A silent battle is brewing over the control of our food supply’s very foundation: seeds. Europe, home to one of the most diverse seed industries in the world, relies on a network of small breeders who carefully select and cultivate new varieties of crops. These breeders play a crucial role in maintaining Europe’s biodiversity and ensuring a plentiful food supply. However, their work is under threat from the patent industry.
While it’s illegal to patent plants in the EU, those created through technological means are classified as technical innovations and are eligible for patents. This means that small-scale breeders can no longer freely plant or research these seeds without paying licensing fees. Approximately 1,200 seed varieties, naturally bred, are currently under patent across Europe, with agrochemical companies claiming to have developed them through technological innovation. The European Patent Office (EPO), an independent entity funded by corporate patent fees, grants these patents, and EU member states are bound by its decisions.
This situation poses a significant challenge to breeders like Frans Carree, an organic breeder at Dutch company De Bolster. Carree is attempting to develop a tomato resistant to the brown rugose fruit virus, a threat to entire harvests. However, his efforts are hampered by numerous patent applications filed by multinational corporations like BASF, Bayer, and others, claiming ownership of this resistance trait. While these patents haven’t been granted yet, they create legal uncertainty and a real risk for Carree’s investment. To develop his virus-resistant tomato, Carree would need to meticulously review all patent applications, written in complex language, to understand which traits are patented. He would then need to pay for laboratory analysis to ensure his tomato varieties do not include any patented traits, a time-consuming and costly endeavor.
The rise of new genetic editing techniques (NGTs), which allow scientists to modify seeds’ genetics with unprecedented precision, further complicates the situation. While NGTs offer significant potential for improved crop yields, disease resistance, and even drought tolerance, they are currently regulated as strictly as GMOs. However, agrochemical companies and scientists are pushing for deregulation of NGTs, arguing for their potential benefits. In February 2023, the European Parliament voted to deregulate NGTs in the market, even considering some to be equivalent to conventionally-bred plants. This deregulation could significantly increase the number of seed patents, with experts predicting a future where the majority of new varieties will be under patent control.
To address concerns about increased corporate control and dependence for farmers and breeders, the Parliament proposed a ban on patents for NGTs. However, the final decision on NGTs is pending, with ongoing negotiations between the Parliament and EU member states. Many countries, including Austria, France, and Hungary, oppose genetic engineering in agriculture. Even if a patent ban is agreed upon, it may prove ineffective due to the EPO’s independent authority. The EPO, overseeing patents across 39 member countries, including the UK, Turkey, and Switzerland, operates independently of EU law. This centralized process allows the EPO to approve European patents without direct involvement from EU member states.
The implications of this patent regime are far-reaching. Increased corporate control over seeds leads to reduced genetic diversity, as smaller breeders have less access to genetic material. This can negatively impact resilience during climate disasters and food supply disruptions.
This ongoing battle over seed patents highlights the complex interplay between market-driven growth, environmental concerns, and food security. The issue could have been resolved in 2017 when the European Commission issued a directive stating that products obtained through biological processes cannot be patented. The EPO initially followed this interpretation, banning patents on conventionally-bred plants. However, critical loopholes remain, allowing companies to use NGTs to claim patents on conventionally-bred plants.
In 2022, the EPO granted a patent to German company KWS for maize with improved digestibility. This patent, based on gene variants found in conventionally-bred maize, allows KWS to control the use of these genes, potentially hindering other breeders. This decision sets a troubling precedent, demonstrating the EPO’s willingness to grant patents even for traits found in nature.
The current patent system places a heavy burden on breeders. They are now required to prove that their varieties were not developed through patented methods, a complex and costly process. Small breeders, unlike multinational corporations, cannot afford expensive legal battles, potentially facing financial ruin.
The EPO’s reliance on user fees for its funding raises concerns about conflicts of interest. Critics argue that the EPO is incentivized to grant patents, as its substantial budget depends on patent applications. Even agrochemical companies express concerns about the quality of patents granted by the EPO, arguing for stricter scrutiny and a more critical approach to patent approval.
The silent battle over seed patents is far from over. The outcome will have profound implications for the future of Europe’s food system, impacting farmers, breeders, consumers, and the planet as a whole. As Europe navigates the complex relationship between scientific progress, economic growth, and environmental sustainability, the control of seeds remains a crucial factor in shaping the continent’s future.
