually incomplete and bias.

Malaria has been seen as a major public health problem in Cameroon. It is a leading cause of morbidity in the country. A lead-ing survey conducted in 2004 by the National Malaria Control Pro-gram shows that malaria accounts for 40.1% morbidity among the general population with variations in regions. In the forest region in the southern part of the country morbidity rates stand at40.6%, in the savannah region of the west-ern side the rates stand at 35.5% and 44.7% in the savannah-forest transition zone of the northern regions.

The most common plasmo-dium specie is the Plasmodium falciparum, closely followed by plasmodium malariea. The anopholine fauna in Cameroon is one of the richest in Africa. In fact researchers say that there are 48 species of anopholeses in the country and they are mostly found in the forest and savannah areas. This is why morbidity rates are high in this part of the country.

Studies also carried out show that there are essentially three ways of transmission in Cam-eroon and this is linked to the various regions and the prevailing climatic conditions. There is con-tinuous transmission in the forest zones of the south where inocula-tion rates are about 100 infective bites per person per month. Sec-ondly we have the long seasonal transmission zones of six to nine

months in the centre region of the country. Here the transmission is intense during the rainy season and can amount to twenty infec-tive bites per person per month. Finally we have the short seasonal transmission period in the sudano-sahelien zone of the north region where inoculation bites are at an average of ten infective bites per person per month during the short rainy season.

Malaria prevention in Cam-eroon is based mainly on vector control through insecticide treated bed nets and indoor residual spraying. Hundreds of thousands of insecticide bed nets are regu-larly being distributed to preg-nant women and to women with children under the age of 5. The government’s target is to reach the vulnerable groups in all the regions in the country. Yet this ac-tivity has been very irregular since government has to depend on its partner to purchase the nets. Also the population still has to adopt the culture of sleeping under in-secticide bed nets while putting away all the prejudices. One other problem faced is in relation to the monitoring of the susceptibility of vectors to the various insecticides. This is to detect as soon as pos-sible any resistance that would undermine the effectiveness of existing tools.

DrugsThere has been a lot of re-

sistance to anti malaria drugs in Cameroon and more particularly to chloroquine. Yet this was the most accessible and the most used first line treatment of uncompli-cated malaria in Cameroon. It was in 1985 that the first cases of resis-

tance were noticed in Limbe, a sea side town ,in the southwest region of the country. Faced with this growing situation the government decided to adopt, amodiaquine, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and new artemesimin-based as the recognized treatment in the coun-try in areas of chemo resistance. These drugs are available today in the country even in generic form. They can be purchased in all health structures at afford-able prices thanks to distribution mechanism put in place by the National Center for Essential Drugs. For example a malaria patient does not need more than 2 dollars to treat a bout of malaria. (1000cfa frs). Despite these ef-forts there is the continuous prob-lem of resistance developed by some patients to some drugs. This is as a result of auto medication widely practiced in the population and failure to follow up treatment to the end by patients once they show signs of recovery.

Economic impactIn Cameroon like in most

countries affected by this disease, the burden of malaria is enormous both from the social and economic point of view. In Cameroon ma-laria has been seen as a cause and consequence of poverty. In most industries this disease has been seen to lead to a loss of work time ( sick leave, hospitaliza-tion, convalescent period) the cost of treatment and prevention, children and adults, because of malaria induced anemia need blood transfusion are exposed to the HIV/AIDS or hepatitis B and lost of wellbeing on account of malaria. �

Malaria - Most Common Disease in Cameroon

A minimum of 3 million cases of malaria are reported each year by the health facilities

Roll Back Malaria Partnership goals also aims to eliminate ma-laria in up to 10 countries by 2015 and afterwards in all countries that are currently in the pre-elimination phase. In the long-term, eradicate malaria worldwide by reducing the global incidence to zero through progressive elimination in coun-tries.

However, unlike before, Africa is well placed to eradicate malaria if the governments, medical experts and the general public remain deter-mined because there are increased options that are available in large scale. These include effective treatment using ACT-L, Insecticide treated nets and residual spraying. Indeed some nations managed to eradicate malaria via widespread environment spraying and destruc-tion of mosquito breeding grounds by draining stagnant water while using nets to keep out mosquitoes at night.

However, it has to be said that Africa seems to be heavily rely-ing on donors and global goodwill while putting minimal efforts in terms of budgetary allocations. In fact few nations can directly pin-point what they really allocate for the war against malaria. Still there have been credible claims that in some countries even the donor money has been misused while the dangerous tendency to get substan-dard drugs haunt most countries including Kenya. There seems to be minimal willingness even from local experts to ensure that substan-dard drugs are not just kept out but some legal actions taken against importers and manufacturers.In other words only inefficiency and corruption could stop some African nations from eradicating malaria. �

Cyrus Ndiritu 24th August 1949 - 7th March 2010OBITUARY

Dr Cyrus Ndiritu was the Director of Kenya Agri-cultural Research Insti-tute (KARI) for 11 years

(1989-2000). He helped give KARI a firm foundation in biotechnology making it one of Africa’s top R&D institutions, especially with schol-arship arrangements with donors, which resulted in KARI having highly skilled researchers with Ph.D.s in and masters degrees. He played key role in advancing agricultural research in Africa.

He was keen on regional co-operation and helped create the Association for Strengthening Research in East and Central Af-rica (ASARECA) in 1994, and the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA).

Dr Ndiritu was known for his strong views on the need for Africa to practically acquire the capac-ity and determination needed to control pests, insects, worms and various microbes that damage crops while improving soil fertil-ity and minimizing post harvest storage losses. Combining all these, he often said, resulted in the possibility of farmers losing almost two thirds of their yield potential.

Some of his famous quotes included “ it’s nice to be romantic about not using chemicals, not us-ing fertilisers, not using transgenic technology, it’s nice to talk about those things. But for some people in Africa the choice is between life and death. Hunger, poverty

and deprivation have a stronghold on Africa. And if Africa is going to get out of these it has to embrace modern technologies, including GM technology.” Dr. Ndiritu studied veterinary medicine at University of Nairobi, did a Master of Sci-ence degree in pathology from the University of California-Davis,US and Ph.D. from the University of Nairobi. He had a positive attitude and deeply believed that Africa will soon overcome its food production problems.

Among those who mourned Dr Ndiritu’s death is the Executive Director of FARA, Dr Monty Jones, whose award winning research resulted in the New Rice for Africa (NERICA) which needs no irriga-tion.

According to the obituary by Dr Monty Jones in the FARA news-letter ..“We in the international community are aware of the great contributions he made to advancing the cause of African agricultural research and advisory services. He served as a scientist, a manager and a director of several important institutions and on many reviews and boards because he was recog-nised as an accomplished scientist with a great depth of experience and sound judgement. These are attributes that are in short supply and for which he will be missed by the colleagues with whom he served. More importantly, we have all lost a friend whose cheerful can-dour attitude to life was a constant source of inspiration.” �

Dr Cyrus Ndiritu was the Director of Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) for 11 years (1989-2000).

From page 1

Africa Can Eradicate Malaria

May / June 2010 19

Malaria

May / June 2010 19

A decade ago, the rav-ages caused by malar-ia in Africa and other parts of the globe were

barely visible to world leaders in prosperous western cities like New York. A disease of poverty, malaria silently devastated com-munities across the global South. Its victims - mostly children and pregnant women in Africa - could do little to exercise their unalienable right to life, health, education and dignity. For them, the Universal Declaration of Hu-man Rights remained a lofty ide-al, touching in its humanity but tragically out of reach.

But in this new millennium, a wind of change has stirred Africa and the world.

In 2000, African Heads of State committed to bold targets to reduce malaria cases and deaths on the continent by 2010. World leaders put forth the challenge of “halting by 2015 and revers-ing the incidence of malaria,” as one of the eight Millennium Development Goals, to which all UN member states committed. A global public-private partnership - Roll Back Malaria - started unit-ing the expertise and resources of hundreds of governments, multi-lateral and donor organizations, foundations, NGOs, researchers and the private sector to stop the spread of malaria.

And then it was your work over the years, the tireless ef-forts of hundreds of RBM Part-

ner institutions, the energy and commitment of global activists and advocates that took the fight against malaria from remote vil-lages in Africa to the heart of world capitals and megacities.

As an African woman, a mother, a doctor, and the Ex-ecutive Director of the RBM Partnership, I am also deeply grateful to Her Royal Highness Princess Astrid of Belgium - RBM’s Special Representative since 2007 - for her invaluable contribution to global advocacy and fund-raising for malaria control. She has brought much more than hope to Africa. She made country efforts visible, she brought donor support to control programmes, helping countries and partners save lives. Thank you, Your Highness.

The theme for World Malaria Day this year is “Counting Ma-laria Out.”

The vision for this theme re-flects an unprecedented ambi-tion. It is based on the realistic opportunity we now have before us to drastically reduce malaria deaths, start eliminating the dis-ease and eventually eradicate it.

A decade ago we counted in horror the millions who died or fell sick of malaria. Today we can also count the lives that have been saved thanks to high net coverage, the children who have survived their 5th birthday and the pregnant women who have had healthy pregnancies and

healthy babies because of access to effective malaria prevention and treatment.

Experience over the past few years has clearly demonstrated that with resources, political lead-ership and a sound action strategy, it is possible to increase coverage with malaria interventions and that when that happens, the ma-laria burden falls dramatically.

With remarkable ten fold in-creases in funding for malaria control since 2004, countries like Eritrea, Swaziland, Botswana, Equatorial Guinea, Zambia and other countries have reduced ma-laria deaths and cases by 50 percent though widespread application of effective measures countries.

Across Africa countries are ramping up efforts to improve access to interventions and reach for the 2010 targets of achieving

universal coverage and halving malaria mortality. Congo and Ni-geria for instance - which togeth-er bear 36 percent of the malaria burden are currently mounting the largest net distribution campaigns in the history of malaria control in an effort to rapidly protect at risk populations with bednets.

But 2010 is not only a mile-stone year for endemic countries. It is also a test year for the inter-national community and foreign donors. The challenges to mul-tiplying successes in Africa and the rest of the world are many, especially in high-burden coun-tries where health and data col-lection systems are often weak, infrastructure is poor, human re-sources are inadequately trained and paid and access to interna-tional funding often uncertain.

Development aid needs to con-tinue flowing to national malaria control programs to sustain prog-ress as well as bring it to all of Africa and to other regions where malaria is a major health problem.

Universal coverage is not tar-get-setting for its own sake. It is based on solid scientific evidence, which shows that malaria control interventions work and that they contribute to achieving broader health and development goals.

Malaria control improves child survival and maternal health and preserves both lives and liveli-hoods. It keeps parents at work, children and teachers at school and lifts barriers to reaching the vision

of the Millennium Declaration.It is equally fitting that this

year Word Malaria Day was commemorated at the highest level in the Republic of Tanza-nia, a country which is showing much success in all aspects of malaria control. The Island of Zanzibar has set a gold standard example in succeeding in reduc-ing malaria deaths by more 71 percent. Tanzania also continues to nurture essential malaria re-search and trials which will take us into the future with new tools and vaccines. It is also in Tanza-nia that innovations in new tech-nology have inspired the long lasting mosquito net and where - telephone technology has been tested in an effort to track stocks of life-saving drugs.

I would like to acknowledge the inspirational leadership of His Excellency Jakaya Kikwete, who has taken up malaria as a global health challenge and is leading the continent of Africa as Chair of the African Leaders Ma-laria Alliance - ALMA - to meet the global targets set in Abuja in 2000, as well as answering the call for Universal Coverage, and moving forward towards the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals.

The evidence we have today gives us good reason to believe that it is possible to count malar-ia out in many countries this year and reach for the ambitious goals of the Millennium. �

Counting Malaria Out

Tanzania Hosts World Malaria Day 2010 Commemorations

Edited Version of the Speech by Professor Awa Marie Coll-SeckExecutive Director, Roll Back Malaria Partnership On World Malaria Day

Tanzania was honoured to host this year’s World Malaria Day commem-orations that took place on 25th April 2010 in Dar Es Salaam attended

by President Jakaya Mrisho Kikwete, who is also the Chairman of the newly formed Afri-can Leaders Malaria Alliance (ALMA). Other dignitaries included WHO Representative for Tanzania – Dr Rufaro Chatora, the Execu-tive Director of Roll Back Malaria – Dr Awa Coll-Seck and the American Ambassador to Tanzania – Alfonso E. Lenhardt. President Kikwete said that Tanzania still faces some challenges in the war against malaria.

He said if others have been able to elimi-nate malaria, Tanzania can also be able to do so. He emphasized that the government will continue focusing on effective treatment of malaria cases, protection from mosquito bites using Long Lasting Insecticidal Nets (LLINs) and killing of mosquitoes through use of insecticides as well as environmental management. �

Our Clients include NGOs, UN agencies, International Organizations

and Parastatals.Specialists in Mechanical Services, Panel Beating, Spray Painting &

Upholstery for All Types of Vehicles

Ngong Road, Opp Race CourseP.O. Box 69494

Tel. 254-722-735682; 578244Nairobi, Kenya

Professor Awa Marie Coll-Seck

May / June 201020

Published at Kilimani Complex, 2nd Floor by ScienceAfrica P.O. Box 57458-00200, Nairobi-Kenya, Tel: 020-2053532 / 2473370

ScienceAfrica

The Leading Publication in Science,

Innovation and Development

Vol. 10 May/June 2010

May / June 201020

● The harmonized regional draft policies and guidelines on GMO planting, trade in GMO products and emergency food aid with GM content are revised to incorporate the stakeholders’ comments and presented to COMESA policy organs for endorsement.

● COMESA institutionalizes a Regional Biosafety and Centralized GMO Risk Assessment Desk.

● Endorse the draft Biosafety Roadmap and urge COMESA to sensitize, identify gaps and support implementation in Member States.

● Endorse the draft Communication Strategy and urge COMESA to operationalise it in alignment with its short- and long-term programs.

● COMESA commits resources to support operations of the Panel of Experts and the GMO Risk Assessment Subcommittees.

● COMESA develops long-term biotechnology/biosafety Program for the Region.

Done at Nairobi, this 20th Day of April 2010.

COMESA Regional Workshop on Biotechnology, Biosafety Policies and Guidelines

Participants in The COMESA Regional Workshop on Biotechnology, Biosafety Policies and GuidelinesNAIROBI, KENYA, 19-20 APRIL, 2010

� �� � �

� �

SEGENET KELEMU (Ethiopia) Director of the BecA-ILRI Hub. She has experienced the challenges and successes associated with African agriculture first-hand, from field to high-tech laboratory. Under her leadership since 2007, BecA Hub research capacity, staff, facilities, funding, partners and training programs have expanded at an ever acceler-ating pace.

Dr. Kelemu is a molecular plant pathologist with exten-sive experience in molecular determinants of host-patho-

gen interactions; devel-opment of novel plant disease control strategies including transgenics, biopesticides; pathogen population genetics and dynamics; and endo-phytic microbes and their role in plant develop-ment. She was awarded a MSc degree in Plant Pathology/Genetics from Montana State Universi-ty, USA, and earned her PhD in Molecular Plant Pathology at Kansas State University, USA.

- Source BecA-ILRI

In Africa people still associate urban life with improved mental and physical health. It is assumed that those in urban centres have higher income, plenty of

nutritious food, better housing, safe water supply and improved sanitation. However, the theme for the 2010 World Health Day- April 7th - focused on the need to pay more attention on the pressing health needs of rapidly increasing urban populations.

The global goals of the WHO campaign hav-ing 1000 cities open public spaces to health activities including opening up public spaces to health, whether it be activities in parks, town hall meetings, clean-up campaigns, or closing off portions of streets to motorized vehicles. It also included collecting 1000 stories of urban health champions who have taken action and had a significant impact on health in their cities.

Know Your Scientists

WHO Focuses on Urban Centres

Workshop Communique