study on testing and listing of varieties of seed and

87 Pages·2010·1.97 MB·English

by  Maria Christodoulou

European Commission
Directorate General for Health and Consumers

STUDY ON TESTING AND LISTING OF VARIETIES OF SEED AND
PLANT PROPAGATING MATERIAL IN THE MEMBER STATES

Framework Contract on Evaluation, Impact Assessment and Related Services
(Awarded through tender no SANCO/2008/01/055)

Final Report
(Confidential)

Submitted by:

Food Chain Evaluation Consortium (FCEC)
Civic Consulting - Van Dijk Management Consultants
Arcadia International - Agra CEAS Consulting

Project Leader: Arcadia International E.E.I.G.

European Commission
DG SANCO
Rue de la Loi 200
1049 Brussels

14 July 2010
Contact for this assignment:
Daniel Traon
Arcadia International
Avenue des princes Brabançons, 35
1170 Brussels
Phone: [phone]
[email protected]

STUDY ON TESTING AND LISTING OF VARIETIES OF SEED AND
PLANT PROPAGATING MATERIAL IN THE MEMBER STATES

Final Report
(Confidential)

Prepared by the Food Chain Evaluation Consortium (FCEC)
Civic Consulting - van Dijk Management Consulting
Arcadia International - Agra CEAS

Project Leader: Arcadia International E.E.I.G.

fcec
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium
Civic Consulting - van Dijk Management Consultants - Arcadia International - Agra CEAS
Study on testing and listing of varieties of seed and plant propagating material: Final Report
DG SANCO Framework Contract on Evaluation, Impact Assessment and Related Services - Lot 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..................................................................................................... 1
1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 2
2. CONTEXT OF THE ASSIGNMENT: THE REVISION OF THE LEGISLATION
ON THE MARKETING OF SEED & PLANT PROPAGATING MATERIAL (S&PM) 2
3. SCOPE OF THE STUDY .................................................................................................... 4
3.1. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY .................................................................................................................................. 4
3.2. DESCRIPTION OF THE ASSIGNMENT – DATA NEEDS ................................................................................................... 5
4. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................. 10
4.1. THE KICK-OFF MEETING .................................................................................................................................... 10
4.2. DOCUMENTATION REVIEW ................................................................................................................................ 10
4.3. COMPLETION OF THE LIST OF CRITERIA TO BE COLLECTED ......................................................................................... 10
4.4. DESIGN OF THE DATABASE AND INSERTION OF AVAILABLE DATA ................................................................................ 11
4.5. VALIDATION OF THE LIST OF CRITERIA AND THE STRUCTURE OF THE DATABASE WITH THE COMMISSION SERVICES ................ 13
4.6. DATA COLLECTION – THE SURVEYS ...................................................................................................................... 13
4.7. DATA COLLECTION - THE FIELD VISITS ................................................................................................................... 15
5. DATA LIMITATIONS ...................................................................................................... 16
6. STRUCTURE OF THE REPORT .................................................................................... 17
7. FINDINGS OF THE QUALITATIVE SURVEY ........................................................... 18
7.1. STRUCTURE AND EVOLUTION OF THE EU S&PM SECTOR ........................................................................................ 18
7.2. RATIONALE BEHIND THE MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS TO TEST ONE VARIETY AND ITS COMPONENTS FOR DUS IN DIFFERENT MS . 26
7.3. IMPLEMENTATION OF EXEMPTIONS FOR “SMALL PRODUCERS” AND “LOCAL MARKET” AS DEFINED BY COMMUNITY PLANT
HEALTH REGIME (CHPR) ........................................................................................................................................ 29
7.4. FARMERS APPROACH TO VARIETY CHOICE : THE ROLE OF THE REGULATED VCU TRIALS FOR AGRICULTURAL CROPS............... 40
7.5. CONSERVATION VARIETIES AND “VARIETIES WITH NO INTRINSIC VALUE FOR COMMERCIAL CROP PRODUCTION BUT DEVELOPED
FOR GROWING UNDER PARTICULAR CONDITIONS" ......................................................................................................... 44
7.6. CONSEQUENCES IN MS IF VCU WAS MADE OPTIONAL ............................................................................................ 48
8. PRESENTATION OF THE RESULTS OF THE QUANTITATIVE SURVEY ......... 52
8.1. PRE-REGISTRATION .......................................................................................................................................... 53
8.2. MANDATORY VCU (STRUCTURE AND SIZE) ........................................................................................................... 54
8.3. DUS FOR VARIETY REGISTRATION PURPOSES (STRUCTURE AND SIZE) .......................................................................... 57
8.4. FEES FOR NATIONAL LISTING OF S&PM VARIETIES ................................................................................................. 59
8.5. ADMINISTRATIVE AND OPERATIONAL COSTS .......................................................................................................... 61
8.6. THE SPECIFIC CASE OF FORESTRY ......................................................................................................................... 68

FOOD CHAIN EVALUATION CONSORTIUM i
Study on testing and listing of varieties of seed and plant propagating material: Final Report
DG SANCO Framework Contract on Evaluation, Impact Assessment and Related Services - Lot 3
9. ANALYSIS OF THE COMMON CATALOGUES OF AGRICULTURAL AND
VEGETABLE SPECIES AND SPECIFIC NATIONAL CATALOGUES ...................... 70
9.1. COMMON CATALOGUES OF AGRICULTURAL AND VEGETABLE SPECIES ......................................................................... 70
9.2. EVOLUTION OF THE SIZE OF THE COMMON CATALOGUES (2004-2010 PERIOD) ......................................................... 76
9.3. SPECIFIC NATIONAL CATALOGUES ....................................................................................................................... 77

ANNEX I: EXCEL DATABASES (VARIETY REGISTRATION) .................................. 80

ANNEX II: EXCEL DATABASES (COMMON CATALOGUES OF AGRICULTURAL
AND VEGETABLE CROPS) ............................................................................................... 80

ANNEX III: TERMS OF REFERENCE ............................................................................. 80

FOOD CHAIN EVALUATION CONSORTIUM ii
Study on testing and listing of varieties of seed and plant propagating material: Final Report
DG SANCO Framework Contract on Evaluation, Impact Assessment and Related Services - Lot 3
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: List of criteria addressed in the study ........................................................................................ 6
Table 2: Summary of the methodology proposed for data collection ...................................................... 13
Table 3: Planning of the field visits ...................................................................................................... 15
Table 5: MS implementation of exemptions from the CPHR regime to „small producers‟ based on the present
study survey ...................................................................................................................................... 30
Table 6: Small producers – definition in national Plant Health legislation, national system of
control/monitoring and estimation of the number of small producers per MS ......................................... 31
Table 7: Local market – definition in national Plant Health legislation, national system of control/monitoring
and estimation of the number of local markets ..................................................................................... 35
Table 8: VCU Chain of knowledge – Typology of trials networks ........................................................... 41
Table 9: Existence and number of listed conservation varieties in the MS ............................................... 45
Table 10: MS with preliminary VCU data required by officials .............................................................. 53
Table 11: Estimation of the average pre-registration costs for breeders (all crops) for the 11 MS that
provided statistics .............................................................................................................................. 54
Table 12: Number of varieties tested on average per year for VCU (average 2006-08) per Directive and
per MS ............................................................................................................................................. 55
Table 13: Distribution of VCU trials between CAs and non-CAs (average 2006-08) per Directive and per
MS ................................................................................................................................................... 56
Table 15: Number of varieties tested on average per year in DUS (average 2006-08) per Directive and per
MS ................................................................................................................................................... 58
Table 16: Estimation of overall yearly costs for Variety Registration (in 11 MS) ...................................... 62
Table 17: Ratio fees incomes / total variety registration costs ................................................................ 63
Table 18: Ratio “fees incomes / total variety registration costs” (figures corrected with costs incurred by
private operators in both DE and FR) .................................................................................................. 64
Table 19: DUS costs summary (11 MS) ............................................................................................... 66
Table 20: VCU costs summary (11 MS) ............................................................................................... 67
Table 21: Registration costs for FRM ................................................................................................... 69
Table 22: Main characteristics of the agricultural Common Catalogue ................................................... 71
Table 23: Main characteristics of the vegetables Common Catalogue .................................................... 74
Table 24: Overview of the additional national catalogues in the EU27 MS............................................. 77
Table 25: Details of the additional National Catalogues in the EU27MS ................................................ 79

FOOD CHAIN EVALUATION CONSORTIUM iii
Study on testing and listing of varieties of seed and plant propagating material: Final Report
DG SANCO Framework Contract on Evaluation, Impact Assessment and Related Services - Lot 3
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Design of the cost model ...................................................................................................... 11
Figure 2: Estimated annual turnover of the major seed crops in the EU27 MS in 2009 ............................ 19
Figure 3: Value of the seed market per MS in 2005 (in % of the total EU seed market value) ................... 20
Figure 4: Seed production area per MS (in % of the total EU seed production area) ................................ 20
Figure 5: Number of seed companies per MS ...................................................................................... 21
Figure 6: Number of staff working in private companies per MS ........................................................... 21
Figure 7: Number of private R&D (breeding) stations per MS ................................................................ 22
Figure 8: Number of R&D employees in the private sector per MS ......................................................... 23
Figure 9: Importance of the private plant breeding efforts per MS (number of R&D employees / number of
total seed employees) ......................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 10: Value for Cultivation Chain of Knowledge ........................................................................... 42
Figure 11: Comparison of fees rate per application for DUS on cereals (Directive 66/402/EEC) per MS . 60
Figure 13: Volume of varieties per group of crops (Directive) in the agricultural Common Catalogue (in
percentage) ....................................................................................................................................... 71
Figure 14: Major MS contributors to the agricultural Common catalogue (in %) ...................................... 72
Figure 15: percentage of species for which the national catalogue of agricultural crops is containing at least
one variety ........................................................................................................................................ 72
Figure 16: Variety flow in the agricultural Common catalogue (1999-2009 period) (in %) ...................... 73
Figure 17: Major MS contributors to the vegetables Common catalogue (in %) ....................................... 74
Figure 19: Evolution of the number of varieties (in percentage) listed in the Common catalogue for
agricultural species and for each species ............................................................................................. 76
Figure 20: Evolution of the number of varieties (in percentage) listed in the Common catalogue for
vegetable species and for each species ............................................................................................... 76

FOOD CHAIN EVALUATION CONSORTIUM iv
Study on testing and listing of varieties of seed and plant propagating material: Final Report
DG SANCO Framework Contract on Evaluation, Impact Assessment and Related Services - Lot 3
LIST OF ACRONYMS

CA: COMPETENT AUTHORITY
CC: COMMON CATALOGUE
COBORU: POLISH OFFICIAL TESTING CENTRE
CPHR: COMMUNITY PLANT HEALTH REGIME
CPVO: COMMUNITY PLANT VARIETY OFFICE
CPVR: COMMUNITY PLANT VARIETY RIGHT
DOM: DÉPARTEMENTS D'OUTRE-MER (FRANCE)
DUS: DISTINCTNESS, UNIFORMITY, STABILITY
EC: EUROPEAN COMMISSION
ESA: EUROPEAN SEED ASSOCIATION
ESCAA: EUROPEAN SEED CERTIFICATION AGENCIES ASSOCIATION
EU: EUROPEAN UNION
FCEC: FOOD CHAIN EVALUATION CONSORTIUM
FRM: FOREST REPRODUCTIVE MATERIAL
FTE: FULL TIME EQUIVALENT
ISF: INTERNATIONAL SEED FEDERATION
MS: MEMBER STATE
NC: NATIONAL CATALOGUE
NL: NATIONAL LISTING
OECD: ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT
PBR: PLANT BREEDERS’ RIGHT
PPP: PLANT PROTECTION PRODUCTS
PSTV: POTATO SPINDLE TUBER VIROID
PVR: PLANT VARIETY RIGHTS
R&D: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
S&PM: SEED AND PLANT PROPAGATING MATERIAL
SME: SMALL AND MEDIUM SIZE ENTERPRISE
ToR: TERMS OF REFERENCE
UPOV: INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NEW VARIETIES OF
PLANTS
VCU: VALUE FOR CULTIVATION AND USE
WOSR: WINTER OIL SEED RAPE

FOOD CHAIN EVALUATION CONSORTIUM v
Study on testing and listing of varieties of seed and plant propagating material: Final Report
DG SANCO Framework Contract on Evaluation, Impact Assessment and Related Services - Lot 3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The FCEC team would like to thank all authorities and stakeholders contacted during the
study for their contribution to this evaluation. We would also like to thank the members
of the steering group and the various Commission services involved for their valuable
assistance and support throughout the study.

Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 1
Study on testing and listing of varieties of seed and plant propagating material: Final Report
DG SANCO Framework Contract on Evaluation, Impact Assessment and Related Services - Lot 3
1. INTRODUCTION
The EU legislation on the marketing of seed and plant propagating material (S&PM) that
was developed starting in the late 1960s was evaluated in 2007-2008 as a first step in the
process of a legal review and was placed in the general context of Better Regulation1.
Based on the results of the evaluation and on other inputs2, DG SANCO has produced an
“Action Plan for the review of the Community legislation on the marketing of seed and
plant propagating material and related issues”. This action plan was presented to the
Member States and to the relevant stakeholder groups on 2 October and on 30 November
2009 respectively in the context of the “Seeds and Propagating Material” section of the
Working Group of the Advisory Group on the Food Chain, Animal and Plant Health.
The above-mentioned evaluation identified some areas for reduction of costs and
administrative burden for the public authorities and private actors with the system of
variety registration identified as the element with probably the best potential for cost
reduction.
Therefore the Commission has mandated the Food Chain Evaluation Consortium (FCEC)
for a complementary study to collect additional data on the seed and variety registration
schemes that are implemented by Member States in order to support the drafting of the
Commission Impact Assessment to underpin the proposal for legal review that the
Commission will eventually submit to the Council and the European Parliament by the
end of 2011.
2. CONTEXT OF THE ASSIGNMENT: THE REVISION OF THE LEGISLATION ON THE
MARKETING OF SEED & PLANT PROPAGATING MATERIAL (S&PM)
In this section we provide an overview of the EU legislation of S&PM and the need at the
basis of the present study which is to collect, through field visits, data to complete the
existing datasets and to fill the knowledge gaps in the field of variety/material
registration.

1 The Commission‟s Better Regulation initiative of June 2002 aims at ensuring that Better Regulation is pursued in the
daily legislative work of the Community but also calls for attention to the stock of Community legislation. This
initiative includes among other things the simplification of legislation and the reduction of the administrative burden on
the public authorities and the private sector.
2 Mainly Standing Committee discussions, stakeholders consultation and the seed conference of 19 March 2009
organised by DG SANCO
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 2
Study on testing and listing of varieties of seed and plant propagating material: Final Report
DG SANCO Framework Contract on Evaluation, Impact Assessment and Related Services - Lot 3
The S&PM legislation that partly dates back to the 1960s has its legal basis in Article 37
of the Treaty establishing the European Community with the objectives, at the time when
the S&PM EU legislation was first developed, to improve the productivity of agriculture,
to ensure food security in the EU, to improve the competitiveness of the related sectors
and to contribute to the harmonisation of legislation at EU level leading to more open
markets.
The EU legislation on S&PM is based on two main pillars i.e. the variety/material
registration and the certification of S&PM material. It consists of 12 basic Council
Directives and it is structured into one horizontal Directive on the Common Catalogue of
varieties of agricultural plant species and 11 vertical marketing Directives, among which
there are 6 seed Directives (for fodder plant seed, cereal seed, beet seed, seed potatoes,
seed of oil and fibre plants and vegetable seed), 4 plant propagating material3 Directives
(vine propagating material, fruit propagating material, vegetable other than seed and
ornamental plants) and 1 forest reproductive material Directive.
The Directive on the Common catalogue for agricultural crops (Council Directive
2002/53/EC) has a horizontal structure and defines requirements for the registration of
the various agricultural crops varieties with the exception of vegetable species varieties,
for which the registration requirements are laid down in Council Directive 2002/55/EC. It
is applicable to beet seed, fodder plant seed, cereal seed, seed potatoes and seed of oil and
fibre plants.
The marketing Directives have a vertical structure (per crop or group of crops) and define
requirements for S&PM marketing. They contain provisions related to registration of
varieties in national lists or catalogues. Once registered, those varieties can be marketed
throughout EU. The ornamentals Directive and the fruit plants Directive (in some cases
under defined conditions) do not contain such provisions and do not establish any
obligation of implementing national catalogues. The forestry sector has a completely
different approach with a compulsory identification and listing of plants from which
propagating material is taken.
The evaluation carried out in 2007-2008 revealed some scope for reduction of costs and
administrative burden. As mentioned above, a preliminary cost study which formed part
of the evaluation highlighted that variety registration is the element which probably has
the best potential for costs reduction.

3 For propagating material, the following definition shall apply: seeds, parts of plants and all plant material, including
rootstocks, intended for the propagation and production of plants.
Food Chain Evaluation Consortium 3