Cooperation between seed enterprises and research institutes: undesirable

GUANGZHOU, China - Jan. 7, 2014 - PRLog -- Tong Pingya, researcher from the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, has engaged in the scientific study on corn and agricultural development strategies for decades. With rich experience, Mr. Tong acts as a senior consultant for both government departments and non-government organizations, according to CCM’s latest issue, Seed China News 1312 (http://www.cnchemicals.com/Product/Newsletter/28/Brief-introduction-of-Guangdong-corn-seed-market-(Seed-China-News-1312)/3415).

In 2011 the State Council of the People's Republic of China issued the Suggestions for Accelerating Development of Modern Crop Seed Industry (the Suggestions), which clearly laid emphasis on "leading and actively mobilizing research institutes and colleges to gradually withdraw from commercialized breeding, and to establish the dominant status of technological innovation in seed enterprises". However, the results have been unsatisfactory.

Since the birth of China's seed industry, the breeding, production and promotion of seeds have been totally out of joint in China. In order to establish the dominant status of technological innovation in seed enterprises, commercialized breeding should be gradually removed from research institutes. Since the issuance of the Suggestions two years ago, there have been huge difficulties in the reform of agricultural research systems, along with strong resistance and few contributions.

On the one hand, relevant departments have not attempted to promote reform and to rationally allocate resources to remove commercialized breeding from research institutes from the macro policy perspective; instead they advocate the collaboration between seed enterprises and institutes, or the R&D alliance between the two sides. On the other hand, officials and scholars conduct investigations on the collaboration between seed enterprises and institutes, and the cooperation is also a hot topic on magazines. Authoritative experts observe that "the reform goes from bad to worse under the guidance of misconception".

It is feasible for those seed enterprises that are qualified for the research system "breeding, production and promotion" to voluntarily cooperate with institutes on seed researches, to buy varieties from the latter, or to temporarily transfer researchers from the latter.

However, the cooperation is not what the development of a seed enterprise relies on. To place the cooperation in a dual-track system with double benefits means that research institutes sell their varieties to enterprises, and that seed enterprises buy varieties from institutes. But the contrasting rules and intentions of the two sides cause seed enterprises to give up technological innovation, and to become a permanent "seed supermarket" instead.

Disagreement on time for cooperation

Scientific research is an incremental process, and the breeding of a variety takes 7-8 years, along with unpredictability, while seed enterprises hope to get the results as soon as possible, usually without a clear understanding of the time required for breeding. As a result, they may quit the cooperation at any time when getting no positive short-term outcome.