| | english | español | français |
Go to record ID

  Home|Finding Information|Record details   Printer-friendly version

Second Regular National Report on the Implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
Record information and status
Record ID
102631
Status
Published
Date of creation
2011-10-31 09:23 UTC (rmhike@biosafetyzim.ac.zw)
Date of last update
2014-03-31 13:15 UTC (jmufandaedza@gmail.com)
Date of publication
2014-03-31 13:15 UTC (jmufandaedza@gmail.com)

Origin of report
Country
  • Zimbabwe
Contact officer for report
Coordinates
Dr JONATHAN MUFANDAEDZA
Chief Executive Officer
National Biotechnology Authority of Zimbabwe (NBA)
21 Princess Drive Newlands
Harare
Zimbabwe, +263
Phone:+263 776 901997
Email:jmufandaedza@gmail.com
Consulted stakeholders
9. Organizations/stakeholders who were consulted or participated in the preparation of this report
1. Ministry of Agriculture
2. Plant Quarantine Services
3. Seed Services
4. Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources
5. Veterinary Department
6. Ministry of Health
Submission
10. Date of submission
2011-11-01
11. Time period covered by this report
Start date
2007-10-01
Time period covered by this report
End date
2011-10-01
Party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
12. Is your country a Party to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB)?
  • Yes
Article 2 – General provisions
15. Has your country introduced the necessary legal, administrative and other measures for the implementation of the Protocol?
  • A domestic regulatory framework is fully in place
16. Which specific instruments are in place for the implementation of your national biosafety framework?
  • One or more national biosafety laws
17. Has your country established a mechanism for the budgetary allocations of funds for the operation of its national biosafety framework?
  • Yes
18. Does your country have permanent staff to administer functions directly related to the national biosafety framework?
  • Yes
19. If you answered Yes to question 18, how many permanent staff members are in place whose functions are directly related to the national biosafety framework?
  • More than 10
20. Has your country’s biosafety framework / laws / regulations / guidelines been submitted to the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH)?
  • Yes
21. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 2 in your country:
National biosafety framework  has been in place since 1998. In 1998, the Research Act was amended to provide for the management of potentially harmful technologies and undertakings. In 2000, the Research (Biosafety) Regulations were developed and gazetted. National policy on biotechnology and its safe use was developed in 2005. In 2005, the Government through the National Policy on Biotechnology agreed to allocate 0.5% of GDP towards biotechnology research, development, application and regulation. To reinforce the policy framework, a new law establishing the National Biotechnology Authority into place - the National Biotechnology Authority Act  [cap. 14.31] of 2006                                                                                                    ]
Article 5 – Pharmaceuticals
22. Does your country regulate the transboundary movement, handling and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) which are pharmaceuticals?
  • Yes
23. If you answered Yes to question 22, has this information been submitted to the BCH?
  • No
24. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 5 in your country:
All phamaceuticals are controlled by the Medicines Control Authority of Zimbabwe. They however refer to the NBA requests for new products from GMOs                                                                                                 
Article 6 – Transit and Contained use
25. Does your country regulate the transit of LMOs?
  • Yes
26. Does your country regulate the contained use of LMOs?
  • Yes
27. If you answered Yes to questions 25 or 26, has this information been submitted to the BCH?
  • Not applicable
28. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 6 in your country:
Imports and exports are screened for the presence of LMOs . We have not yet had any case of LMOs transiting through our country.                                      
Articles 7 to 10 – Advance Informed Agreement (AIA) and intentional introduction of LMOs into the environment
29. Has your country adopted law(s) / regulations / administrative measures for the operation of the AIA procedure of the Protocol?
  • Yes
30. Has your country adopted a domestic regulatory framework consistent with the Protocol regarding the transboundary movement of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes
31. Has your country established a mechanism for taking decisions regarding first intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes
32. If you answered Yes to question 31, does the mechanism also apply to cases of intentional introduction of LMOs into the environment that were not subject to transboundary movement?
  • Yes
33. Has your country established a mechanism for monitoring potential effects of LMOs that are released into the environment?
  • Yes
34. Does your country have the capacity to detect and identify LMOs?
  • Yes, to some extent
35. Has your country established legal requirements for exporters under its jurisdiction to notify in writing the competent national authority of the Party of import prior to the intentional transboundary movement of an LMO that falls within the scope of the AIA procedure?
  • Yes
36. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information contained in the notification?
  • Yes
37. Has your country ever received an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • No
38. Has your country ever taken a decision on an application / notification regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • No
41. In the current reporting period, how many applications/notifications has your country received regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • None
42. In the current reporting period, how many decisions has your country taken regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • None
50. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Articles 7-10 in your country, including measures in case of lack of scientific certainty on potential adverse effects of LMOs for intentional introduction to the environment:
With regard to the intentional introduction of LMOs into the environment , Zimbabwe refers to the National Biotechnology Authority Act of 2006 and guidelines for planned release of LMOs into the environment.                                      
Article 11 – Procedure for living modified organisms intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (LMOs-FFP)
51. Has your country adopted specific law(s) or regulation(s) for decision-making regarding domestic use, including placing on the market, of LMOs-FFP?
  • Yes
52. Has your country established legal requirements for the accuracy of information to be provided by the applicant?
  • Yes
53. Has your country established a mechanism to ensure that decisions regarding LMOs-FFP that may be subject to transboundary movement will be communicated to the Parties through the BCH?
  • Yes
54. Has your country established a mechanism for taking decisions on the import of LMOs-FFP?
  • Yes
55. Has your country declared through the BCH that in the absence of a regulatory framework its decisions prior to the first import of an LMO-FFP will be taken according to Article 11.6 of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety?
  • No
56. Has your country indicated its needs for financial and technical assistance and capacity building in respect of LMOs-FFP?
  • Yes
57. Has your country ever taken a decision on LMOs-FFP (either on import or domestic use)?
  • Yes
58. How many LMOs-FFP has your country approved to date?
  • None
59. In the current reporting period, how many decisions has your country taken regarding the import of LMOs-FFP?
  • More than 10
60. In the current reporting period, how many decisions has your country taken regarding domestic use, including placing on the market, of LMOs-FFP?
  • More than 10
61. Has your country informed the Parties through the BCH of its decision(s) regarding import, of LMOs-FFP?
  • No
62. Has your country informed the Parties through the BCH of its decision(s) regarding domestic use, including placing on the market, of LMOs-FFP within 15 days?
  • No
63. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 11 in your country, including measures in case of lack of scientific certainty on potential adverse effects of LMOs-FFP:
LMOS FFPs are handled on a case by case basis to augment national stocks and in emergence situations. The National Biotechnology Authority supervises the handling of all LMOs to ensure that no material enters into the environment.                                            
Article 12 – Review of decision
64. Has your country established a mechanism for the review and change of a decision regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • Yes
65. Has your country ever received a request for a review of a decision?
  • No
66. Has your country ever reviewed / changed a decision regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • No
67. In the current reporting period, how many decisions were reviewed and/or changed regarding an intentional transboundary movement of an LMO?
  • None
71. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 12 in your country:
In cases where new evidence is received approval decisions can be reviewed.                                                   
Article 13 – Simplified procedure
72. Has your country established a system for the application of the simplified procedure regarding an intentional transboundary movement of LMOs?
  • Yes
73. Has your country ever applied the simplified procedure?
  • No
75. In the current reporting period, how many LMOs has your country applied the simplified procedure to?
  • None
Article 14 – Bilateral, regional and multilateral agreements and arrangements
77. Has your country entered into any bilateral, regional or multilateral agreements or arrangements?
  • No
80. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 14 in your country:
Even though guidelines are  there developed by SADC which are on a voluntary basis. They resemble our own system. There are however links between regulatory agencies in the region. There are also guidelines that are being  developed by COMESA though they are not legally binding                                              
Article 15 – Risk assessment
81. Has your country established a mechanism for conducting risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?
  • Yes
82. If you answered Yes to question 81, does this mechanism include procedures for identifying experts to conduct the risk assessments?
  • Yes
83. Has your country established guidelines for how to conduct risk assessments prior to taking decisions regarding LMOs?
  • Yes
84. Has your country acquired the necessary domestic capacity to conduct risk assessment?
  • Yes
85. Has your country established a mechanism for training national experts to conduct risk assessments?
  • Yes
86. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • No
87. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing?
  • Yes
88. If your country has taken decision(s) on LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment or on domestic use of LMOs-FFP, were risk assessments conducted for all decisions taken?
  • Yes, always
89. Has your country submitted summary reports of the risk assessments to the BCH?
  • No
90. In the current reporting period, if your country has taken decisions regarding LMOs, how many risk assessments were conducted in the context of these decisions?
  • None
91. Has your country ever required the exporter to conduct the risk assessment(s)?
  • Yes, always
92. Has your country ever required the notifier to bear the cost of the risk assessment(s) of LMOs?
  • Yes, always
93. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 15 in your country:
LMO FFPs and those LMOs for intentional release into the environment are treated the same because there are chances that LMO FFPs  can escape  into the environment thus the need to conduct risk assessments for all cases.  Risk assessment was done done in 2003 but was overtaken by events.                                      
Article 16 – Risk management
94. Has your country established and maintained appropriate and operational mechanisms, measures and strategies to regulate, manage and control risks identified in risk assessments for:
94.1) LMOs for intentional introduction into the environment?
  • Yes
94.2) LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing?
  • Yes
95. Has your country established and maintained appropriate measures to prevent unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • Yes
96. Has your country taken measures to ensure that any LMO, whether imported or locally developed, undergoes an appropriate period of observation that is commensurate with its life-cycle or generation time before it is put to its intended use?
  • Yes
97. Has your country cooperated with other Parties with a view to identifying LMOs or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity?
  • Yes
98. Has your country cooperated with other Parties with a view to taking measures regarding the treatment of LMOs or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity?
  • Yes
99. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 16 in your country, including any details regarding risk management strategies, also in case of lack of scientific certainty on potential adverse effects of LMOs:
The inspectorate regularly carries out survellinace programmes with the intention of checking for LMOs in imports, exports  and harvests. Field trials involving LMOs are also supervised inorder to minimise unintentional introduction of LMOs into the environment.                                         
Article 17 – Unintentional transboundary movements and emergency measures
100. Has your country made available to the BCH the relevant details setting out its point of contact for the purposes of receiving notifications under Article 17?
  • Yes
101. Has your country established a mechanism for addressing emergency measures in case of unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs that are likely to have significant adverse effect on biological diversity?
  • Yes
102. Has your country implemented emergency measures in response to information about releases that led, or may have led, to unintentional transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • Yes
103. In the current reporting period, how many times has your country received information concerning occurrences that led, or may have led, to unintentional transboundary movement(s) of one or more LMOs to or from territories under its jurisdiction?
  • Never
107. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 17 in your country:
The inpectorate is always on the look out for unintentional transboundary movements  of LMOs. LMOs which are illegally imported are milled under the supervision of the National Biotechnology Authority or destroyed.                                                
Article 18 – Handling, transport, packaging and identification
108. Has your country taken measures to require that LMOs that are subject to transboundary movement are handled, packaged and transported under conditions of safety, taking into account relevant international rules and standards?
  • Yes
109. Has your country taken measures to require that documentation accompanying LMOs-FFP clearly identifies that, in cases where the identity of the LMOs is not known through means such as identity preservation systems, they may contain living modified organisms and are not intended for intentional introduction into the environment, as well as a contact point for further information?
  • Yes
110. Has your country taken measures to require that documentation accompanying LMOs-FFP clearly identifies that, in cases where the identity of the LMOs is known through means such as identity preservation systems, they contain living modified organisms and are not intended for intentional introduction into the environment, as well as a contact point for further information?
  • Yes
111. Has your country taken measures to require that documentation accompanying LMOs that are destined for contained use clearly identifies them as living modified organisms and specifies any requirements for the safe handling, storage, transport and use, the contact point for further information, including the name and address of the individual and institution to whom the LMO are consigned?
  • Yes
112. Has your country taken measures to require that documentation accompanying LMOs that are intended for intentional introduction into the environment of the Party of import, clearly identifies them as living modified organisms; specifies the identity and relevant traits and/or characteristics, any requirements for the safe handling, storage, transport and use, the contact point for further information and, as appropriate, the name and address of the importer and exporter; and contains a declaration that the movement is in conformity with the requirements of this Protocol applicable to the exporter?
  • Yes
113. Does your country have the capacity to enforce the requirements of identification and documentation of LMOs?
  • Yes
114. Has your country established procedures for the sampling and detection of LMOs?
  • Yes
Article 19 – Competent National Authorities and National Focal Points
116. Has your country designated one national focal point for the Cartagena Protocol to be responsible for liaison with the Secretariat?
  • Yes
117. Has your country designated one national focal point for the Biosafety Clearing-House to liaise with the Secretariat regarding issues of relevance to the development and implementation of the BCH?
  • Yes
118. Has your country designated one or more competent national authorities, which are responsible for performing the administrative functions required by the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and are authorized to act on your country’s behalf with respect to those functions?
  • Yes, one
120. Has your country made available the required information referred in questions 116-119 to the BCH?
  • Yes, all information
122. Has your country established adequate institutional capacity to enable the competent national authority(ies) to perform the administrative functions required by the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety?
  • Yes
123. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 19 in your country:
The national focal point for the Cartagena Protocol is the Ministry of Environment and for the BCH it is the National Biotechnology Authority. The national competent authourity for   the Cartagena Protocol is the National Biotechnology Authority.                                        ]
Article 20 – Information Sharing and the Biosafety Clearing-House (BCH)
124. Please provide an overview of the status of the information provided by your country to the BCH by specifying for each category of information whether it is available and whether it has been submitted to the BCH.
124.a) Existing national legislation, regulations and guidelines for implementing the Protocol, as well as information required by Parties for the advance informed agreement procedure (Article 20, paragraph 3 (a))
  • Information available and in the BCH
124.b) National laws, regulations and guidelines applicable to the import of LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (Article 11, paragraph 5)
  • Information available and in the BCH
124.c) Bilateral, multilateral and regional agreements and arrangements (Articles 14, paragraph 2 and 20, paragraph 3 (b))
  • Information not available
124.d) Contact details for competent national authorities (Article 19, paragraphs 2 and 3), national focal points (Article 19, paragraphs 1 and 3), and emergency contacts (Article 17, paragraph 3 (e))
  • Information available and in the BCH
124.e) Reports submitted by the Parties on the operation of the Protocol (Article 20, paragraph 3 (e))
  • Information available but not in the BCH
124.f) Decisions by a Party on regulating the transit of specific living modified organisms (LMOs) (Article 6, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.g) Occurrence of unintentional transboundary movements that are likely to have significant adverse effects on biological diversity (Article 17, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.h) Illegal transboundary movements of LMOs (Article 25, paragraph 3)
  • Information not available
124.i) Final decisions regarding the importation or release of LMOs (i.e. approval or prohibition, any conditions, requests for further information, extensions granted, reasons for decision) (Articles 10, paragraph 3 and 20, paragraph 3(d))
  • Information not available
124.j) Information on the application of domestic regulations to specific imports of LMOs (Article 14, paragraph 4)
  • Information not available
124.k) Final decisions regarding the domestic use of LMOs that may be subject to transboundary movement for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (Article 11, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.l) Final decisions regarding the import of LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing that are taken under domestic regulatory frameworks (Article 11, paragraph 4) or in accordance with annex III (Article 11, paragraph 6) (requirement of Article 20, paragraph 3(d))
  • Information not available
124.m) Declarations regarding the framework to be used for LMOs intended for direct use as food or feed, or for processing (Article 11, paragraph 6)
  • Information available and in the BCH
124.n) Review and change of decisions regarding intentional transboundary movements of LMOs (Article 12, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.o) LMOs granted exemption status by each Party (Article 13, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.p) Cases where intentional transboundary movement may take place at the same time as the movement is notified to the Party of import (Article 13, paragraph 1)
  • Information not available
124.q) Summaries of risk assessments or environmental reviews of LMOs generated by regulatory processes and relevant information regarding products thereof (Article 20, paragraph 3 (c))
  • Information not available
125. Has your country established a mechanism for strengthening the capacity of the BCH National Focal Point to perform its administrative functions?
  • Yes
126. Has your country established a mechanism for the coordination among the BCH National Focal Point, the Cartagena Protocol focal point, and the competent national authority(ies) for making information available to the BCH?
  • Yes
127. Does your country use the information available in the BCH in its decision making processes on LMOs?
  • Yes, always
128. Has your country experienced difficulties accessing or using the BCH?
  • No
129. If you answered Yes to question 128, has your country reported these problems to the BCH or the Secretariat?
  • Not applicable
130. Is the information submitted by your country to the BCH complete and up-to date?
  • Yes
131. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 20 in your country:
Zimbabwe  has successfully completed the BCH project and some of the trained people are now posting information on the BCH website.                                                                                     
Article 21 – Confidential information
132. Has your country established procedures to protect confidential information received under the Protocol?
  • Yes
133. Does your country allow the notifier to identify information that is to be treated as confidential?
  • Yes, always
Article 22 – Capacity-building
135. Has your country received external support or benefited from collaborative activities with other Parties in the development and/or strengthening of human resources and institutional capacities in biosafety?
  • Yes
136. If you answered Yes to question 135, how were these resources made available?
  • Multilateral channels
137. Has your country provided support to other Parties in the development and/or strengthening of human resources and institutional capacities in biosafety?
  • Yes
138. If you answered Yes to question 137, how were these resources made available?
  • Multilateral channels
139. Is your country eligible to receive funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF)?
  • Yes
140. Has your country ever initiated a process to access GEF funds for building capacity in biosafety?
  • Yes
141. If you answered Yes to question 140, how would you characterize the process?
Please add further details about your experience in accessing GEF funds under question 150.
  • Average
142. Has your country ever received funding from the GEF for building capacity in biosafety?
  • Pilot Biosafety Enabling Activity
  • Development of national biosafety frameworks
  • Building Capacity for Effective Participation in the BCH (Phase I)
  • Building Capacity for Effective Participation in the BCH (Phase II)
143. During the current reporting period, has your country undertaken activities for the development and/or strengthening of human resources and institutional capacities in biosafety?
  • Yes
144. If you answered Yes to question 143, in which of the following areas were these activities undertaken?
  • Institutional capacity
  • Human resources capacity development and training
  • Risk assessment and other scientific and technical expertise
  • Risk management
  • Public awareness, participation and education in biosafety
  • Information exchange and data management including participation in the Biosafety Clearing-House
  • Scientific, technical and institutional collaboration at subregional, regional and international levels
  • Identification of LMOs, including their detection
  • Socio-economic considerations
  • Implementation of the documentation requirements under Article 18.2 of the Protocol
  • Handling of confidential information
  • Measures to address unintentional and/or illegal transboundary movements of LMOs
  • Scientific biosafety research relating to LMOs
  • Taking into account risks to human health
145. During the current reporting period, has your country carried out a capacity-building needs assessment?
  • Yes
146. Does your country still have capacity-building needs?
  • Yes
147. If you answered Yes to question 146, indicate which of the following areas still need capacity-building.
  • Institutional capacity
  • Human resources capacity development and training
  • Risk assessment and other scientific and technical expertise
  • Risk management
  • Public awareness, participation and education in biosafety
  • Information exchange and data management including participation in the Biosafety Clearing-House
  • Scientific, technical and institutional collaboration at subregional, regional and international levels
  • Technology transfer
  • Identification of LMOs, including their detection
  • Socio-economic considerations
  • Implementation of the documentation requirements under Article 18.2 of the Protocol
  • Measures to address unintentional and/or illegal transboundary movements of LMOs
  • Scientific biosafety research relating to LMOs
  • Taking into account risks to human health
148. Has your country developed a capacity-building strategy or action plan?
  • Yes
149. Has your country submitted the details of national biosafety experts to the Roster of Experts in the BCH?
  • Yes
150. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 22 in your country, including further details about your experience in accessing GEF funds:
The Government of Zimbabwe has made tremendous efforts in biosafety capacity building. These efforts were complimented by organisations like ICGEB and RAEIN_AFRICA which have assisted in training the country's risk assessors. 
Zimbabwe has applied to receive funds for Building Capacity for Effective Participation in the BCH (Phase II).                               
Article 23 – Public awareness and participation
151. Has your country established a strategy or put in place legislation for promoting and facilitating public awareness, education and participation concerning the safe transfer, handling and use of LMOs?
  • Yes
152. Has your country established a biosafety website?
  • Yes
153. Has your country established a mechanism to ensure public access to information on living modified organisms that may be imported?
  • Yes
154. Has your country established a mechanism to consult the public in the decision-making process regarding LMOs?
  • Yes
155. Has your country established a mechanism to make available to the public the results of decisions taken on LMOs?
  • Yes
156. Has your country taken any initiative to inform its public about the means of public access to the Biosafety Clearing-House?
  • Yes
157. In the current reporting period, has your country promoted and facilitated public awareness, education and participation concerning the safe transfer, handling and use of LMOs?
  • Yes
158. If you answered Yes to question 157, has your country cooperated with other States and international bodies?
  • Yes
159. In the current reporting period, how many times has your country consulted the public in the decision-making process regarding LMOs and made the results of such decisions available to the public?
  • More than 5
160. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 23 in your country:
The country is involved in various public awareness activties and information gaps are constantly checked for and addressed.                                 
Article 24 – Non-Parties
161. Has your country entered into any bilateral, regional, or multilateral agreement with non-Parties regarding transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • No
162. Has your country ever imported LMOs from a non-Party?
  • No
163. Has your country ever exported LMOs to a non-Party?
  • No
166. If your country is not a Party to the Cartagena Protocol, has it contributed information to the BCH on LMOs released in, or moved into, or out of, areas within its national jurisdiction?
  • Not applicable
167. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 24 in your country:
The country has not entered into any agreement with a non party                                                
Article 25 – Illegal transboundary movements
168. Has your country adopted domestic measures aimed at preventing and/or penalizing transboundary movements of LMOs carried out in contravention of its domestic measures to implement this Protocol?
  • Yes
169. Has your country established a strategy for detecting illegal transboundary movements of LMOs?
  • Yes
170. In the current reporting period, how many times has your country received information concerning cases of illegal transboundary movements of an LMO to or from territories under its jurisdiction?
  • Never
175. Here you may provide further details on the implementation of Article 25 in your country:
Officers at ports of entry verify import and export documents. Consignments without the required documentation are held pending submssion of import documents. Samples of consignments are collected and tested for the presence of LMOs. In the event of detection of LMOs consignments are either subjected to supervised milling or destroyed. Permit defaulters are penalised.                                                    
Article 26 – Socio-economic considerations
176. If your country has taken a decision on import, has it ever taken into account socio-economic considerations arising from the impact of the LMO on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity?
  • Yes
177. Has your country cooperated with other Parties on research and information exchange on any socio-economic impacts of LMOs?
  • Yes
Article 27 – Liability and Redress
179. Has your country signed the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress?
  • No
180. Has your country initiated steps towards ratification, acceptance or approval of the Nagoya-Kuala Lumpur Supplementary Protocol?
  • Yes
Article 33 – Monitoring and reporting
182. Has your country submitted the previous national reports (Interim and First National Reports)?
  • Yes
183. If your country did not submit previous reports, indicate the main challenges that hindered the submission
  • Lack of financial resources to gather the necessary information
Other information
184. Please use this field to provide any other information on issues related to national implementation of the Protocol, including any obstacles or impediments encountered.
Zimbabwe has made tremendous progress in implementing provisions of the Cartagena Protocol. However financial constraints have hampered efforts to fully implement provisions of the Protocol.                                     
Survey on indicators of the Strategic Plan (2014)
In decision BS-VI/15, Parties requested the Executive Secretary to conduct a dedicated survey to gather information corresponding to indicators in the Strategic Plan that could not be obtained from the second national reports or through other existing mechanisms.

The answers to the survey are displayed below.
When did your national biosafety framework become operational?
indicator 1.1.1
  • 2001 or earlier
Here you may provide further details
Additional funds for implementation of the Protocol were sourced from regional and international organisations. However the funds were not enough for effective implementation of the Protocol.
Survey 4. How many biosafety short-term training programmes and/or academic courses are offered annually in your country?
indicator 1.2.3
  • 1 per year or more
Here you may provide further details
Zimbabwe through the National Biotechnology Authority has put in place biosafety training programmes. The programmes focus on various biosafety issues such as risk assessment, science communication etc. Though a comprehensive programme is in place it cannot be fully implemented because of financial constraints. Most training programmes are run when the country manages to partner with organisations which offer resources for training such as universities.
Survey 5. Does your country have in place a functional national mechanism for coordinating biosafety capacity-building initiatives?
indicator 1.2.4
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
All capacity-building initiatives are coordinated by the National Biotechnology Authority and at times through our other stakeholders such as universities
Survey 6. How much additional funding (in the equivalent of US dollars) has your country mobilized in the last four years to support implementation of the Biosafety Protocol, beyond the regular national budgetary allocation?
indicator 1.2.5
  • 5,000 USD or more
Survey 7. Does your country have predictable and reliable funding for building capacity for the effective implementation of the Protocol?
indicator 1.2.6
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
The country's National Competent Authority for the Cartagena Protocol that is the National Biotechnology Authority is a wholly owned government organisation. Thus it is funded by the government. However the resources supplied by government are limited therefore are not enough for building capacity for effective implementation of the Protocol. This is because the country is facing economic challenges.
Survey 8. How many LMO-related collaborative bilateral/multilateral arrangements has your country established with other Parties/non-Parties?
indicator 1.2.8
  • None
Here you may provide further details
Zimbabwe has not entered into any LMO-related collaborative bilateral/multilateral arrangements. However it is a member of two regional bodies that have come up with guidelines for handling living modified organisms. The regional bodies are the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA). SADC guidelines are implemented on a voluntary basis whilst the COMESA guidelines which are yet to be passed and are thus not legally binding.
Survey 9. Has your country adopted or used any guidance documents for the purpose of conducting risk assessment and/or risk management?
indicator 1.3.1.1
Survey 9.a) Risk assessment
  • Yes
Survey 9.b) Risk management
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
All risk assessment and risk management activities are undertaken are in accordance to provisions of the Protocol
Survey 10. Has your country adopted or used any guidance documents for the purpose of evaluating risk assessment reports submitted by notifiers?
indicator 1.3.1.2
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
The country has in place guidance documents for evaluating risk assessment reports submitted by notifiers.
Survey 11. Has your country adopted any common approaches to risk assessment with other countries?
indicator 1.3.2
  • No
Survey 12. Has your country ever conducted a risk assessment of an LMO?
indicator 1.3.3
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
The country has conducted risk assessments for LMOs intended for contained use and for Food, Feed and Processing.
Survey 13. Does your country have the capacity to identify, assess and/or monitor living modified organisms or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking into account risks to human health?
indicator 1.4.2
Survey 13.a) Identify
  • Yes
Survey 13.b) Assess
  • Yes
Survey 13.c) Monitor
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
The country has a fully functional laboratory with capacity to identify and assess LMOs or specific traits that may have adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, taking into account risks to human health. In addition,  the National Biotechnology Authority's inspectorate screens all imports for the presence of LMOs and takes appropriate action. Surveillance activities also include screening grains in fields and other storage facilities for the presence of LMOs.
Survey 14. Does your country have available any guidance for the purpose of ensuring the safe handling, transport, and packaging of living modified organisms?
indicator 1.6.4
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
The country has developed guidelines for the purposes of handling, transport and packaging of LMOs. However the guidelines need to be revised. Legal provisions for labelling LMOs exists.
Survey 15. Does your country have any specific approaches or requirements that facilitate how socio-economic considerations should be taken into account in LMO decision making?
indicator 1.7.2
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
Efforts have been made towards putting in place mechanisms for taking into account socio-economic considerations in LMO decision making. However a lot more work in this regard still needs to be done.
Survey 16. How many peer-reviewed published materials has your country used for the purpose of elaborating or determining national actions with regard to socio-economic considerations?
indicator 1.7.1
  • 10 or more
Here you may provide further details
The country relies on peer reviewed journal articles and policy documents when making decisions pertaining to socio-economic considerations
Survey 17. What is your country's experience, if any, in taking socio-economic considerations into account in LMO decision making?
indicator 1.7.3
To date Zimbabwe has not experienced any challenges in taking into account socio-economic considerations in decision making.
Survey 18. Does your country have the capacity to take appropriate measures in the event that an LMO is unintentionally released?
indicator 1.8.3
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
The country has biosafety officers who regularly carry out LMO surveillance activities. However there is need to increase the staff complement and resources for the work. In addition, a fully functional LMO detecting laboratory exists.
Survey 19. How many people in your country have been trained in risk assessment, monitoring, management and control of LMOs?
indicator 2.2.3
Survey 19.a) Risk assessment
  • 10 or more
Survey 19.b) Monitoring
  • 10 or more
Survey 19.c) Management / Control
  • 10 or more
Here you may provide further details
Though efforts have been made in training personnel on risk assessment, monitoring, management and control of LMOs there is need to train more people for effective implementation of the Protocol.
Survey 20. Does your country have the infrastructure (e.g. laboratory facilities) for monitoring or managing LMOs?
indicator 2.2.4
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
Infrastructure for monitoring or managing LMOs is rather limited , state of art equipment/infrastructure is required.
Survey 21. Is your country using training material and/or technical guidance for training in risk assessment and risk management of LMOs?
indicator 2.2.5
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
Training material and technical guidance is used whenever training programmes are conducted.
Survey 22. Are the available training materials and technical guidance on risk assessment and risk management of LMOs sufficient and effective?
indicator 2.2.6
Survey 22.a) Sufficient
  • No
Survey 22.b) Effective
  • No
Survey 23. How many customs officers in your country have received training in the identification of LMOs?
indicator 2.3.1
  • 10 or more
Here you may provide further details
Although the country trained a number of custom officials there are a few trained officers at ports of entry. This is because the country was affected by the brain drain and some custom officials have since left employment for various reasons.
Survey 24. How many laboratory personnel in your country have received training in detection of LMOs?
indicator 2.3.1
  • 10 or more
Here you may provide further details
Few laboratory personnel has received training in detection of LMOs due to limited resources.
Survey 25. Does your country have reliable access to laboratory facilities for the detection of LMOs?
indicator 2.3.2
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
The country has a fully functional laboratory but its charges for detecting LMOs are prohibitive.
Survey 26. How many laboratories in your country are certified for LMO detection?
indicator 2.3.3
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
Only one laboratory is certified for LMO detection.
Survey 27. How many of the certified laboratories in the previous question are operational?
indicator 2.3.4
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
only one
Survey 28. Has your country received any financial and/or technical assistance for capacity-building in the area of liability and redress relating to living modified organisms?
indicator 2.4.1
  • No
Here you may provide further details
The country realises the importance of developing capacity to handle liability and redress issues. Zimbabwe is thus is keen to develop the required capacity.
Survey 29. Does your country have administrative or legal instrument that provide for response measures for damage to biodiversity resulting from living modified organisms?
indicator 2.4.2
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
The National Biotechnology Authority handles all administrative and legal issues pertaining to damage of biological diversity due to living modified organisms.
Survey 30. Has your country informed the public about existing modalities for public participation in the decision-making process regarding living modified organisms?
indicator 2.5.2
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
Zimbabwe strongly recognises the need for public participation in decision making processes regarding living modified organisms thus makes all efforts to engage the public.
Survey 31. If you answered yes to the previous question, please indicate the modalities used to inform the public?
indicator 2.5.2
  • National website
  • Newspaper
  • Forums
  • Mailing lists
  • Public hearings
Survey 32. If you indicated multiple modalities for public participation in the question above, which one was most used?
indicator 2.5.2
  • Forums
Here you may provide further details
The country engages the public at activities such as workshops and national exhibitions.
Survey 33. How many academic institutions in your country are offering biosafety education and training courses and programmes?
indicator 2.7.1
  • 3 or more
Here you may provide further details
In a bid to ensure the effective implementation of the Protocol the Government of Zimbabwe embarked on human resource capacity development since 2006. To date graduates with expertise in the area of biosafety have been trained although the critical mass of skilled personnel is still very thin.
Survey 34. How many biosafety training materials and/or online modules are available in your country?
indicator 2.7.2
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
There is need for development of more biosafety training materials and online modules for effective implementation of the Protocol.
Survey 35. Does your country have in place a monitoring and/or an enforcement system?
indicator 3.1.6
Survey 35.a) Monitoring system
  • Yes
Survey 35.b) Enforcement system
  • Yes
Here you may provide further details
A monitoring and enforcement system for the Protocol exists through the National Competent Authority for the Protocol that is the National Biotechnology Authority (NBA). The NBA has biosafety officers who are responsible for regulating LMOs.
Survey 36. Please indicate the number of regional, national and international events organized in relation to biosafety (e.g. seminars, workshops, press conferences, educational events, etc.,) in the last 2 years.
indicator 4.3.1
  • One or more
Here you may provide further details
3
Survey 37. Please indicate the number of biosafety related publications that has been made available in your country in the last year.
indicator 4.3.2
  • 10 or more
Survey 38. If biosafety related publications were made available (see question above), please indicate which modalities were preferred.
indicator 4.3.2
  • BCH Central Portal
Survey 39. How many collaborative initiatives (including joint activities) on the Cartagena Protocol and other Conventions and processes has your government established in the last 4 years?
indicator 5.2.1
  • One or more
Survey 40. Does your country have any awareness and outreach programmes on biosafety?
indicator 5.3.1
  • Yes
Survey 41. If you answered yes to the question above, please indicate what entity is responsible for carrying out the programmes and/or services and at which level the programmes take place.
indicator 5.3.1
E.g. local, national, etc.,
the national biotechnology authority is responsible for carrying out programmes at local, national and international level.
Survey 42. Has your country designed and/or implemented an outreach/communication strategy on biosafety?
indicator 5.3.2
  • Yes
Survey 43. Please indicate the number of educational materials on biosafety that are available and accessible to the public.
indicator 5.3.4
  • 5 or more