Environmental experts have raised concerns about the potential risks associated with merging the National Biotechnology Development Agency (NABDA) and the National Centre for Genetic Resources and Biotechnology (NACGRAB) into the National Biotechnology Research and Development Agency (NBRDA). They are urging the Federal Executive Council (FEC) to reconsider the merger plans due to the perceived threats it poses to Nigeria’s biosafety.
The FEC, aiming to enhance efficiency in the federal civil service and reduce governance costs, has decided to implement recommendations from the Steve Oronsaye panel on restructuring and rationalizing federal agencies, parastatals, and commissions. This involves merging, subsuming, and scrapping agencies with similar functions.
Dr. Nnimmo Bassey, the Executive Director of Health Of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF), emphasized in a statement that while the idea of restructuring and rationalization is commendable, there should be a thorough review of the mandates of agencies slated for merger. This includes ensuring adequate institutional support, budgetary allocations, and concrete implementation plans.
Regarding the NABDA and NACGRAB merger, Bassey explained that their functions do not overlap. NABDA, established in 2001 under the Federal Ministry of Science and Technology, focuses on biotechnology research, promotion, coordination, and development. On the other hand, NACGRAB, founded in 1987 by the same ministry, is mandated to collect and conserve genetic resources for food and agriculture, ensuring sustainable use with a genebank located in Ibadan, southwest Nigeria.
Bassey underscored that NACGRAB plays a distinctive role in regulating the seed, livestock, and fisheries industries, indicating a clear conflict of mandates with NABDA.
“Also, the NACGRAB coordinates the activities of the National Committee on Naming, Registration and Release of Crop Varieties, Livestock Breed and Fisheries. How then would the proposed NBRDA for example, ensure the development of new varieties of crops through genetic manipulation and approve same for commercial release?” He queried.
HOMEF’s Director of Programmes Joyce Brown noted that although both agencies have a research mandate, the focus of research is different.
Brown recommended that instead of a merger with NABDA, NACGRAB should collaborate with the National Biosafety Management Agency, NBMA, with a similar regulatory role in this case to regulate modern biotechnology activities and the release into the environment, handling, and use of genetically modified organisms which are products of modern biotechnology to prevent adverse impact on the environment and human health.
She added, “Better still, the NBMA can become a unit under the NACGRAB which would ensure institutional support and oversight for the NBMA to address the current lax biosafety regulatory system.
“However, within the NACGRAB, there needs to be a clarification of mandate – It is ironical that a center that prides itself in its commitment to the conservation of the rich Genetic Resources of the nation is the same in charge of approving the release of genetically modified varieties which threaten this very mandate.”
Food sovereignty activist and Deputy Executive Director of Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth Nigeria, Mariann Bassey-Orovwuje, noted that the proposed merger is rife with conflict saying if it pulls through, that would be the end of any form of GM regulation in Nigeria, which according to her “will be a recipe for disaster.”
Orovwuje called for the government at this time to consider setting up a policy on agroecology which is proven to address food insecurity, strengthen local economy, and ensure climate change adaptation.
