Is there one ideal variety registration model that every country should adopt? Variety registration is not a one-size-fits-all scenario but there are certain characteristics that every variety registration system should have — flexibility and a market-driven focus.
A responsive and efficient seed regulatory system contributes to the success of a country’s crop production sector. However, each country has its own regulations when it comes to variety registration. As the seed industry evolves, it’s becoming more clear that while these variety registration systems around the world can differ, one common theme needs to exist for seed industries to ensure their end users are successful — a flexible variety registration system that meets the needs of the various value chains of the many different crops found in that country.
Streamline the System
The Canadian government has taken a leadership role in updating its variety registration system. This past year, it began reviewing Canada’s crop variety registration system with the goal of streamlining it.
Stakeholders were asked to consider four alternatives in an issues and policy paper prepared by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the Canadian Grain Commission. Options ranged from allowing flexibility in the current, recently revised system to eliminating the federal government’s role in the variety registration process completely.
The following results were collected after the comment period ended in November:
• Allow the flexibility inherent in the current variety registration system to emerge, which was supported by 37 percent of respondents.
• Streamline the regulatory process by requiring that all crops meet minimum registration requirements with the option for some crops to have merit assessment through an independent assessment process, which was supported by 27 per cent of respondents.
• Streamline the process by maintaining a minimum level of government oversight, and eliminate any merit assessment or performance data under the variety registration system, which was supported by 17 per cent of respondents.
• Withdraw the federal government’s role in variety registration, allowing industry or third parties to assume these functions, which was supported by 13 per cent.
Following the survey, Patty Townsend, CEO of the Canadian Seed Trade Association, worked with members to release a statement, which requests that any revisions to the variety registration system maintain current exemptions from registration such as corn and the ability to exempt crop species, types and kinds from registration (with a first priority of exempting oilseed type soybeans from registration). The statement also called for all crop species, kinds and types to be placed in Part 3 of Schedule III of the Seeds Regulations, providing government oversight but removing merit requirements and the need for a recommendation from a recognized recommending committee, except where the value chain for the crop kind provides the rationale and consensus for the crop kind to remain in Part I or Part II.
On June 4, CFIA released a notice to the industry, stating that regulatory changes are now in effect that streamline the variety registration process for new oilseed soybean and forage varieties. It says the amendments provide a more efficient approval process and support faster access to innovative varieties that are in global demand. New oilseed soybean and forage crop varieties can now be expedited as the registration process has been simplified. Specifically, pre-registration testing and merit assessments will no longer be required. All relevant safety assessments will continue. An application to register a new plant variety is only permitted after these safety assessments are complete and the variety is deemed safe for commercial production.
To reduce duplication, the amended regulations have removed the option to suspend a variety registration.
The variety registration system is designed to prevent fraud, support seed certification, foster international trade and enable tracking in the marketplace, according to CFIA. The relevant amendments to the Seeds Regulations included moving oilseed soybean and forage crop varieties from Part I to Part III of Schedule III.
Meet the Market’s Needs
Ken Nelson, president of Alberta-based K L Nelson Associates Inc. and breeders representative for KWS-UK, says Canada has work to do to improve its variety registration process. He feels the Canadian system needs to be market-based versus regulatory-based. “The system in Canada is regulatory-based, whereas the United States and Australia have market-driven systems,” he says. “The marketplace should determine what is grown.”
While it’s hard to compare variety registrations from country to country, Nelson says that as nations look to streamline their systems, they need to look around the world for successes and then apply that to their own needs — all while keeping the market in mind. “Is variety registration in line with the needs of the commercial industry? That’s what we need to ask,” he says. “Can new varieties come through the system fast enough to meet the needs of the marketplace? Variety registration systems have to be highly responsive.”
The United States doesn’t have a formal variety registration system in place, but relies on the marketplace to determine which varieties best meet the needs of farmers.
“It’s preferable to offer the market and farmers ample freedom to make varietal choices and allow the market to drive decisions about which varieties can be purchased,” says Bernice Slutsky, American Seed Trade Association senior vice president of domestic and international policy. “This system allows new varieties to be more quickly introduced into the market and adopted by farmers, thus giving farmers more immediate access to the benefits of new advances in breeding.” But governments and industries must keep in mind the varying dynamics at play from country to country.
“There is no ‘one model,’ even within Canada,” Townsend says. “The variety registration system needs to be flexible to accommodate the needs of the value chains of the many different crops in Canada. We need a flexible, transparent and nimble system that can ensure our plant breeders and variety developers have the tools they need to give farmers access to varieties that best suit their needs.”
Julie McNabb
