| | english | español | français |
  Home|The Cartagena Protocol|Socio-economics|Portal|Latest activities (2019-2020)|Online discussions on socio-economic considerations   Printer-friendly version

Online discussions on socio-economic considerations

Return to the list of threads...

Forum 1: Focused discussion on experiences in considering socio-economic aspects in decision taking on LMOs (discussion to take place during week 1 of the forum)

Forum closed. No more comments will be accepted on this forum.
Nigeria [#9861]
Participants are invited to comment on and add views to the submission by Nigeria in this thread.
posted on 2019-09-08 23:44 UTC by Ms. Paola Scarone, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity
RE: Nigeria [#9866]
One of the experiences that has made socioeconomic consideration of LMOs workable remains the fact that is consistent with our National law, frameworks and guidelines on biosafety as indicated fully in Nigeria Submission. It empowers the National Competent Authorities to always consider the socioeconomic issues as a priority towards granting or rejecting approvals. This is one action I think all nations must fully adopt and implement.
posted on 2019-09-09 06:57 UTC by Mr. Onyeka Kingsley Nwosu, Nigeria
RE: Nigeria [#9867]
South Africa also has a Biosafety Framework (GMO Act, 1997) which includes socio-economic considerations, and - like the Nigerian example - they both extend well beyond the scope of Article 26 (which refers to voluntary SE considerations related only to the impact of LMOs on the conservation & sustainable use of biodiversity). 
It remains a sovereign decision on whether or not to incorporate socio-economic considerations, but as per Nigeria and ourselves, this approach is consistent with our national frameworks.

My query on the Nigerian submission, is that is appears that the explicit steps of the Guidance document were not necessary/required in reaching a decision (ie. defining and undertaking a study) - rather decisions were based on the internal considerations by the National Biosafety Commission, and engagement with farmers/communities by the National Biosafety Management Agency.  Is this correct?

Ben Durham
South Africa
posted on 2019-09-09 08:09 UTC by Mr. Ben David Durham, South Africa
RE: Nigeria [#9868]
Of course the issue of Guidance document as regards defining and undertaking a study is fully incorporated into the consideration. Critical undertaking of study is also been determined by the type of application. In most cases, there are wide reaching available data for experts considerations together with public/community engagements which may not necessary require undertaking a full study. In all, the priority remains ensuring transparency, excellence and application of best standards and as much as possible comply with the Nigeria's Executive Order on ease of doing business.
posted on 2019-09-09 08:40 UTC by Mr. Onyeka Kingsley Nwosu, Nigeria
RE: Nigeria [#9920]
Many thanks for the submission. I have a question if Nigeria has tried to use the voluntary guidance and if they have comments or suggestions for improving it?

O.A.El-Kawy
posted on 2019-09-14 10:11 UTC by Prof Ossama AbdelKawy, Seychelles