Topic 2: Ongoing and planned biosafety capacity-building projects/initiatives

Considering the importance of biosafety in relation to genetically modified organisms (GMOs), it is essential to implement public policies and promote research projects that respond to the specific needs of each country. In this context, Mexico stands out as a center of origin and diversification of maize, a crop that forms the foundation of national food security and cultural identity. The country is home to approximately 64 native maize landraces, whose preservation is crucial for maintaining biodiversity, adaptability, and sociocultural value.However, the introduction and cultivation of transgenic maize, as well as its use in human and animal consumption, have raised concerns about potential impacts. In particular, the strong association between transgenic maize and the use of glyphosate has triggered various actions aimed at mitigating negative effects on human health, the environment, and biodiversity. In light of this situation, I propose that each country establish a certified national laboratory capable of developing standardized risk assessment protocols and promoting rigorous scientific research to support informed decision-making. Coordinated participation of governmental, academic, scientific, and civil society institutions will help expand research lines and strengthen the influence on public policy. This approach must be transdisciplinary, integrating methodological and analytical strategies to address issues associated with GMOs from multiple perspectives: human and environmental health, food sovereignty, socio-ecological systems, and the development of alternative technologies. All of this should be guided by a humanistic vision that respects the rights of Indigenous peoples, protects the environment, and contributes to strengthening rural Mexico and the country’s food sovereignty.

Dear participants,

My Name is Thato Mogapi from South Africa and I am the Moderator for this Online Forum. I am the National Focal Point for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, based at the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment.

It is great to see that you have started sharing your views and experiences.

Please be reminded to briefly introduce yourself when posting your first message, including your name, title, country, institutional affiliation and current responsibilities.

Please also keep your messages short, concise and focussed, for the discussion topic.

Kindly refer to the guidelines and modalities for the Forum to ensure that your messages are consistent and relevant for the discussion topic. These are available on the Forum page.

Looking forward to more of your contributions.

Kind regards
Ms Thato Mogapi

Dear colleagues

We are about midway into the discussions. Thank you very much for your contributions thus far.

Please be reminded to provide information on current and planned capacity-building initiatives and opportunities available to Parties to the Protocol if you have not done so yet. In addition to submitting using the links provided, feel free to share briefly on this platform.

Kindly also share your views on the question:

• What are the key global, regional cooperation (e.g. multi-country projects) and/or local cooperation efforts that could be promoted in countries to hold capacity-building activities?

I would like to encourage participants who have not yet posted to share their views and experiences.

Kind regards
Ms Thato Mogapi

Dear colleagues, my name is Lim Li Lin and I am with the biosafety and biodiversity programme of Third World Network, Malaysia. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to these discussions.

I would like to bring your attention to TWN’s submission on implementing or funding biosafety capacity-building activities, which is on the BCH at -https://bch.cbd.int/en/pdf/documents/submission/BCH-SUB-SCBD-277130/1

TWN has conducted numerous biosafety capacity building initiatives and continues to do so.

TWN’s submission identifies key elements for biosafety capacity building activities that can help develop adequate integration of diverse issues – including policy, legal, regulatory, ethical, economic and social dimensions – in the regulation of LMOs.

In addition, the evolving fields of genetic engineering and synthetic biology are raising new biosafety challenges, and TWN’s submission highlights some key features of the changing nature of genetic technologies, where future capacity-building efforts could be focused.

These points are relevant to Topics 1, 2 and 3 of this online forum.

Dear Laura Hernández Padilla,

Thank you very much for your contribution to the discussions.

I would like to encourage that you share the link to the capacity-building projects that you submitted through the BCH if you have done so already. If not, you can submit in the Capacity Development Initiative in the BCH and then share the link. 

Kind regards
Ms Thato Mogapi

4. Quelles sont les principales initiatives de coopération mondiale, régionale (par exemple, projets multinationaux) et/ou locale qui pourraient être promues dans les pays pour organiser des activités de renforcement des capacités ?

Je m’appelle M. KAKPO Comlan Marcel, Expert Biosécurité, Ancien Point Focal National du Protocole de Cartagena de la République du Bénin

Je partage avec vous une expérience régionale. Il s’agit du Programme Régional de Biosécurité de l’Union Monétaire Ouest Africaine (PCB-UEMOA) dont j’étais le Coordonnateur National.

Ce programme a pris en compte le huit (8) pays de l’UEMOA et a mis en œuvre un programme de renforcement de capacités qui a permis à chaque payer de former au moins cinq (5) experts régionaux par pays. A travers ce programme le Bénin a pu former huit (8) experts régionaux de biosécurité de l’UEMOA. Par ailleurs des renforcements de capacités des parties prenantes à travers des ateliers nationaux et régionaux. Ainsi un réseautage s’est établi entre les experts des huit (8) pays.

Comme les projets ou programmes ont une fin, à la fin du financement, les activités n’ont pas pu continuer comme cela se doit. Mais il faut signaler qu’il existe au niveau de l’UEMOA, une structure dédiée à la Biosécurité. En conclusion les initiatives régionales sont très bénéfiques pour le renforcement des capacités et le réseautage.

Dear Ms Lim Li Lin

Thank you very much for your contribution to the discussions. Are there any key areas of cooperation from TWN you would like to highlight briefly on this forum? 

Kind Regards
Ms Thato Mogapi

I am Ma. Lorelie U. Agbagala, BCH National Focal Point from the Philippines. Let me take this opportunity to share our experiences on capacity-building currently being undertaken in the Philippines and partner countries in Asia.

These are the following:

1. Promoting the safe application of biotechnology through Multi country Cooperation in the implementation of National Biosafety Frameworks in Asia
The project's objective is to strengthen institutional, human and regulatory capacities and  promote cooperative measures in the implementation of National Biosafety Frameworks for the safe transfer, handling and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) in Asia.
The envisaged project interventions will contribute to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity from any adverse effects of LMOs. The aim is to provide a more coherent, coordinated and effective delivery of biosafety capacity building and technical support at all levels, in response to identified country gaps/priorities and needs.
The project will also develop coherent partnerships across the four participating countries, namely, Mongolia, India, Bangladesh and the Philippines, for continued and sustainable sharing of biosafety resources, expertise, information and experiences aimed at strengthening implementation of the CPB. The participating countries recognize that regional cooperation is essential for sustainability of the implementation of the CPB at the national and regional levels due to the transboundary focus of the CPB.
The critical elements for regional cooperation include sharing of resources among countries within the region, including technical facilities, materials, and expertise; sharing of experiences among countries in developing and implementing their NBFs including methodologies, materials, and skills;  sharing of information on biosafety among countries and through regional networks, including the BCH; and building and strengthening regional capacity for biosafety and biotechnology to support national decision-making.

2. Mainstreaming Biotechnology and Biosafety in the Philippine Education Sector
The future of biotechnology in the Philippines hinges on the quality of biotechnology  education offered to today’s youth. Filipino society will only be able to fully harness the benefits of biotechnology when accurate information and widespread public acceptance, fostered through education, are established. Consequently, a 2-year research project titled “Mainstreaming Biotechnology and Biosafety in the Philippine Education Sector” is currently being implemented by the National Committee on Biosafety of the Philippines (NCBP) to enhance the fundamental understanding of students and pedagogical knowledge of science teachers on biotechnology and biosafety.
This Department of Science and Technology – Philippine Council for Agriculture, Aquatic, and Natural Resources Research and Development (DOST-PCAARRD -funded project seeks to address five initial areas: (1) Knowledge, Attitude, and Perception Survey Research; (2) Development of Learning Materials on Biotechnology; (3) Pilot Testing of the Learning Materials; (4) Capacity Building of Science Teachers; and (5) Curriculum Review and Policy Development.
This initiative will provide support to the education sector for its pilot implementation of the new basic education curriculum, particularly in the area of biotechnology. All project activities are being and will be conducted in coordination with the Department of Education (DepEd). Drafting of a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between NCBP and DepEd is also in progress for the initiatives of developing learning materials on biotechnology designed for Grade 10 learners and Junior high school’s science teachers, pilot testing of these materials on select schools in the country, and building the capacity of these science teachers on biotechnology and biosafety instruction.
On top of that, the roll-out of the nationwide survey to gather comprehensive information about the knowledge, attitude, and perception towards biotechnology and biosafety among students in Senior High School and science teachers in Junior and Senior High School in the Philippines has just recently concluded. Data analysis is currently underway that will offer in-depth insights on the status of biotechnology and biosafety education in secondary education. The survey results will also provide baseline data for the creation of learning materials on biotechnology, which will be developed in collaboration with the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), Inc. Focus group discussions will further explore challenges and insights from experts on the subject matter to come-up with recommendations to integrate biosafety in the curricula, which will be reported through a policy brief.

Thank you for the opportunity to share our initiatives under capacity-building for biosafety. Both of these efforts—the multi-country cooperation in Asia and the integration of biotechnology and biosafety in the Philippine education sector—highlight our strong commitment to building not just technical capacity, but also long-term institutional and societal support for biosafety.

We believe that regional collaboration and early education are key to fostering a culture of responsibility and innovation. We hope these initiatives inspire similar efforts in your respective countries, and we look forward to continued knowledge-sharing and partnership moving forward.

Dear Ms Thato Mogapi,

Thank you for your kind invitation to highlight key areas of cooperation.

Performing credible and relevant risk assessments requires multi-disciplinary scientific and social scientific competence that considers the local context of LMO introductions. Each country requires the capacity for general scientific risk assessment and management, tailored to their particular environmental, health, and community needs.

Therefore the following are key elements for biosafety capacity building activities that require, and can help develop, adequate integration of diverse issues, disciplines and perspectives, also prioritising independent assessments in the regulation of LMOs. These elements all require cooperation efforts across disciplines and across different sectors of society -

1) A holistic framework – empowering participants with the knowledge and training necessary to develop a holistic view on the issues surrounding LMOs in order to fairly, yet critically, evaluate the issue from their own perspectives and country needs.
2) Precautionary technology assessment that can help developing countries make appropriate technology choices.
3) Independent biosafety research as a basis for teaching, and partnering with academic institutions in delivering capacity-building.
4) Multi-disciplinarity in approach and teaching, drawing on numerous resource people from academia and civil society, forming an international pool of experts.
5) Co-learning engendered by a cross section of participants from governments, academia and civil society. Also of importance is strengthening CSOs on biosafety issues, so that they can engage with policy makers and scientists at the national level.

These types of cooperation efforts can also help build synergies and encourage the sharing of expertise (Topic 3, Question 3).

POSTED ON BEHALF OF ANNAH TAKOMBWA, ZIMBABWE

I am Annah Takombwa and I work for the National Biotechnology Authority (NBA) in Zimbabwe. NBA is the National Competent Authority for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

Zimbabwe is one of the pilot countries for the AUDA-NEPAD Centre of Excellence in Science, Technology, and Innovation Genome editing (GEd) programme. The programme aims to raise awareness and foster a broader understanding of modern biotechnology among various stakeholder groups through communication, advocacy, and policy guidance to ensure increased uptake of genome editing as a tool to sustainably optimize agriculture in Africa. To date AUDA-NEPAD has conducted various capacity building programmes in Zimbabwe which include training regulators on genome editing (https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/CDI/BCH-CDI-SCBD-279864/1); development of genome editing guidelines; disseminating of the genome editing module to academia and researchers; and development of a genome editing communication and advocacy strategy.

Dear Forum participants,

My name is Doreen Mnyulwa and I am the Project Manager and Head of RAEIN-Africa ( South Africa - Office) , the Lead Executing Agency of the SINBF Project working in selected African Countries.

The objective of the Strengthening the Implementation of National Biosafety Frameworks in Southern Africa (SINBF) project is to significantly contribute to the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety by providing support to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Madagascar, and Namibia.  In order to facilitate the effective implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, RAEIN, in collaboration with the UNEP and with the support of GEF, seeks to strengthen the national capabilities of the three participating countries via cooperative facilitative mechanisms. Our objective is to see these countries established with national biosafety frameworks that are operational, transparent, and functional by 2026.
June 2025 to July 2026 is Year 3 of the SINBF project. During this period  capacity-building efforts will continue to strengthen national biosafety systems in Namibia, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), and Madagascar. The focus will remain on equipping stakeholders with the technical, institutional, and legal expertise needed to advance the review and implementation of national biosafety frameworks in line with the Cartagena Protocol and emerging national priorities.

At the regional level, inter-country workshops and virtual exchanges will provide platforms for peer learning on aligning national legislation with international protocols, integrating biosafety into national development priorities, and mobilizing resources. The SINBF Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) will continue mentoring country teams to ensure quality and consistency across participating countries.

Nationally, a series of targeted workshops and trainings are planned. These include stakeholder consultations and validations of Draft Zero/One legal texts, as well as specialized training for lawmakers, regulators, and judiciary on biosafety policies and case handling ( will be posting schedules of the trainings once finalized) Trainings on risk assessment and risk management (RA/RM) tools, socioeconomic considerations, and biosafety awareness are also planned to support decision-making and stakeholder engagement. Inspectors and enforcement agents, particularly those at borders, will receive practical training on LMO detection, inspection protocols, and compliance monitoring.

These activities will target multidisciplinary national expert teams, policymakers, lawmakers, enforcement officials, civil society, and media professionals. Scheduled from July 2025 through June 2026, they aim to embed capacities within national institutions and foster ownership of biosafety governance. Regional cooperation through SANGL, SINBF-TAC, and multi-country knowledge exchanges will complement national efforts, promoting harmonized approaches to common technical challenges while respecting country-specific legal and policy contexts.

Dear colleagues, I am Modupe Adeyemo, Senior Programme Officer - Biosafety with the African Union Development Agency - NEPAD. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to these discussions.

The African Union Development Agency-NEPAD (AUDA-NEPAD) continues to lead strategic biosafety capacity-building efforts across Africa, recognizing that robust biosafety systems are essential for ensuring the safe and sustainable application of modern biotechnology. In alignment with the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. AUDA-NEPAD supports both ongoing and planned initiatives that aim to strengthen national and regional capacities for biosafety governance. These initiatives are as follows:

Institutional capacity development
1. Technical support in establishing (and strengthening) functional biosafety regulatory systems in AU member states and RECs through high-level advocacy, legal support, training, workshops, webinars, etc. to empower AU member states in developing and operationalizing functional biosafety regulatory systems that will enable informed decision-making and contribute to Africa’s agricultural transformation. Support provided includes, but not limited to, development of biosafety legal framework; development of guidelines and capacity in specific areas/ topics such as biosafety administration, risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication, genome editing, stacked events, and data transportability; and facilitation of peer-learning and twinning.
Ongoing support provided to: Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cote d’Ivoire, Eswatini, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sudan, Togo, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe; while plan is underway to support: Botswana, Egypt, Tanzania, and Zanzibar.

2. Science Diplomacy and Negotiation trainings (In development): To empower member states to negotiate international and regional science engagements.

3. Transboundary Engagement on Gene Drive Mosquitoes at regional economic community level: To strengthen regional cooperation and mutual understanding on the regulation of gene drive mosquitoes by facilitating dialogue among AU Member States within regional economic communities (RECs), enabling harmonized risk assessment approaches, coordinated decision-making processes, and early identification of transboundary concerns related to potential field releases.
Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS): Held from 14th to 18th July 2025
East African Community (EAC): Planned to be held on 10th to 15th August 2025

4. Project: Support on the establishment of biosafety regulatory framework in Rwanda jointly implemented by AUDA-NEPAD, Agriculture and Food System Institute (AFSI) and Rwanda Environment Management Authority (REMA). To support the establishment of a biosafety regulatory framework in Rwanda, including training, capacity building, provision of technical materials, and support to REMA. Implementation period is from 10 June, 2025 to 31 December, 2025.

Continuation on Modupe Adeyemo's submission (2/5):

Other initiatives are:

Experiential learning
5. Michigan State University / AUDA-NEPAD Biotechnology and Biosafety Study Tour (Active program and held annually): To provide African stakeholders with comprehensive insights into the development, adoption, regulation, and communication of modern biotechnology and biosafety practices by showcasing experiences and best practices.

Online learning
6. ICGEB / AUDA-NEPAD Biosafety E-learning Programme (Valid as a joint effort from 2020 to May 2026): To impart knowledge and skills on biosafety topics, including risk analysis, containment and confinement, and GMO food safety, enhancing expertise to conduct evidence-based risk assessments, manage biosafety risks effectively, and communicate safety information clearly to relevant stakeholders.

7. AUDA-NEPAD E-learning modules on Gene Drive Technology (In development): To build foundational and advanced understanding of gene drive technologies among regulators and stakeholders by providing flexible, self-paced online training on science, risk assessment, regulatory considerations, ethical issues, and stakeholder engagement in the African context.

In-person courses
8. Michigan State University International Short Course in Agricultural Biotechnology, Biosafety and Technology Transfer (Active program and held annually): This program is designed to help participants better understand various issues surrounding the use and management of agricultural biotechnology globally. It is scheduled to hold this year from 2nd to 16th August, 2025.
Studies
9. Fellowship programme on Data Transportability (Ongoing, to be implemented from 2022 – 2025): To enhance data transportability for trait decision-making in Africa by documenting current practices, engaging stakeholders, developing regulatory tools, and supporting their adoption at national, regional, and continental levels. Focus countries are Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, and Nigeria.

Continuation on Modupe Adeyemo's submission (3/5):

Other initiatives are:

Online forums and networks
10. African Biosafety Lawyers’ Network (Active): To provide support to legal practitioners aligned to rendering legal service to Government Agencies mandated  to implement Biosafety Policies and legislation in AU Member States.

11. Environmental Safety Resource Network (In development): A network of environmentalists to promote active participation in regulatory issues on biotechnology through knowledge sharing on environmental safety.

12. Communication Network (Active): To facilitate active exchange of information and best practices among members on global and national developments in biotechnology and biosafety regulation, and to enhance effective communication strategies around key issues in these fields.

13. Food Safety Resource Network (Active): To provide knowledge-based advisory support and dissemination of information on food safety related matters to AU member states.

14. Africa Integrated Vector Management (IVM) Platform (In development): To serve as a continental coordination and knowledge-sharing mechanism that supports AU Member States in the evaluation, regulation, and adoption of innovative vector control technologies, including gene drive mosquitoes, through regional engagement, capacity strengthening, and policy harmonization.

15. African Union High Level Panel on Emerging Technologies Knowledge Platform (In development): To provide strategic, evidence-based policy advice and curated knowledge products on emerging technologies (such as gene drives, AI, synthetic biology) to inform regulatory development, foster continental alignment, and guide responsible innovation in AU Member States.

16. National Integrated Vector Management (IVM) Platforms (In development): To institutionalize country-level coordination of vector control strategies, facilitate national policy implementation, promote stakeholder collaboration, and support regulatory oversight of new tools including genetically based vector control technologies.

Dear Mr Comlan Marcel KAKPO,

Thank you very much for sharing on some of your capacity building activities.

Please do remember to submit at the Capacity Development Initiative in the BCH if you have not done so already. Please see the link below.

https://bch.cbd.int/en/search?currentPage=1&schema=capacityBuildingInitiative

Kind regards
Ms Thato Mogapi

Continuation on Modupe Adeyemo's submission (4/5):

Other initiatives are:

Provision of capacity development tools, resources and knowledge products
17. Report of the High-Level African Union Panel on Emerging Technologies (APET) on Policy Framework for Applications of Genome Editing in African Agriculture: To inform the policies being formulated at both national and regional economic community levels on the use of genome editing in African Agriculture. https://www.nepad.org/file-download/download/public/146470

18. Resources on AUDA-NEPAD website: To provide accessible, credible, and up-to-date resources that support informed decision-making on biotechnology and biosafety regulation across Africa. Also, to foster knowledge sharing, regulatory harmonization, and evidence-based policy development in alignment with the continent’s goals for innovation, health, and environmental sustainability. https://www.nepad.org/publications?programme=1017&combine=

19. Science, Technology and Innovation Strategy for Africa (STISA) 2034

20. African Union (AU) Agenda 2063: To guide science, technology and innovation (STI) development strategic frameworks and implementation. AU https://au.int/sites/default/files/documents/36204-doc-agenda2063_popular_version_en.pdf and https://au.int/sites/default/files/documents/36204-doc-agenda2063_popular_version_fr.pdf

21. Report of the High-Level African Union Panel on Emerging Technologies (APET) on Gene Drives for Malaria Control and Elimination in Africa (1st edition, 2018): To assess gene drive technology as a promising and complimentary tool for malaria control and elimination in Africa, including its development, risks, and implementation strategies. https://www.nepad.org/publication/gene-drives-malaria-control-and-elimination-africa

22. Report of the High-Level African Union Panel on Emerging Technologies (APET) on Gene Drives for Malaria Control and Elimination in Africa (2nd edition, 2025): To update a diverse community of stakeholders on progress and current state of research and development  efforts with recommendations for gene drive technology advancement.

23. Artificial Intelligence white paper on Health Regulation (In development): To provide a strategic framework and evidence-based guidance for African Union Member States on the regulation of Artificial Intelligence in the health sector, ensuring safety, ethical integrity, data protection, equity, and alignment with continental health priorities.

Continuation on Modupe Adeyemo's submission (5/5):

The target audience for these biosafety capacity-building initiatives comprises a broad range of stakeholders including biosafety regulators, environmental and food safety officers, agricultural scientists and researchers, policy makers, lawyers, judges, ethicists, media practitioners, and communication specialists, as well as regional economic communities, national biosafety authorities, ministries of environment and health, and other technical experts involved in biotechnology and biosafety governance, risk assessment, regulatory processes, and public engagement across Africa.

Question 4: What are the key global, regional cooperation (e.g. multi-country projects) and/or local cooperation efforts that could be promoted in countries to hold capacity-building activities?

Some effective platforms for capacity building that could be promoted in countries to build/strengthen capacity are listed below:
Global:
1. Michigan State University International Short Course in Agricultural Biotechnology, Biosafety and Technology Transfer (annual capacity building platform): Builds participant capacity to understand, manage, and regulate agricultural biotechnology through intensive, globally informed training.
2. Michigan State University / AUDA-NEPAD Biotechnology and Biosafety Study Tour (annual capacity building platform): Provides African stakeholders with hands-on exposure to real-world biosafety systems and regulatory best practices, enabling experiential learning and knowledge transfer.
3. ICGEB / AUDA-NEPAD Biosafety E-learning Program: Enhances technical knowledge on biosafety through flexible, accessible online training in risk assessment, GMO food safety, and containment strategies.
Regional:
1. African Union High Level Panel on Emerging Technologies (APET) Knowledge Platform: Supports capacity building by offering evidence-based policy guidance and curated knowledge products on emerging biotechnologies to inform national decision-making.
2. AUC / AUDA-NEPAD preparatory meetings for processes of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its protocols: Prepares national delegates for international negotiations through training, strategy alignment, and peer exchange on biosafety and biodiversity issues.
3. Harmonization efforts by regional economic communities (RECs) (e.g., ECOWAS Regulation C/REG.4/09/20): Promote regional capacity by aligning national regulatory systems and offering technical assistance for coherent biosafety governance.
4. Africa Integrated Vector Management (IVM) platform: Facilitate cross-country learning and technical collaboration on novel vector control strategies, including genetically based tools, strengthening national implementation capacity.
5. Expert Resource Networks: Enable targeted technical support, peer mentorship, and information sharing among specialized professionals across countries.
National:
1. National Biosafety Conferences (Kenya – National Biosafety Authority (NBA), Nigeria – National Biosafety Management Agency (NBMA)): Serve as platforms for stakeholder engagement, policy dialogue, and technical training at the country level, enhancing biosafety regulatory systems.
2. National Integrated Vector Management (IVM) platform: Supports national coordination of vector control innovations and builds capacity among regulators, researchers, and policymakers for safe and effective implementation.

Dear Ms. Modupe Adeyemo

Thank you very much for sharing on the various capacity-building initiatives led by AUDA NEPAD.

Please be reminded to submit current initiatives on the Capacity Development Initiative in the BCH accessible on the link below, if you have not done so already.

https://bch.cbd.int/en/search?currentPage=1&schema=capacityBuildingInitiative

If you have already submitted, you can also share the links on this Forum.

Kind regards
Ms Thato Mogapi

POSTED ON BEHALF OF GALINA MOZGOVA, BELARUS

Good afternoon, dear participants.
Among the activities on capacity building in the field of biosafety, I would like to mention the BioBridge project of the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity “Enhancing Collaboration between the CEE and Central Asia’s Centres of Excellence to Address the Key Drivers of Biodiversity Loss and Maintain Human, Crop and Livestock Health” completed not so far. The activities carried out by 7 countries were aimed at comparison legal and technical regulations, as well as existing laboratory methods and approaches in the fields of species identification, detection and identification of LMOs, detection of plant pathogens, and environmental DNA, developed in the countries-participants, and other key areas that may help biodiversity conservation; identifying gaps in countries in the areas of regulation and laboratory detection, and ways to overcome them. Also, during the project, a 5-day practical training on laboratory detection of key drivers of biodiversity loss, including LMO detection, identification and quantification, was organized. Perhaps the results of the project will be useful for other countries.
Kyrgyzstan is also currently implementing the BioBridge project «Development and Capacity Building of Coordination Resource Biosafety Centre». The purpose of the project is to establish a Coordination Resource Biosafety Centre whose purpose will be to provide technical guidance and assistance on biosafety matters, with a view to ensuring the safe use of modern biotechnological products in the country.

Best regards,
Galina Mozgova

Argentina conducted several training courses to third countries in the last years. Please see below the link with all the information:

1. Argentina BCH-SUB-SCBD-277834-3 (https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/SUB/BCH-SUB-AR-277834/3)
2. Argentina BCH-SUB-SCBD-277833-2 (https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/SUB/BCH-SUB-AR-277833/2)
3. Argentina BCH-SUB-SCBD-277832-2 (https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/SUB/BCH-SUB-AR-277832/2)
4. Argentina BCH-SUB-SCBD-277831-2 (https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/SUB/BCH-SUB-AR-277831/2)
5. Argentina BCH-SUB-SCBD-277830-2 (https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/SUB/BCH-SUB-AR-277830/2)
6. Argentina BCH-SUB-SCBD-277829-2 (https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/SUB/BCH-SUB-AR-277829/2)
7. Argentina BCH-SUB-SCBD-277828-2 (https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/SUB/BCH-SUB-AR-277828/2)
8. Argentina BCH-SUB-SCBD-277854-1 (https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/SUB/BCH-SUB-AR-277854/1)
9. Argentina BCH-SUB-SCBD-277867-1 (https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/SUB/BCH-SUB-AR-277867/1)
10. Argentina BCH-SUB-AR-277868-1 (https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/SUB/BCH-SUB-AR-277868/1)
11. Argentina BCH-SUB-SCBD-277869-1 (https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/SUB/BCH-SUB-AR-277869/1)

Dear all,
As IICA, we will continue with the preparatory virtual sessions for the participation of the delegations from LATAM countries in COP-MOP 2026. Although these sessions are focused on regulators, we will have the participation (as speakers) of experts from academia, research centers, representatives from the private sector, and regulators.
- Information of some of such sessions can be found in the following site: https://sites.google.com/iica.int/biotecnologia-y-bioseguridad/actividades-tecnicas/seminarios-virtuales/2026-cop17
- Some proceedings regarding risk aseessment courses can be found at https://sites.google.com/iica.int/biotecnologia-y-bioseguridad/actividades-tecnicas/seminarios-virtuales/2026-cop17
- IICA and delegates form LATAM countriel will participate in the ISBR2026 (Ghent, Belgium 2-6 November, 2025; https://isbr.info/symposium )

Best regards,
Pedro

Dear participants,

I would like to thank Ms. Thato Mogapi for a very successful moderation of the discussion on the suggested topic.
My name is Angela Lozan, I am a project manager at the National Environmental Projects Implementation Office of the Ministry of Environment of Moldova. Currently I am coordinating the MSP GEF/UNEP project  Biosecurity Implementation Framework for the Management of Biological Resources in Moldova. The project objective is to strengthen institutional biosecurity frameworks in the management of invasive alien species and living modified organisms through a coordinated risk analysis measures in line with the Convention of Biological Diversity, Cartagena Protocol, its Supplementary Protocol and relevant Invasive Alien Species regulations in Moldova. The project has the following components:
Component 1: Effective Biosecurity Legislative, Policy, Regulatory and Institutional Frameworks
Component 2: Integration of biosecurity into Biological resource management
Component 3: A unified system for Knowledge management, Public awareness, Education, Communication on biosecurity

The project outputs are focused to the national needs to improve national capacities and meeting the provisions of the Cartagena Protocol and its Supplementary protocol:
- National policy for integrated bioresource management ensuring biosecurity for IAS and LMOs developed with special attention to gender participation as part of the new NBSAP 2030 in line with the GBF;
- Subsidiary regulation (law) on both IAS and LMOs developed, existing legislation is strengthened for more effective biosecurity and regulations on Liability and Redress;
- National capacities (with specific attention to gender equality) in risk analysis frameworks, detection and identification for monitoring and management for LMOs IAS strengthened with equipment, defined guidelines and manuals;
- Unified Portal for Information Sharing in line with the CBD’s Integrated approach on Clearing Houses set up with the requisite national database and registers for IAS and LMOs, including GIS mapping and spatial planning resources;
- Awareness programs, training and educational curricula  on LMOs and IAS with special attention to gender equality developed and implemented.

A training on risk assessment and risk management has been held in June in Chisinau and conducted by the International experts to knowledge management and skills for specific procedures of risk assessment and management for LMOs, based on real case studies of RA for GM sugar beet, corn, soybean etc. and involved specific personnel and risk assessors form laboratory, academia and research, sectorial governmental officers and decision makers, NGOs, students of biological faculty etc.

Further needs should be addressed to improve capacities for laboratory detection and identification, monitoring of LMOs, liability and redress mechanisms, BCH and exchange of information, public awareness and public participation to decision making process.
A regional and sub-regional communication and exchange of information would better facilitate risk management and prevention measures, redress biodiversity and ecosystem conservation.

Best,
Angela Lozan, PhD

Many thanks to the CBD Secretariat for the opportunity to share resources via this online forum and to Ms. Thato Mogapi for her excellent moderation. I am Brinda Dass, Deputy Director, Senior Technical Expert, Regulatory and  Policy Lead at GeneConvene Global Collaborative within The Foundation for the National Institutes of Health, USA. I have served previously as a risk assessment expert in CBD RA/RM AHTEGs and as a risk assessor and GMO product reviewer in the US federal regulatory system.

With regard to ongoing and planned biosafety capacity building initiatives-

GeneConvene Global Collaborative (https://fnih.org/our-programs/geneconvene-global-collaborative/) has been active in supporting scientific training and capacity building for scientists, regulators, biosafety experts, and science communicators. More information on our past activities are available at https://fnih.org/our-programs/geneconvene-global-collaborative/timeline/

In 2024 we have partnered with URU Research & Development Group to offer gene-editing short courses at the University of Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania from July 29th to August 02nd, 2024 and in Kigali, Rwanda from 25-29 November 2024. More information on specifics are available at https://academy.geneconvenevi.org/courses/gene-editing-a-short-course-for-science-professionals/ The goal is to offer these trainings on an annual basis. Information will be forthcoming on the next iteration of this training opportunity.

GeneConvene has partnered with Dr. Lina Finda and Fredros Okumu in the Environmental Health and Ecological Sciences (EHES) unit at Ifakara Health Institute in Tanzania to elicit opinions and recommendations of key African stakeholders regarding gene drive technologies and their application to malaria control & elimination efforts via the African Conversations Initiative. As part of this effort, they convened experts in Bagamoyo, Tanzania, for a Scenario Planning Workshop in March 2025. The previous work from this ongoing effort is also described in the article https://malariajournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12936-023-04787-w

GeneConvene has provided, on request, online training on monitoring for GMOs and considerations for indicator selection to the National Biosafety Authority of Burkina Faso in June 2025. We are happy to provide the same to any interested party as well.

GeneConvene has also provided a 3 day in person IBC training workshop with a focus on GM insect research and contained use to biosafety professionals at ACEME, USTTB, Mali in April 2024 and continues to support the African Genetic Biocontrol Consortium based in Nairobi, Kenya with their IBC forum and capacity building initiatives. More information on these events are available at https://www.genbioconsortium.africa/events/

The African Genetic Biocontrol Consortium hosted its 2nd Global Congress in Accra, Ghana in partnership with GeneConvene and National Biosafety Authority Ghana from 17-20 March 2025. Details are available at https://conference2025.genbioconsortium.africa/ Two-day hands-on pre-conference training workshops were conducted on the following topics
• Regulatory frameworks and decision-making processes for emerging biotechnologies
• Communicating Genetic Biocontrol Technologies
• Principles & practices of biosafety and biosecurity for high containment facilities.

The African Genetic Biocontrol Consortium has an active science communication forum through which it engages communication experts and science communicators in regulatory agencies in African countries to provide a platform for information exchange and better understanding of new and emerging biotechnologies. The next science communication event is scheduled for November 2025.

GeneConvene makes scientific material related to genetic biocontrol available through its online Virtual Academy https://www.geneconvenevi.org/ which hosts an extensive knowledgebase of peer reviewed scientific articles, media reports, frequently asked questions, infographics, and webinars. It regularly hosts webinar series which are also archived on their youtube channel at https://www.youtube.com/@GeneConveneGlobalCollaborative . They hosted a scientific webinar series on aspects of environmental monitoring in April and May 2025.
We are happy to support future webinar series with relevant expert speakers to support the exchange of information and ideas on scientific topics related to genetic biocontrol as identified or requested by Parties.

All our resources are available to the public at no cost.
Many thanks

Brinda Dass

Les initiatives en matière de renfoncement de capacités:
1. projet 1: Intégration de la biosécurité dans les curricula d'enseignement au Burkina Faso. Le Burkina Faso a fait une évaluation de l'intégration de la biosécurité dans les curricula d'enseignement supérieur (universités et les grandes écoles). Il ressort que nous avons une faible intégration des modules sur la biotechnologie et la biosécurité. Les actions encours sont: le renfoncement de capacités des enseignants en biosécurité afin d'harmoniser les cours. par ailleurs, étant au début, les modules ne sont pas harmonisés et bien classer suivant les niveaux d'étude Licence et Master.  L'Agence Nationale de biosécurité du Burkina Faso organiser des ateliers de formations et de rédaction des syllabi en biosécurité et sur le contrôle et la règlementation des biotechnologies au Burkina Faso. Pour ces activités les publics cibles seront: les enseignants des universités et grandes écoles, les régulateurs. Nous espérons conduire ces activités en 2026. Mais pour le moment nous sommes toujours à la recherche de financements.
2. Intégration de la biosécurité dans les politiques sectorielles publiques du Burkina Faso. Il s'agit d'une approche pour impliquer le gouvernement et le législateur d'avantage dans la conception et la gestion de la biosécurité liée aux OGM et aussi les Biorisques. L'implication de ces acteurs va faciliter la prise en compte au plus haut niveau de l'administration des questions de biosécurité. Cela permettra mettre en exergue toute la place de la biosécurité dans l'utilisation sécurisée de la biotechnologie. Ces activités vont concernées les décideurs qui seront sensibilisés et une feuille de route d'intégration de la biosécurité sera élaborée et validée au niveau national. Cet projet est ambitieux, mais nous estimons que sa réalisation va permettre d'intégrer tous les acteurs surtout ceux influant dans la gestion des risques  biotechnologique. Le Burkina Faso a une petite expérience en matière d'intégration de la biosécurité. Car en 2016, il avait essayé de faire un document de ce genre. mais par manque de financement, il n'a pas pu continuer. Ce projet va couvrir la période 2026-2027 si nous obtenons les financements.

Pour ce qui est des collaborations en matière de renforcement de capacités, le Burkina Faso à eu à collaborer avec l'agence de régulation du Nigeria et du mali. Au mali, nous avons renforcer les capacités de l'équipe du mali en matière d'évaluation des risques en 2020 et 2021.  Le Burkina Faso est la premier pays en Afrique de l'Ouest à adopter la biotechnologie. Ainsi, pour certains pays nous avons une bonne expérience que nous pouvons partager avec eux. Surtout les pays Francophone avec qui nous parlons la même langue. Aussi, dans notre espace communautaire, nous avons un règlement régional CLISS-CEDEAO. Il est important d'avoir une politique de diffusion de cet règlement dans tous les pays membres. Notre Agence à aussi fait ses preuves avec la règlementation des moustiques génétiquement, où nous sommes leader en Afrique.

POSTED ON BEHALF OF HATEM BELGACEM, TUNISIA

Tunisia was actively engaged in initiatives to build capacities to raise public awareness and promote public education regarding LMOs/GMOs. A good practice included the translation of outreach materials into several languages (e.g. Arabic, French and English). These materials include: The Introductory Guide to Biotechnology, Biosafety and GMO Detection and Quantification, The Guide to the Biological Risk Analysis related to the use of Natural and GMOs, and The National Strategy and Action Plan on Biosafety (the Case of GMO’s). Another positive activity was the use of varied methods to share and disseminate these support tools. The dissemination was through, among other things, BCH/Dropbox links, USB keys, CD-ROMs and booklets. 
  
Further, Tunisia has developed and set in place a National Action Plan for Communication on Biosafety, mainly regarding GMOs.

As biosafety is considered a key issue at national and regional level, Tunisia organized a number of national seminars and workshops. The most important ones were the celebrations for the Biodiversity and Biosafety Days held annually during the International Day for Biodiversity in different regions of the country. These celebrations were an opportunity to promote the different activities related to biosafety issues. Furthermore, many media articles on biosafety issues were developed during these events.

At the regional level, three major events were hosted by Tunisia :
- The regional workshop for French-speaking African countries regarding capacity-building of National Focal Points of the BCH, held in Tunis in 2011;
-  The 18th Biosafety National Project Coordinators (NPCs) UNEP meeting for Africa on the Implementation of NBFs, held in Tunis, Sousse and Sfax 15-19 June, 2015; and
- The first Annual Bio-risk Management Symposium for Biosafety Associations in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Region, held 4-8 April 2017 in Tunis, Tunisia, organized by ATB2E and the International Federation of Biosafety Associations (IFBA).

Below a BCH link regarding Capacity development outcomes.

https://bch.cbd.int/en/database/CDI/BCH-CDI-SCBD-277132/1

Many thanks to Pedro Rocha for mentioning the ISBR 2025 conference-
GeneConvene Global Collaborative and African Genetic Biocontrol Consortium will also be sponsoring a panel session on Science Communication at the ISBR 2025 conference in November in Ghent, Belgium. All speakers will be experts from various African countries.

many thanks
Brinda Dass
GeneConvene Global Collaborative
Maryland, USA

Sudan has a national biosafety framework ( national biosafety law 2010) though yet to be fully operational to regulate LMOs, posing risks to biodiversity ,human health and agricultural sustainability in the  light of modern biotechnology trends including genome editing , gene drive. Weak institutional capacity , fragmented policies and limited public awareness hinder compliance with Cartagena protocol on biosafety . The absence of an operational legal framework,  institutional coordination and technical capacity hinders the country's  ability to implement its obligations under Cartagena protocol on biosafety . Limited public awareness and stakeholders engagement further exacerbate challenges in monitoring and managing modern biotechnological products .
Without urgent intervention , unregulated LMOs could threaten Sudan ecosystems, food security and compliance with international trade reguirements. These gaps underscore the needs for immediate action to establish a robust national boisafety governance system.  So developing project aims to establish and operationalisearobust  science-based biosafety system in Sudan to ensure the safe handling,  transfer, and use of LMOs in compliance with the obligations of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.

Dear colleagues,

It is great to see the various capacity-building projects either past or currently being implemented in your countries/by your organisations, especially their coverage in terms of the specific areas of biosafety they are focusing on, the target audience and the various collaborations.

It is encouraging that these and other planned initiatives will contribute to the implementation of the Capacity-building action plan.

Please be reminded to submit your projects, including relevant websites, document links, and supporting resources to:

Capacity Development Initiatives in the Biosafety Clearing-House: https://bch.cbd.int/en/search?currentPage=1&schema=capacityBuildingInitiative
Virtual Library Resources: https://bch.cbd.int/en/register/VLR/new

There is still time to share on this platform if you have not yet contributed to the discussions.

Kind regards
Ms Thato Mogapi

Je vous remercie pour la modération et pour cette recommandation.
Cordialement

Name: Karemera Vincent
Title: Program Manager
Organization: ARECO-RWANDA NZIZA

Key cooperation opportunities include regional toolkits, shared biosafety lab services, civil society collaboration platforms, and academic integration of biosafety content into agricultural programs. There is a potential for multi-country cooperation on public participation, grassroots engagement models, and compliance monitoring strategies.

I’m Consuelo López López,  I am a Director of Information and Research Promotion of the Executive Secretariat of Cibiogem in Mexico, and NFP of Biosafety Clearing House. First, I'd like to thank the people who coordinate this online forum.

In relation to point 2, Mexico, in compliance with Goal B3 of the Action Plan, the activities developed and planned use a common language for the general public interested in the biosafety of GMOs and related issues. Public servants and people from indigenous peoples and communities in Mexico have been summoned. Our main objective is to raise awareness of the importance of LMO biosafety in government and stakeholders, thereby ensuring universal access to relevant knowledge. 

With regard to question 4, in pursuance of Goal B4 of the Action Plan, it is considered appropriate to promote regional initiatives relating to the exchange of experiences on a face-to-face or virtual basis, focusing on installed capabilities for detection, LMO identification and quantification, LMO risk analysis and assessment, as well as the traceability and labelling of products containing LMOs. Mexico, center of origin and diversification of species such as maize and cotton, has an interest in cross-border movements of GM maize and cotton. In this regard, it should be noted that, in Mexico, as of March 18, 2025, articles 4 and 27 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States do not allow the use of GM maize seed https://www.dof.gob.mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=5752109&fecha=17/03/2025#gsc.tab=0

In addition, in 2023, the National Laboratory of Agri-food Biosafety was integrated. Its central objective is to develop strategies for the detection and identification of transgenic maize varieties through regional and national real-time analysis and monitoring, as well as rapid diagnosis of pesticides such as glyphosate in human consumption products, focusing on sustainable and safe solutions for the national agri-food system.

Dear colleagues,

My name is Cinthia Soberanes Gutiérrez. I hold a Ph.D. in Chemical and Biological Sciences. I serve as a “Researcher for Mexico” within the Secretariat of Science, Humanities, Technology, and Innovation (Secihti), and I am currently assigned to the Executive Secretariat of the Intersecretarial Commission on the Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms (CIBIOGEM), which serves as Mexico’s NFP for the Cartagena Protocol. I would like to thank the forum moderators and all participants for sharing their experiences.

My comment refers to question 1. In Mexico, various activities are being promoted to strengthen capacities in the biosafety of LMO, which support the achievement of Objective B.3. The focus has been on collaborating with diverse institutions and engaging directly with Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities.

As part of the efforts to strengthen LMO biosafety capacities and promote food sovereignty in Mexico, we are collaborating with the National Specialization in Agroecology and Food Sovereignty (ENBC-ASA–Secihti) through the “Co-laboratory: Guardians of the Milpa and Life – Community strategies for the conservation of native seeds and biocultural heritage,” a transdisciplinary and territorial training space focused on the defense of native seeds and LMO biosafety (https://cibiogem.secihti.mx/wp-content/uploads/comunicados-de-prensa/2025/Comunicado%20No.%202_2025_.pdf). In this context, we have worked alongside students, producers, and local stakeholders to build capacities related to biosafety, conscious use of genetic resources, and the protection of native maize from the risks associated with LMO. Since Mexico is the center of origin of this crop—as mentioned by Dr. Consuelo López in #12796—a constitutional amendment to articles 4 and 27 has been enacted to prohibit the cultivation of genetically modified maize in Mexico.

Additionally, we are participating in collaborative processes with the Ethnobiological Gardens of Guanajuato, Querétaro, and Oaxaca, promoting dialogue among knowledge systems and the articulation of regional initiatives for biodiversity conservation and the development of public policies on biosafety from an intercultural, inclusive, and sustainable perspective.

Dear colleagues, I am Lamine Kane, Senegal's National Focal Point for the Cartagena Protocol.

Senegal has developed and implemented its national biosafety strategy for 2019-2024, and then renewed the said strategy for the period 2025-2029. One of the major challenges of this strategic planning remains the operationalisation and strengthening of the national biosafety framework.
In this respect, the establishment of solid and well-coordinated institutional structures is essential to
guarantee effective management of modern biotechnologies. In this dynamic, capacity building for stakeholders has always played a central role. It has been carried out in line with the Letter from sectoral policy on the environment and in partnership with ABNE (African Biosafety Network Expertise, based in Senegal), UEMOA, USDA (US Department of Agriculture), etc. A large number of stakeholders have thus been able to benefit, through communication and public awareness, from upgrading and exchanges on important aspects of biosafety, including :
- the legal framework (national and international) for biosafety, and the drafting of regulatory texts (including the revision of the Biosafety Act in 2022 and the drafting of implementing texts for the Act);
- risk assessment;
- information management, in particular the dissemination of BCH;
- inspection and control...
In addition to these various initiatives implemented by the National Biosafety Authority, the following should be added: the organisation of scientific events in the various regions of the country, the holding of international symposia or workshops (on gene drive, comparative analysis of regulations in several countries, modern biotechnologies applied to animals, communication on the use of modern biotechnologies in human food, etc.)
Communication and awareness-raising are therefore one of the main challenges, requiring the design and implementation of an appropriate communication strategy to popularise the concepts of biosafety and modern biotechnologies among a wide range of stakeholders, from political decision-makers to local populations. This strategy will also need to institutionalise mechanisms for sharing information between the various players involved, in particular the research institutions and the NBA.
In this respect, emerging biotechnologies such as gene drive, genomic editing and synthetic biology must be fully taken into account
In this context, although Senegal has designated the plant biotechnology laboratory at Cheikh Anta Diop University in Dakar as a reference laboratory for biosafety, the strategic guidelines are moving towards the creation and equipping of an autonomous laboratory. This is part of the process of setting up an effective monitoring system, which requires not only enhanced technical and organisational capabilities, but also the appointment of staff dedicated to inspection and control. These efforts must be supported by training programmes for advisory bodies, such as the Scientific and Technical Biosafety Committee (responsible for risk assessment) and the National Biosafety Committee (responsible for socio-economic considerations), whose capacities must be continually strengthened.
Despite the will expressed in the strategic orientations, the scope of implementation of the national biosafety framework remains limited due to the constraints of adequate funding commensurate with the missions and ambitions of the National Biosafety Authority for the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol. Indeed, the level of budget allocation by the State of Senegal, although significant, remains insufficient. Mobilising financial resources from the GEF is still difficult, if not non-existent, as most of the national allocation is directed towards priority options other than biosafety. In the new national biosafety strategy, the development and implementation of a plan to mobilise financial resources is a major challenge. This will have to be accompanied by better integration of biodiversity (including biosafety issues) into national policies and across sectors. Thus, a good link between the National Biosafety Strategy and the NBSAP aligned with the Global Framework needs to be defined.
In addition to the synergy to be implemented at national level, sub-regional integration in terms of biosafety needs to be significantly strengthened. Following on from the Regional Biosafety Programme of the West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has not yet really put in place the sub-regional institutional framework for biosafety. This framework, which was supposed to follow the adoption and entry into force of the Community regulation on biosafety, has not yet materialised. Once operational, it will lay the foundations for a genuine area of cooperation and harmonisation of sub-regional biosafety initiatives.

Dear colleagues, 

My name is Nancy Serrano Silva. I hold a Ph.D. in Biotechnology and I am part of the “Investigadoras e Investigadores por México” program of “Secretaría de Ciencia, Humanidades, Tecnología e Innovación - SECIHTI”. I am currently assigned to the Executive Secretariat of CIBIOGEM, where I am researching Integral Biosafety for the Food Sovereignty of Mexico. Thank you for the opportunity to join this Online Forum. 

Regarding question 1, to strengthen compliance with Goal B.3, Mexico has promoted various territorial initiatives to strengthen biosafety capacities related to LMO, in collaboration with ethnobiological gardens, Indigenous communities, educational institutions, and regional public agencies (for example, in the states of Chihuahua, Sonora, and Sinaloa). These activities have focused on creating participatory, intercultural, and transdisciplinary spaces that foster an integral vision of biosafety, closely linked to the defense of biodiversity and food sovereignty. These experiences highlight the importance and necessity of territorial, cross-sectoral, and culturally contextualized approaches to biosafety capacity-building for the effective implementation of the Cartagena Protocol’s Capacity-building Action Plan.

Also, a key initiative is the development of a Consultation Protocol to ensure the right to self-determination of Indigenous, Afro-Mexican, and similarly situated communities with respect to applications for the environmental release of LMO. This effort, coordinated by CIBIOGEM, aims to strengthen compliance with Goal A.9 of the Cartagena Protocol’s Capacity-building Action Plan, by promoting effective and culturally appropriate public participation in biosafety decision-making.

Dear colleagues,  
My name is Humberto Peraza Villarreal. I hold a PhD in Biological Sciences and currently serve as subdirector of Social Engagement and Socioeconomic Research at the Executive Secretariat of Cibiogem in Mexico. I want to begin by thanking the organizers of this online forum for providing us with this space for dialogue and exchange of experiences.  
Regarding Topic 2: Capacity-Building Projects and Initiatives in Biosafety—Ongoing and Planned (Question 1).  Mexico has developed various initiatives to strengthen capacity in LMO biosafety, in collaboration with multiple academic, governmental, scientific, and community institutions. These initiatives have included forums, webinars, discussion panels, and participatory workshops, as well as the creation of audiovisual and scientific outreach materials, accessible through social media and institutional digital platforms. These actions have contributed to ensuring universal access to scientific knowledge on LMO biosafety, aligned with human rights and Mexico's cultural diversity. Among the academic activities, discussion panels at universities are notable, aimed at higher-level students. These discussions address key aspects of public policy on LMO biosafety, including its construction, implementation, and evaluation; national and international commitments on the matter; socioeconomic considerations; and the regulation of pesticides and crops related to LMO. These spaces allow for direct dialogue between students and decision-makers, and strengthen the technical and ethical knowledge of future professionals. The broadcasts of these events have reached a wide audience on social media, strengthening public communication channels, fostering a dialogue of knowledge, and advancing the development of public policies on biosecurity from a perspective of well-being, inclusion, and sustainability. These events can be viewed at: https://www.youtube.com/live/xnVd_1v2jak,https://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wPeNMKcbOA, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jF3EdEQIdro, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6xU_C2q0YU, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQTkAmieMns, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJB_xidkRX0&t=563s, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aR3F9gayfjg&t=276s, https://lc.cx/FAAgAu, https://lc.cx/_b0HoW, https://lc.cx/-gjkBk, https://conahcyt.mx/pronaces/pronaces-soberania-alimentaria/foro-internacional-danos-y-riesgos-para-la-salud-por-consumo-de-maiz-transgenico-y-la-regulacion-internacional/,https://lc.cx/wJ-fFb, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JT3uKdkH9X0&t=80s,https://lc.cx/TAQvga,  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hv8T6X0Neko&t=9143s, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWmkqhSQYzg&t=6514s,https://lc.cx/dJX6k7, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwXQXcep-uc&t=420s, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZZ-jaNCsLM&t=5240s, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmGEmokc390&t=4605s, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bej2MP_8gC4&t=134s, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKx5XaPB260

Greetings to all. Thanks to Ms. Tharp Mogapi for moderating this forum. I am David Castro, Director of Genetic Resources and Biosafety at the Ministry of Environment of Peru.

With regard to biosafety capacity-building activities, Peru conducts two annual training sessions for customs officials and sanitary authorities on the detection of LMOs at various official points of entry across the country. In accordance with our national legislation, all imported seeds of maize, cotton, soybean, and alfalfa are tested to prevent the illegal (smuggling) or accidental entry of LMOs that could potentially be released into the environment. These trainings focus on sampling and analysis using field testing methods (reactive strips).

Additionally, we organize both online and in-person seminars on the progress made in implementing Peru’s biosafety regulatory framework, the use of the BCH for accessing LMO-related information, and practical sessions on risk assessment. These seminars are targeted at undergraduate students from universities throughout the country, specially those with biological, agronomical and related science programs.

Best regards.

A.A.I.M Amarsinghe - Sri Lanka
Greetings to all, and thank you to our moderator and all participants for the interesting interventions.

My name is Mandakini Amarasinghe, and I am an Environmental Officer working at the National Competent Authority of Sri Lanka.The following responses are provided by the participants of the forum from the Central Environmental Authority, which serves as the National Competent Authority. of the Sri Lanka,The Ministry of Environment, Sri Lanka, acts as the National Focal Point of the Convention.

As part of the ongoing and planned biosafety capacity-building projects and initiatives, Sri Lanka is currently working on strengthening the legal and institutional framework for biosafety. A key focus of this effort is the implementation of the Biosafety Act, which aims to establish a comprehensive legal basis for the safe handling, transfer, and use of living modified organisms (LMOs) in accordance with the Cartagena Protocol.

Dear Forum participants,

Thank you all very much for your contributions to the Online Forum on Capacity-building for Biosafety. The Forum is now closed. Please note that all the postings will remain under each topic.

There will be a complete moderator’s summary of information and recommendations of the three topics made available in the coming weeks. The information will also be used to develop an information document for the twelfth Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the Parties (COP-MOP 12) to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety in 2026.

We look forward to your continued contribution to the implementation of the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety and the Capacity-building Action Plan for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. We also encourage the continuation of governments and organizations to, on a regular basis, submit information on implementing or funding biosafety capacity-building activities in the Capacity Development Initiative in the BCH at https://bch.cbd.int/en/register/CDI/new and any resources at https://bch.cbd.int/en/register/VLR/new.

Thank you.

Best regards,
Ms Thato Mogapi

POSTED ON BEHALF OF THE MODERATOR OF THE FORUM

Dear Forum participants,

Thank you all again for your participation in the Online Forum on Capacity-building for Biosafety.

Please find a link of the moderators' summary of the Online Forum at https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/fb84/f0bc/60f3fb9bed089cc280a2b49d/cp-cb-om-2025-01-02-en.pdf

Best regards,

Ms. Thato Mogapi